BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1996|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1996
Author: Hill (D)
Amended: 6/1/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE BUSINESS, PROF. & ECON. DEVELOP. COMM. : 5-2,
6/28/10
AYES: Negrete McLeod, Calderon, Corbett, Florez, Yee
NOES: Aanestad, Correa
NO VOTE RECORDED: Wyland, Walters
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-1, 7/15/10
AYES: Kehoe, Corbett, Emmerson, Leno, Price, Wolk, Yee
NOES: Walters
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alquist, Wyland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 64-8, 05/06/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Chiropractors: license renewal fee
SOURCE : State Board of Chiropractic Examiners
DIGEST : This bill amends the Chiropractic Initiative Act
of California by increasing the license renewal fees of
chiropractors from $150 to $250.
ANALYSIS : Existing law establishes the Chiropractic
Initiative Act of California, approved by voters on
November 7, 1922, and became effective on December 21,
1922. Establishes, under the Initiative Act, the State
CONTINUED
AB 1996
Page
2
Board of Chiropractic Examiners (BCE) to license and
regulate the chiropractic practice, and prescribes the
licensing and renewal fees for chiropractors.
This bill amends the Initiative Act by increasing the
license renewal fees of chiropractors from $150 to $250.
Background
In 1922, California voters approved the Initiative Act,
described as an act prescribing the terms upon which
licensees may be issued to practitioners of chiropractic,
creating the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners and
declaring its powers and duties, prescribing penalties for
violation hereof, and repealing all acts and parts of acts
inconsistent therewith. Among other provisions, the
Initiative Act provides that each applicant must pay an
initial licensure fee of not more than $100, as determined
by the board. Additionally, a licensee must pay a renewal
fee annually of not more than $150 as determined by the
board. The Initiative Act also authorized the Legislature
to fix the amounts of the fees payable by applicants and
licensees.
The BCE currently regulates over 14,000 licensed
chiropractors in California. According to the BCE, its
annual budget is $3.4 million, funded exclusively by the
profession through licensing fees and other regulatory
fees.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11
2011-12 2012-13 Fund
License renewal fee increase Up to an estimated ($1,330)
annually Special*
(revenue)
*Chiropractic Examiners' Fund
AB 1996
Page
3
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/15/10)
State Board of Chiropractic Examiners (source)
International Chiropractors Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to State Board of
Chiropractic Examiners, BCE has implemented significant
consumer protection changes that are necessary to fulfill
its consumer protection mandate. For example, in 2008, the
BCE expanded its enforcement program to include a permanent
field investigation and inspection program. Continued
improvements to investigations are very important for
consumer protection but require resources. With these
necessary enhancements in the BCE's enforcement program and
the increase in costs of doing business, the BCE's current
revenue is inadequate to pay for the level of service that
is needed to protect consumers.
BCE points out that it expends approximately 70 percent of
its operating budget on enforcement. If the renewal fee
remains at its current level, the BCE's fund will be
insolvent in FY 2010-11, and it will be forced to make
drastic cuts to its enforcement program. The BCE points
out that it has not raised renewal fees since 1991, and
with no increase in revenue for two decades, it was only a
matter of time until expenditures outpaced the funding
necessary for the BCE to maintain a balance in its reserve
and keep its funds solvent.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Arambula, Beall, Bill Berryhill,
Blakeslee, Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan,
Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Conway,
Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, Emmerson, Eng,
Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani,
Galgiani, Garrick, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber,
Huffman, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Monning,
Nava, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, V. Manuel Perez,
Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner,
Smyth, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico,
Tran, Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez
AB 1996
Page
4
NOES: Anderson, Tom Berryhill, Gaines, Harkey, Jeffries,
Knight, Miller, Audra Strickland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bass, Block, DeVore, Gilmore, Hagman,
Logue, Mendoza
JA:nl 7/28/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****