Legislative Plan by Senator Richard Lara - Research Proposal Example

Pol103A Assignment2 Legislative Plan (SB 4-The Health for All-Senator Richard Lara) Background on Legislation The re-introduction of Health for AllAct 2015 by Senator Richard Lara received enormous support and was celebrated statewide. The manner in which the bill was received thus left a number of questions unanswered to those who heard the senator’s proposal for the first time. To begin with, one would like to know what the bill does and why the senator would make his proposal at this time. In answering these questions, I would address the major concern that compelled Senator Lara to reintroduce the Bill. Basically, the main purpose is to ensure improved health care in California both for the natives and the immigrants. I put it forward that when this bill has been successfully approved by the state Senate appropriation committee and becomes a law, all Californians would have access to coverage in health care without any discrimination. Initially, the health care act denied the immigrants access to health care coverage. The proposal therefore is aimed at expanding the health care policy to include everybody in California. Additionally, the bill aims at allowing all immigrants the opportunity to be registered in the Medical program and insurance that has always been offered through the health benefits exchange that has always been a parallel program. This way, millions of people living in California would have access to health care. This is because the bill seeks to include approximately 138% of families living under federal poverty level. The proposal was reintroduced at this time considering the fact that quite a large population living in California has not been eligible for health care or the exchange benefit just because of their immigrant status. The senator identified this time as the period for California to step up and finish the job. Has there been any similar legislation A similar bill failed to take effect in California after the proposal was rejected by the Senate appropriation committee. However, it is to be noted that at the time the state senate appropriations committee rejected this proposal; it had successfully gone through the authentication process executed by the Senate legislation. The decision by the state Senate appropriation committee to reject this bill therefore amounted to insubordination of the law thus considered illegal. The bill could therefore not be passed into law. Since the action on the bill was delayed by the committee, the Senate had to vote both for and against the bill. The winning side would be passed by two-thirds of the total voters. The bill that received massive support from different organizations and sectors that include the California Women’s Law Center, the Senate legislative and a good percentage of the population would be passed into law. The senator also expressed interest in working with any like-minded person including Senate colleagues as well as other stakeholders in seeking alternatives to funding that would ensure his goal in improving health care for all continues with a similar momentum. The support that the senator received in reintroducing the bill suggests that it has much influence amongst the majority thus stands a chance of being passed into law. However, it should be noted that the initial attempts by the senator to introduce the bill did not take effect. This is because the senator in making his proposal had not submitted a clear outline of the funding sources for the project. As a result, the Senate Appropriations Committee failed to approve the proposal made by the Senator despite the fact that it had been passed by the Senate legislation. It should, therefore, be noted that the support of the Senate Appropriations Committee is significant and very powerful. The legislation would likely be received with celebration in the senator’s home district. The current demographic reports indicate that the population in California ranging between three to four million has not been enrolled in the Medical program. The same estimate of three to four million people in California are therefore not insured in the Medical program. Additionally, another estimate of one million people living in California are immigrants. It therefore, implies that a similar population will not be insured. Further, the same population has no eligibility for health care coverage. The proposal therefore, would be advocating more than six million people living in California to have an affordable access to health care and exchange benefit similarly to the natives. The senator’s home district would therefore, be advantaged by the proposed legislation. The entire community would be eligible for quality and affordable health care. Further, better health care ensures the population realizes a healthy lifestyle through consistent checkups and screening. This ensures any diagnosis is made at its early stages thus treatment and management of the condition becomes easier. This would in turn improve the health of the entire community. Further, the emergency rooms would be less crowded. This would in turn lower health care costs in California. Path through the Legislature For a bill to be passed into law in California, it has to undergo a legislative process. The Healthcare for All Act proposed by Senator Richard Lara is no different. The state legislature of California consists of two houses that include the Assembly and the Senate. The Assembly members are normally 80 while the Senate house is usually 40. When Senator Richard Lara authored the Healthcare for All Act, it marked the beginning of the legislation process. The bill was then submitted to the Office of State Printing and acted upon 30 days after the time it was introduced. The health care bill is then referred to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee in order to be reviewed. The committee has the duty of developing the proposals that have been submitted by a specific author. The Senator therefore presented the Bill to the Committee alongside supporting documents that could be essential in either agreeing to the proposal or objecting the proposal. The committee then voted and passed the bill as amended. At this stage, more than two-thirds of the committee voted the bill as amended. Copies of letters that agreed with the bill as well as those that objected to the bill were then posted to the author. After the amendments, the bill was scheduled for hearing before the committee