BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 176
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB
176 (Bonta)
As Enrolled September 10, 2015
2/3 vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |77-1 |(June 2, 2015) |SENATE: |40-0 |(September 2, |
| | | | | |2015) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |77-1 |(September 8, | | | |
| | |2015) | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.
SUMMARY: Requires the California Community Colleges (CCC), the
California State University (CSU), the University of California
(UC), and the California Department of Managed Health Care
AB 176
Page 2
(CDMHC) to disaggregate demographic information for Native
Hawaiian, Asian, and Pacific Islander (API) groups.
The Senate amendments:
1)Delete the requirement for the California Department of Health
Care Services.
2)Make technical and clarifying changes.
EXISTING LAW: Requires state agencies, boards, and commissions
that directly or by contract collect demographic data as to the
ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians to use separate
collection categories and tabulations for each major API group,
including, but not limited to, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino,
Korean, Vietnamese, Asian Indian, Laotian, Cambodian, Hawaiian,
Guamanian, and Samoan (Government Code Section 8310.5).
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee:
1)One-time costs of about $10,000 and ongoing cost of about
$10,000 per year for the California State University System to
upgrade computer systems and ensure proper reporting of
student data (General Fund).
2)No significant costs are anticipated by the Department of
Managed Health Care, as another provision of existing law
already requires the Department to collect data in a manner
that complies with the requirements of this bill (Managed Care
Fund).
AB 176
Page 3
3)No significant costs are anticipated by the California
Community College System, as the Chancellor's Office
anticipates that the delayed implementation in the bill will
allow community college districts to incorporate the required
data system changes as part of their ongoing system
maintenance (General Fund).
4)No significant costs are anticipated by the University of
California (General Fund).
COMMENTS: Background. According to the California Commission
on Asian and Pacific Islander American Affairs' Issue Paper on
September 5, 2014, data disaggregation is imperative for
uncovering economic, educational, and social disparities
inherent not only in API American communities, but in all ethnic
populations. The commission finds that the need to disaggregate
data is often exemplified by the needs of Southeast Asian
American students; often categorized as "Asian," their "lower
academic achievement rates are overshadowed by the stereotype
that all Asian students excel in academics."
Purpose of this bill. According to the author's office, "By
relying heavily on aggregate data of the API community, the
State of California fails to recognize that different API ethnic
subpopulations have diverse social and economic conditions."
The author contends that if the needs of each of the API
"subgroups" are not addressed properly, California will run the
risk of lower educational outcomes and greater healthcare costs
for our future generations. Data disaggregation is imperative
for uncovering social, economic and educational disparities
within the greater Asian population.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:
AB 176
Page 4
Assembly Bill 176 would require the Regents of the University of
California, the Trustees of the California State University, the
Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges and the
Department of Managed Health Care to collect and report
demographic information for Asians, Native Hawaiians and Pacific
Islanders by specified ethnic categories after the next census.
To be sure, there is value in understanding data on race,
ethnicity, gender and other aspects of identity. On a broad
level, these demographic data can signal important changes in
society. On a practical level, they can help elucidate how our
laws and programs can be shaped to reflect a changing
population.
Despite this utility, I am wary of the ever growing desire to
stratify. Dividing people into ethnic or other subcategories may
yield more information, but not necessarily greater wisdom about
what actions should follow. To focus just on ethnic identity may
not be enough.
CSU, community colleges, and UC already provide many ways in
which to self-identify, including choosing among several ethnic
identities. In the case of CSU, there are 50 choices for API
applicants alone. Codifying the collection and reporting of at
least 12 API groups several years into the future appears
unnecessary, or at least premature.
Analysis Prepared by:
Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960
FN: 0002474
AB 176
Page 5