BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1887
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 4, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Lorena Gonzalez, Chair
AB
1887 (Low) - As Amended April 7, 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Judiciary |Vote:|8 - 2 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| |Accountability and | |6 - 3 |
| |Administrative Review | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill:
1)Prohibits any state agency, department, board, authority, or
commission, including the University of California (UC) and
the California State University (CSU), from requiring its
employees to travel, or approving a request for state-funded
AB 1887
Page 2
travel, to a state that, after June 26, 2015, has enacted a
law that voids or repeals, or has the effect of voiding or
repealing, existing state or local protections against
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender
identity, or gender expression or has enacted a law that
authorizes or requires discrimination against same-sex couples
or their families or on the basis of sexual orientation,
gender identity, or gender expression, including any law that
creates an exemption to antidiscrimination laws in order to
permit discrimination against same-sex couples or their
families, or on the basis of sexual orientation, gender
identity, or gender expression.
2)Specifies that the prohibition created by this bill does not
apply to travel that is necessary for the enforcement of
California law, to meet prior contractual obligations, or for
the protection of public health, welfare, or safety.
3)Requires the California Attorney General (AG) to develop, and
keep current on his or her website, a list of states that that
have enacted laws as described in (1). State agencies are to
consult this website in order to comply with (1).
FISCAL EFFECT:
Costs would involve communicating the new travel policy
throughout state government, including UC and CSU, and regular
monitoring the AG's list of states subject to the travel ban by
state agencies when employees plan out-of-state travel. For any
agency, these costs should be minor and absorbable. Costs to the
AG will also be minor and absorbable.
[For Executive Branch agencies, current law permits out-of-state
travel upon approval from the Governor's office. State entities
AB 1887
Page 3
are required to submit their annual travel plans to the
Department of Finance. The plans describe an entity's trips for
that year, including both mission critical trips and
discretionary trips that have supporting documentation showing
they are a benefit to the state. Upon approval, entities must
work through DGS when making travel arrangements.]
COMMENTS:
Background and Purpose. Since the United States Supreme Court's
2015 ruling upholding marriage equality, a number of states, at
least partly in reaction to that decision, have passed laws with
the intent or effect, or both, of rolling back laws that protect
same-sex couples and LGBT persons more generally from
discrimination. Last year, the Governor of Indiana signed a law
that would have permitted businesses, in the name of religious
freedom, to deny services to same-sex couples or other LGBT
persons. Most recently, North Carolina adopted a law that
effectively overturned local ordinances prohibiting
discrimination on the basis of gender identity and gender
expression. Mississippi has also recently enacted a similarly
discriminatory law.
The author and co-sponsors of this bill believe that California,
a leader in preventing discrimination against the LGBT
community, should register its opposition to these laws by
effectively imposing a ban on state-funded travel to states that
have recently enacted discriminatory laws, or undid
anti-discrimination laws.
Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
AB 1887
Page 4