and was passed by a majority vote. It should also be noted that before the bill was presented for hearing, an analysis was conducted in order to assess the conformity of the bill with the current law. The cost of the bill is also significant to be taken into consideration. The estimated cost of implementation of the bill is $ 350 million. However, the author reiterated that the cost would increase to more than $ 420 million. The stated amount, however, excludes the plan of payment that the state would incur while expanding the health care to include all immigrants. At this level, the State Senate Appropriations Committee is tasked with the duty of assessing if the author has also presented information of how payments for the bill would be made. Should the committee have failed to establish that the policy backers had not figured out how to face this bill, it would then be declined and further time established on how to source these funds. However, in this case, the senator has sought the back up of other likeminded colleagues alongside the stakeholders on the issue of finances. This is an approach that the author of this bill established to ensure that the bill passes successfully through the State Senate Appropriation Committee. The Health Care for All Act originated from the Senate house. Since it received the approval of the committee, the Senator had to present the same bill for the second time in the Senate house which would further assign the bill for the third hearing. Analysis of the bill is done both before the second and the third hearing. During the third hearing of the bill, the Senator successfully explained and discussed with the colleagues the contents of the bill. The third reading was preceded by a roll call voting. Since the support that the bill received at this stage implied that the bill could take effect immediately by leading by 27 votes in the house of origin, the process of hearing had to proceed in the other house. A similar procedure was followed to the Assembly House, and the roll call voting was in favor of the Health Care for All Act. Fifty-four out of eighty members of the Assembly House voted in favor of the bill. However, it is to be noted that the presentation of the bill in the Assembly house is not conducted by the author of the bill. In this case, the author Senator Lara introduced a co-author to “jockey” the bill in the second house. The Senator therefore worked hand in hand with the Assembly Member Kristin Olson in order to ensure that the bill was well presented in the other house. The Assembly member for a long time had expressed his interest in this policy area. Executive Branch The bill successfully received approval from the Senate and the House of Assembly. The subsequent step is to forward the bill to the governor. Governors in the state of California are the chief executive officers elected by the majority rule. As the manager of the state, the governor has the duty of ensuring the implementation process of the laws of the states takes place effectively. Once a bill has successfully passed through the two houses, it then depends on the position held by a governor to pass the bill into law. In the case of the bill that was proposed by Senator Lara, the bill was welcomed by the governor and his reception of the idea made it easy to sign the bill into law. The governor appended his signature to the bill thus becoming law. Through the Health and Human Service agency, the governor further set aside a budget that would ensure the running of the project. It should also be noted that California has taken a lead in the implementation of a number of health reforms in the recent past. It is therefore, evident that the governor must have signed pieces of legislation in the past that are closely similar to the Health Care for All in the past. The belief that has been expressed by the respective agencies to the Executive Agencies of the governor indicates that the governor supports the proposed bill into becoming the law. The governor’s budget has also taken consideration of the new law. In his budget, $ 142 billion has been allocated for the health care reforms. Out of this allocation, $ 111 billion has been sourced from other funds while the remaining $311 billion obtained from the general fund. In this manner, the governor expressed his good will in the implementation process. The allocated budget would ensure the health care coverage is accessed by millions of people living in California. Further under the executive of the governor, California would realize the benefits of the proposed bill that has been signed into law. The expansion of the Healthcare Act, as was stated in the bill, included up to 138% of childless adults, parents and relatives who are caretakers of the federal poverty level. Additionally, the signing of the bill into law enhanced the benefits in terms of Medical mental health and substance use disorders. It should also be noted that California is amongst the first of the 27 states in the implementation of the health care reform. The acceptance of the governor to sign the bill into law increased the eligibility of the state access to expanded medical care. Courts The health care act has not had any legal concern with the legislation. However, earlier on, the court had upheld the Health Care Act in 2012. The ruling was described to favor the budget for the health care. In the ruling California had been awarded $15 billion yearly to boost the expansion of the project initiated by this newly signed law. The ruling allowed the governor Jerry Brown to lower the budget by $ 200 million. This move was not received well by a number of organizations and the part of the state members. It is this conflict that led to filing of the case that the court later ruled in favor of the governor based on the argument that this would be a good approach for the state budget. Floor Speech SENATOR RICHARD LARA: Mr. Speaker, members of the Senate and the people of California: As we all know, America and its respective states have suffered from the worst economic crisis since the beginning of the Great Depression. The immediate impact that followed was reduction in the availability of job opportunities. The financial system of America almost collapsed. It is, therefore, realizable that a good population of the Americans is still out there seeking for new job vacancies. California as a state was not left out in this great depression. It has therefore been my concern that any Californian out there seeking