BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Committee on Industrial
Relations 1999-2000 Regular Session Hilda L. Solis,
Chair
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
Bill No: AB 107
Author: Knox
Version: As Amended May 24, 1999
Subject:
Public employees' health benefits: domestic partners
Support:
Association of California State Attorneys and Law Judges
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
City of Petaluma
Metropolitan Water District
The Friends Committee on Legislation
California Teachers'Association
California Nurses'Association
California Professional Firefighters
California Alliance for Pride and Equality
Union of American Physicians
Community College League
East Bay Municipal Utility District
California Independent Public Employees' Legislative
Council
California School Employees Association
National Organization for Women
City of Los Angeles
American Civil Liberties Union
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Opposition:
Committee on Moral Concerns
Traditional Values Coaltion
San Vicente Community Church
Purpose:
To provide an option for state and local public employers
to extend health benefits to domestic partners under the
Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act.
Analysis:
Current law authorizes, under the Public Employees' Medical
and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA), the Board of Administration
of CalPERS to provide health benefits plan coverage to
state and local public employees and annuitants and their
family members.
This Bill
1. Provides employers whose employees participate in the
California Public Employees Retirement System's (CalPERS)
health care program (PEMHCA) the option to extend health
benefits coverage to the domestic partners of their
employees and annuitants.
2. Authorizes contracting agencies to elect to include
with the definition of "family member" persons who meet
the definition of "domestic partner" of an employee or
annuitant of the contracting agency when that person is
duly registered as a domestic partner. Requires election
forms containing specified information to be filed under
penalty of perjury.
3. Provides for this option only upon election by the
employer who contracts for PEMHCA coverage. May apply to
employees of the state, local public agencies or schools.
The option to elect is also available to the following
employers: a) California State University; b) the
Judicial Council; c) the Senate; and, d) the Assembly.
4. Specifies that for those employees who are members of
bargaining units, domestic partner coverage is only
applicable if it has been adopted in a signed memorandum
of understanding (MOU) between their employer and the
recognized employee organization.
Hearing Date: July 14, 1999 AB
107
Consultant: Clem Meredith Page
2
Senate Committee on Industrial Relations
5. Requires employees to notify CalPERS upon the
termination of the domestic partnership. Employees who
fail to notify CalPERS are liable for costs incurred
after the partnership is terminated.
6. Defines a domestic partnership, exclusively for the
purpose of providing PEMHCA
coverage, as meeting all of the following criteria:
a) Both persons have a common residence;
b) One of the persons is enrolled as an employee or
annuitant of a contracting
employer;
c) Both persons agree to be jointly responsible for
each other's basic living
expenses during the domestic partnership;
d) Neither person is married nor a member of another
domestic partnership;
e) The two persons are not related by blood in a way
that would prevent them
from being married in this state; and,
f) Both persons are at least 18 years of age.
Comments:
1. Proponents :
This bill is sponsored by the City of West Hollywood,
which believes it will strengthen and protect families by
promoting better health care for those in committed,
lasting relationships. Supporters of this bill also
contend that it is necessary to acknowledge the
different types of families that exist, and that access
to quality health care should be a basic right of all
Americans and should be expanded to domestic partners.
They also point out that increasing the "covered lives"
in health programs has the general effect of reducing
Hearing Date: July 14, 1999 AB
107
Consultant: Clem Meredith Page
3
Senate Committee on Industrial Relations
costs.
Supporters also state that since domestic partner
coverage is widespread in the private sector there is
substantial actuarial data to show that the pay out rate
for health insurance policies of domestic partners is no
higher than the pay out rate for other family members.
2. Opponents :
Opponents of the measure contend that "the historical
family arrangement works best for society. Employers,
public and private, have long recognized the advantage of
covering an employee's dependents. However, struggling
families do not need their tax burden increased to
support public employees' non-dependent adult friends."
3. Prior Legislation :
AB 427 (Knox) of 1997-98 is the last of five previous
bills which have attempted to grant domestic partner
benefits under the PEMHCA program.
4. Legislative History This measure passed the Assembly
P. E. R. & S.S. Committee by a 6 to 2 vote, the Assembly
Appropriations Committee by a 14 to 6 vote and the Assembly
Floor by a 42 to 38 vote.
Hearing Date: July 14, 1999 AB
107
Consultant: Clem Meredith Page
4
Senate Committee on Industrial Relations