BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 364
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   August 19, 2009 

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Kevin De Leon, Chair

                    SB 364 (Florez) - As Amended:  July 15, 2009  

          Policy Committee:                              Health Vote:10-7

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill prohibits officers, directors, or members of the  
          governing board of a hospital designated as a comprehensive  
          cancer center by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to  
          serve or hold a position as an officer, director, or member of  
          the board of:

          1)A corporation that manufactures or sells tobacco products,  
            including facilities or pharmacies that derive revenue from  
            tobacco products.

          2)A corporation that has violated state or federal controlled  
            substances laws or regulations. 

          3)A biopharmaceutical company that focuses on the discovery,  
            development, and commercialization of therapeutic products for  
            diseases such as diabetes and cancer.

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          No direct fiscal impact results from the prohibitions  
          established by this bill. 

           COMMENTS  

            1) Rationale  . This bill establishes three prohibitions related  
             to service on the governing board of one of California's 10  
             comprehensive cancer centers, as designated by the NIH. These  
             prohibitions relate to tobacco, controlled substances, and  
             biopharmaceutical companies. 

            2) Background  . According to press coverage and anecdotal  








                                                                  SB 364
                                                                  Page  2

             reports, this bill appears to be aimed at a specific  
             individual serving as Chief Executive Officer of one of  
             California's 10 NIH-designated cancer centers. This  
             individual formerly served on the board of a large chain  
             pharmacy and has since resigned due to negative coverage of  
             tobacco sales at that company. In addition, the individual  
             appears on the board of directors of a biotech firm that  
             features the precise language "discovery, development, and  
             commercialization of therapeutic products for diseases such  
             as diabetes and cancer" on its internet homepage. 

            3) Term Undefined  . The term "biopharmaceutical company" remains  
             undefined in this bill. It is unclear what an appropriate  
             statutory definition may be or what is intended because the  
             author appears to have copied the language directly from a  
             specific company's website. 

            4) Concerns  . The Chamber of Commerce, the California Grocers  
             Association, and the California Retailers Association each  
             oppose this bill in its entirety due to the prohibition  
             related to tobacco. These groups indicate tobacco is legal  
             and that this bill creates a slippery slope with regard to  
             prohibitions related to other products. 

           Several organizations, including BayBio and the California  
             Healthcare Institute, hold an oppose unless amended position  
             due to the provision of the bill prohibiting service on the  
             board of a pharmaceutical company. For example, the  
             Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA)  
             indicate unlike tobacco, there's no inherent incompatibility  
             between a cancer center and research underway at a  
             biopharmaceutical company. The groups opposing this provision  
             indicate this bill will have a chilling effect on medical  
             research in California. In addition, these groups indicate  
             that members of boards and medical researchers are already  
             governed by strict codes of conduct with regard to ethics and  
             conflicts of interest.  
            


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Mary Ader / APPR. / (916) 319-2081