for a way of paying his or her bills would be in a position to find a means. I will therefore not let up until being certain that the situation has improved. I want to thank the members of the Senate and the Assembly for walking with me in this journey that began many months ago that aimed to make equal access to healthcare to any of the Californian regardless of being an immigrant or not. We should realize that America as a whole is one of the most democratic nations. The state of California, therefore, follows suit. However, it should be realized that the health care system has been a problem not only for the uninsured. Even those who are insured have expressed a lot of uncertainty in the health care insurance. Due to the great depression, the insured have felt insecure about losing their insurance as well. Further, the uninsured population estimated at six million for both who are immigrants and not enrolled in the Medical and exchange benefit is not eligible for affordable health care. The risks that this population is exposed to are therefore worrying. It should also be noted that a population that is not healthy is not productive, and if we are not careful the mortality rate will be on the rise. A man from San Francisco, who was an immigrant lost his life due to delayed treatment due to lack of health care coverage and insurance. On a different occasion, an expectant woman who also happened to be an immigrant in the city of Anaheim also succumbed to death under similar circumstances. It is therefore, necessary make significant changes within the health care systems in order to save lives. This forms the basis of the bill that has been proposed by Senator Richard Lara. The bill has been put forward pending to be passed into law. I strongly believe that if the bill is implemented fully, California will be one of the best health care systems that include its entire population regardless of being an immigrant. Opinion Editorial Unfunded Healthcare Crisis in California SB 4-The Health for All by Senator Richard Lara is a bill that if overlooked would similarly mean that this house is not concerned with the welfare of the respective voters whom we represent. I, therefore, take this opportunity to support the senator in his proposal. After considering all the ideas that the Senator has presented, a number of issues that are not currently addressed in the health care system can be identified. To begin with, the main purpose is to ensure improved health care in California both for the natives and the immigrants. Initially, the health care act denied the immigrants access to health care coverage. The proposal therefore is aimed at expanding the health care policy to include everybody in California. Additionally, the bill is aimed at allowing all immigrants the opportunity to be registered in the Medical program and insurance that has always been offered through the health benefits exchange that has always been a parallel program. This is because the bill has included approximately 138% of families living under federal poverty level. Another point that is of major concern in the proposal of this prudent plan is that it would save on cost while taking into account the health care coverage and benefits the retirees. This approach would ensure that the taxpayers and the civic workforce for those serving in the government would have their costs reduced. The statistical results indicate that the current costs incurred in offering health care to retirees, as well as the current state workers is estimated at $ 72 billion. Further, it is projected that this figure is on the rise and if no action is taken, the liability would go up to $ 92 billion. The only way of ensuring that this figure does not further increase but instead suppressed is to ensure that the State does not surrender to complacency as well as temptations that are dangerous since that would pollute the upcoming policy with fear mongering. The approach that has been considered in the policy would allow the state to refund health care benefits involving the retirees and the state workers through an organized plan of setting money aside. The proposal that has been presented to the house also suggests that the State of California should develop a single-payer health care system. You would realize that a single player healthcare system is one that does not discriminate between who is eligible for the health care coverage and who is not eligible for the health care coverage. It is, therefore, a universal approach that would include both immigrants and non-immigrants. It should also be noted that this approach has succeeded in other states and applying the policy for sure can also not fail our health care system. This approach therefore, advocates the basic human need of health care services. I would therefore, put it forward to you that this bill aims at delivering a health care system that is effective, spends with consideration and covers everyone. For this reason, this policy can also be identified as the civil rights movement of our generation. Please join us. Thank you. Social Media Tweets: Ricardo Lara @SenRicardoLara 1. Join me in the Healthcare for all Bill# reducing the medical budget for the Californians by 10% to accommodate the huge population in our state. 2. Californian needs us# health care for all will not hurt the taxpayers. Relieve yourself of the burden. 3. Health Care for All# referred to as civil rights movement of our generation - needs you now. Please join us! Facebook posts: Senator Ricardo Lara 1. Improved health care in California both for the natives and the immigrants; make it work through the new Health Care for All Policy. 2. Approximately 138% of families living under federal poverty level are catered for in the new approximately 138% of families living under federal poverty level. Leave a comment to support the proposal. 3. Health Care for All Policy will save more than four million of the Californian population denied access to affordable health care. Instagram posts: Senator Ricardo Lara 1. California bill on health care has raised questions about the inclusion of immigrants in the new Healthcare for All. My bill# SB 4 advocates for a single player health system. 2. California Women’s Law Center supports the Health Care for All. My bill promotes equity in health care. 3. Reduced immortality rate is achievable through adoption of the Health Care for All policy. Works Cited Brown, Edmund. “2015-16 Governors’ Budget Summary.” State of California, 2015. Read More