BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                       AB 775


                                                                      Page  1





          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          775 (Chiu and Burke)


          As Amended  May 4, 2015


          Majority vote


           --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                   |Noes                 |
          |----------------+------+-----------------------+---------------------|
          |Health          |12-5  |Bonta, Bonilla, Burke, |Maienschein, Chávez, |
          |                |      |Chiu, Gomez, Gonzalez, |Lackey, Patterson,   |
          |                |      |Nazarian,              |Waldron              |
          |                |      |Ridley-Thomas,         |                     |
          |                |      |Rodriguez, Santiago,   |                     |
          |                |      |Thurmond, Wood         |                     |
          |                |      |                       |                     |
          |----------------+------+-----------------------+---------------------|
          |Judiciary       |7-3   |Mark Stone, Alejo,     |Wagner, Gallagher,   |
          |                |      |Chau, Chiu, Cristina   |Maienschein          |
          |                |      |Garcia, Holden,        |                     |
          |                |      |O'Donnell              |                     |
          |                |      |                       |                     |
          |                |      |                       |                     |
           --------------------------------------------------------------------- 


          SUMMARY:  Requires licensed clinics that provide family planning  
          or pregnancy-related services to provide a notice to consumers  
          regarding their reproductive rights and the availability of  
          services in California.  Requires unlicensed facilities that  
          provide pregnancy-related services to disseminate and post a  
          notice informing consumers that they are not a licensed medical  








                                                                       AB 775


                                                                      Page  2





          facility and to include the notice in their advertising materials.  

          FISCAL EFFECT:  None


          COMMENTS: 


          1)Purpose of this bill.  According to the author, California has a  
            proud legacy of respecting reproductive freedom and funding  
            forward thinking programs to provide reproductive health  
            assistance to low income women.  The author notes that according  
            to the Department of Health Care Services, the Patient  
            Protection and Affordable Care Act expansion has made millions  
            of Californians, 53% of them women, newly eligible for Medi-cal.  
             The author states because pregnancy decisions are time  
            sensitive, California women should receive information about  
            their rights and available services at the sites where they  
            obtain care.
            The author contends that, unfortunately, there are nearly 200  
            licensed and unlicensed clinics known as crisis pregnancy  
            centers (CPCs) in California whose goal is to interfere with a  
            woman's ability to be fully informed and exercise their  
            reproductive rights, and that CPCs pose as full-service women's  
            health clinics, but aim to discourage and prevent women from  
            seeking abortions.  The author concludes that these  
            intentionally deceptive advertising and counseling practices  
            often confuse, misinform, and even intimidate women from making  
            fully-informed, time-sensitive decisions about critical health  
            care.


          2)Background.  CPCs are facilities, both licensed and unlicensed,  
            which present themselves as comprehensive reproductive health  
            centers, but are commonly affiliated with, or run by  
            organizations whose stated goal is to prevent women from  
            accessing abortions.  A 2015 NARAL Pro-Choice America report on  
            CPCs notes that the National Institute of Family and Life  
            Advocates (an organization with over 1,300 CPC affiliates)  








                                                                       AB 775


                                                                      Page  3





            states on its Web site that it is on the front line of the  
            cultural battle over abortion, and its vision is to provide CPCs  
            with legal resources and counsel, with the aim of developing a  
            network of life-affirming ministries in every community across  
            the nation in order to achieve an abortion-free America.  The  
            NARAL report also sent several researchers into CPCs to receive  
            the counseling offered, and they widely reported that they were  
            provided with inaccurate information, including only being given  
            information regarding the risks of abortion, being told that  
            many women commit suicide after having an abortion, and being  
            told abortions can cause breast cancer.
            In fall of 2009 the Assembly Business, Professions and Consumer  
            Protection Committee, concerned that CPCs throughout California  
            were disseminating medically inaccurate information about  
            pregnancy options available in the state, requested a report by  
            the University of California, Hastings College of Law regarding  
            CPCs' practices and potential legislative options for regulating  
            them.  Completed in December of 2010, "Pregnancy Resource  
            Centers:  Ensuring Access and Accuracy of Information,"  
            discusses several options for regulation of CPCs, ranging from  
            creating new regulations, leveraging existing regulations aimed  
            specifically at medical services, as well as creating a new  
            statute.  Because approaches that have treated CPCs and  
            full-service pregnancy centers differently have been challenged  
            as violating the First Amendment, the report concludes that the  
            best approach to a statutory change would regulate all pregnancy  
            centers, not just CPCs, in a uniform manner, which is the  
            approach that this bill adopts.



          3)Support.  Black Women for Wellness and NARAL Pro-Choice,  
            California the co-sponsors of this bill as well as numerous  
            other organizations, including, California Council of Churches  
            IMPACT, California Latinas for Reproductive Justice, Maternal  
            and Child Health Access, and Planned Parenthood, California,  
            support this bill because it requires unlicensed facilities that  
            provide pregnancy-related care to inform clients that they are  
            not a licensed medical facility and do not have a licensed  








                                                                       AB 775


                                                                      Page  4





            provider on staff, enabling women to seek the care they wish to  
            obtain and providing context for counseling given at these  
            unlicensed facilities.  They also state that distributing a  
            notice of reproductive health services would ensure that women  
            in any reproductive health or pregnancy counseling facility know  
            that California respects their rights and provides assistance.

          4)Opposition.  The California Catholic Conference (CCC) opposes  
            this bill stating, on its surface, this bill proposes to  
            regulate the state's pregnancy centers, but in actuality is  
            aimed at discriminating against those pregnancy centers that  
            hold a pro-life viewpoint.  CCC contends that such unfair  
            legislation may discourage women from getting the assistance  
            that they need and deserve as well as expose many of these  
            pregnancy centers to needless criminal or civil sanctions for  
            failure to comply.  CCC concludes that because they believe all  
            life is sacred, they support programs which offer medical,  
            economic and emotional support for pregnant women and children,  
            so that they can make life-affirming choices.


          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
          Lara Flynn / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097  FN: 0000399