BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                           Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair

                                          SB 299 (Evans)
          
          Hearing Date: 5/2/2011          Amended: As Introduced
          Consultant: Bob Franzoia        Policy Vote: L&IR 5-2  Judiciary 
          4-1
          















































          _________________________________________________________________
          ____
          BILL SUMMARY: SB 299 would prohibit an employer from refusing to 
          maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for a 
          female employee disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related 
          medical condition employee who takes that leave, as specified.
          _________________________________________________________________
          ____
                            Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions         2011-12      2012-13       2013-14     Fund
           Unlawful employment    Unknown, likely minor, absorbable 
          costsGeneral
          practice prohibition   annually   
          _________________________________________________________________
          ____

          STAFF COMMENTS:  

          Under existing law, employers with at least 50 employees are 
          required to maintain and pay for coverage under a group health 
          plan during a period of leave, of up to 12 weeks, for the birth 
          of a child.  Existing law prohibits employers with at least five 
          employees from refusing to allow female employees to take a 
          leave of absence due to a pregnancy, childbirth, or related 
          medical condition, not to exceed 16 weeks.  This bill would 
          prohibit an employer of five or more employees from refusing to 
          maintain and pay for coverage under a group health plan for a 
          female employee taking pregnancy disability leave.

          The Department of Fair Employment and Housing indicates costs to 
          respond to inquiries regarding health care coverage during 
          pregnancy disability leave are likely to be minor, and 
          absorbable.
          
          Impact on the California Health Benefits Exchange
          Employers of 50 or fewer employees are permitted to purchase 
          insurance, commencing January 1, 2014, for their employees 
          through the Small Business Option Program (SHOP) Exchange, 
          established by Chapter 655/2010 and 659/2010 and under the 
          authority of the California Health Benefits Exchange.  
          Additionally, the federal government offers tax incentives to 
          small businesses in an effort to continue their provision of and 
          contribution to employee health care coverage.
          
          To the extent this new requirement to provide up to an extra 








          SB 299 (Evans)
          Page 3

          four months of coverage (and to the extent that employers do 
          drop this coverage while a female employee is on maternity 
          leave) increases health care costs too high for small employers 
          to handle, small employers may drop coverage.

          There are a variety of publicly-funded health care coverage 
          programs for eligible individuals based on income and health 
          status, including Medi-Cal, Healthy Families Program, Access for 
          Infants and Mothers Program, Pre-Existing Condition Insurance 
          Plan, and Managed Risk Medical Insurance Program, that these 
          employees could 

          attempt to access.  If they could not access these programs, 
          there would be an increase in the number of uninsured and 
          therefore cost pressure on county, state, and federal funds to 
          compensate hospitals for any uncompensated care.
          
          The Exchange must be operational by January 1, 2014. Thus, 
          uninsured individuals may purchase insurance through the 
          Exchange in the individual market and, dependent on income 
          eligibility, may receive federal subsidies.

          Federal law requires plans and insurers, commencing January 1, 
          2014, to provide coverage for ten general "essential health 
          benefits"; they have yet to be fully defined by federal 
          guidance.  If a state mandates coverage of a benefit that is not 
          included in the essential health benefits, the state would need 
          to assume the cost of that extra benefit for individuals covered 
          through the Exchange.  State General Fund costs are speculative 
          at this point; further federal guidance is needed to accurately 
          determine a state's General Fund liability.

          If a small employer drops coverage for their employees as a 
          result of this bill, there could (1) be cost pressure on state, 
          local, and federal funds to compensate the health care safety 
          net for newly uninsured individuals, and ( 2) General Fund cost 
          pressure to the extent that these uninsured employees (a) 
          purchase insurance from the Exchange commencing January 1, 2014, 
          and, (b) they have an income between 200 and 400 percent of the 
          federal poverty level, thus making them eligible to receive 
          federal subsidies.  












          SB 299 (Evans)
          Page 4