Close Call in California

As we go to press, Calif. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has just vetoed SB801, a bill designed to place an initiative act called the "Chiropractor Consumer Protection Act" on the June 2008 ballot for voter approval.

Although the bill, passed by the legislature on Sept. 12, and amended Sept. 7 (removing the stipulation that would have allowed legislative amendments to chiropractic scope of practice, as established in 1922), the legislation still required that the California Board of Chiropractic Examiners (BCE) be regulated by the state Department of Consumer Affairs.¹

According to the final text of SB801, which was sent to Gov. Schwarzenegger's desk for approval on Sept. 12 and vetoed on Oct. 11:

This bill would enact the Chiropractor Consumer Protection Act, which would include the board in the Department of Consumer Affairs, would change 2 members of the board to public members appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules and the Speaker of the Assembly, and would require the members appointed by the Governor, including one public member, to be confirmed by the Senate. The bill would also prohibit the director of the chiropractic board from disapproving or rejecting any rule or regulation pertaining to chiropractic scope of practice or educational requirements. (In essence, we would be subject to the legislature defining chiropractic for us.) The bill would exempt the executive officer from civil service, and would specify that other employees of the board are subject to those provisions. It would also specify that protection of the public is the highest priority of the board. The bill would provide that employment of legal counsel by the board be subject to certain requirements, and that the board be subject to specified meeting and disclosure requirements. (Many of these requirements already exist.)

The bill would also require that all appropriations from the state Board of Chiropractic Examiners' Fund be made by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act. (We would loose control of the money DCs pay for their licenses.) This bill would prohibit a person from being denied admission to a chiropractic school, from being denied the right to take an examination, from being denied the right to receive a diploma or certificate of graduation from a chiropractic school, or from being denied licensure because he or she is disabled. The bill would also specify that certain general provisions applicable to health care providers and health care provider licensing boards be applicable to chiropractors and to the board. The bill would appropriate $1,542,000 from the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners' Fund for purposes of the Chiropractic Act, as specified.

In explaining his rationale for introducing the bill, Sen. Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Los Angeles) said, "For far too long the Board has behaved inappropriately, taking highly questionable actions and not fulfilling its fundamental mission of protecting the public. Changing the Board's governance structure and placing it under the oversight of the Department of Consumer Affairs (Department) will ensure the Board fulfills its fundamental mission of protecting the public. Additionally, it causes the Board to comply with open meeting laws and other provisions that apply to similar health-related boards throughout the state."

Partisan politics played a key role in the progression of SB801 through the state legislature. When the senate voted on the original version of SB801 (minus the Sept. 7 amendment), the vote was 24-16 in favor of passing the bill - only three votes more than the 21 votes required for passage. All 24 "yes" votes were cast by democrats. The 16 votes against the bill were cast by 15 republicans and one democrat. One day later, the assembly voted on its version of the bill (AB1137). The vote was 42-29 in favor of passing the bill, just a single vote over the 41 votes required for passage. The 42 "yes" votes were cast by 42 democrats; 27 republicans and two democrats opposed the legislation.

True to form, the final amended version of SB801 passed in the senate on Sept. 10 by a 24-15 vote (21 votes required for passage) and by 42-32 in the assembly (41 votes required) on Sept. 12. In the senate, all 24 yes votes were cast by democrats; in the assembly, all 42 yes votes were cast by democrats.

The governor stated that "I do not feel it is necessary at this time to go through the expense of placing this measure on the ballot to essentially codify existing practice. I also do not support requiring the profession's licensing fees to pay for the costs of placing this measure on the ballot."

"California is fortunate to have a leader with the vision and courage of Arnold Schwarzenegger. In all my years in practice in California, I do not believe there has been a single chief executive that would have taken the stand Governor Schwarzenegger did and vetoed this negative and unnecessary legislation. For this courageous action, we should all be very grateful," said Dr. Charles Davis, ICAC President.

But California Chiropractic Association (CCA) president William Updyke, DC, made it clear that chiropractic's battle with democratic legislators would continue: "The Legislature has called for a full audit of the state Board of Chiropractic Examiners, which is underway. When lawmakers return to the Legislature in January, we must be prepared for Democratic leadership to use any negative information in the audit to make the case in the media for allowing legislative amendments to all sections of the Chiropractic Act."

Reference

1. "Chiropractic's California Crisis." Dynamic Chiropractic. July 16, 2007, Volume 25, Issue 15.