BILL ANALYSIS
SB 364
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 364 (Florez)
As Amended August 31, 2009
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :21-15
HEALTH 10-7 APPROPRIATIONS 9-7
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Ammiano, Carter, De La |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano, Coto, |
| |Torre, | |Davis, Fuentes, Skinner, |
| |De Leon, Hayashi, | |Solorio, Torlakson, Hill |
| |Hernandez, | | |
| |Bonnie Lowenthal, Nava, | | |
| |V. Manuel Perez, Salas | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Jones, Fletcher, Adams, |Nays:|Conway, Charles Calderon, |
| |Conway, | |Harkey, Miller, Nielsen, |
| |Emmerson, Gaines, Audra | |John A. Perez, |
| |Strickland | |Audra Strickland |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Prohibits an officer, director, or member of a
governing board of a general acute care (GAC) hospital
designated by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) as a
comprehensive cancer center, and that accepts state funds, from
holding a position as an officer, director, or member of the
board, or a similar position, of a specified corporation.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits an officer, director, or member of a governing board
of a GAC hospital that is designated by NCI as a comprehensive
cancer center to conduct cancer research and treatment, and
that accepts state funds, from holding a position as either of
the following:
a) An officer, director, or member of the board, or a
similar position, of a "corporation that manufactures or
sells tobacco products," defined as a corporation or other
entity that owns or operates licensed clinics, health
facilities, or pharmacies that derive revenue from tobacco,
or any entity that derives more than 1% of its annual
SB 364
Page 2
revenue from tobacco products; and,
b) An officer, director, or member of the board, or a
similar position, of a corporation that has, within the
past five years, violated federal or state controlled
substances laws or regulations.
2)Makes legislative declarations that it is misleading for a GAC
hospital that is designated as a comprehensive cancer center,
and that is provided resources by the state, to employ
officers and directors who profit from the sale and
distribution of tobacco products. Finds that such a hospital
should seek to ensure that its directors and officers do not
profit from the consumption of tobacco products and do not
render services to corporations that have violated federal or
state laws.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides for the licensing and regulation of health care
facilities, including GAC hospitals, acute psychiatric
hospitals, and special hospitals by the Department of Public
Health (DPH).
2)Provides that an application for licensure as a health care
facility may be denied by DPH if the applicant, or a
significant officer, director, or shareholder, of an applicant
firm, partnership, corporation or public entity, has been
convicted of a crime, as defined, or knowingly makes a false
statement of fact in an application for such licensure.
3)Requires DPH to consider several factors concerning an
applicant seeking licensure of a health care facility,
including whether the applicant is of reputable and
responsible character and has the ability to comply with state
and federal licensing laws and regulations, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, no direct fiscal impact resulting from the
prohibitions established by the bill.
COMMENTS : According to the author, this bill is intended to
prevent cancer research and treatment facilities that receive
state funds from employing or appointing officers and directors
SB 364
Page 3
who also hold positions in corporations that either profit from
the sale and distribution of tobacco products, or have violated
federal or state controlled substances laws and regulations.
The prohibitions in the bill are designed to prevent potential
conflicts of interest for governing board members of
California's 10 NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers.
The California Medical Association (CMA) supports this bill.
CMA states that, due to the serious inherent health risks from
smoking, CMA physicians strongly discourage smoking and support
ways to restrict minors' access to tobacco products to prevent
their becoming addicted and that the organization has long
called for hospitals, pharmacies, and other establishments where
health care services are delivered to refrain from selling or
allowing the consumption of tobacco products on its premises.
CMA argues that the relationships pondered by this bill are not
only unacceptable conflicts of interest but also are of dubious
benefit to patients and may in fact cause harm. CMA maintains
that no health entity should be affiliated with any person or
entity that profits from tobacco addiction and certainly not
cancer research hospitals.
The California Chamber of Commerce, the California Grocers
Association, and the California Retailers Association are
opposed to this bill. The opposition argues that the sale of
tobacco products is legal in California and that prohibiting
individuals associated with tobacco from serving their
communities is an over-reaching government intrusion. The
opposition also argues that this bill presents a slippery slope
to other legal products and forcing the removal and barring the
appointment of these individuals from service on boards does not
benefit the community.
Recent amendments remove the opposition of BayBio, the
California Healthcare Institute, and the Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America by striking provisions that
additionally would have prohibited service on the board of a
biopharmaceutical company involved with therapeutic products for
diseases such as diabetes and cancer.
Analysis Prepared by : Joyce Iseri / HEALTH (916) 319 2097
SB 364
Page 4
FN: 0002664