As Legislative Session Ends Governor Calls Special Session
Early Wednesday morning, the California State Legislature concluded its regular legislative business for 2007.  Following partisan budget negotiations that went two months beyond the legal deadline, legislators rushed through hundreds of proposals that now either go to the governor for approval or will be carried over until 2008.  The protracted budget debate left no time for several major policy issues, including healthcare reform. In consequence, the governor called a special session on Tuesday to address the issues of healthcare and water use. While the details of the healthcare session remain unknown, recent negotiations between the governor and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez have progressed to the point where it appears possible that a coverage proposal might pass this year.  As ever, the central questions revolve around finance and it may take a ballot measure to provide a funding mechanism (as Republicans have announced that they will not support any increase in taxes).  CHI will closely follow the policy and politics of healthcare reform and relay pertinent information to our members.

Chemical Proposals on Hold until Next Year
Two bills relating to chemical use and reporting that would have significant impact on the life sciences community were pulled from the Senate Floor by their authors.  AB 515, authored by Assemblywoman Sally Leiber (D-Mountain View), would have required the state’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board to assign new permissible exposure limits (PELs) to many chemicals used in the workplace, and these PELs would be set without industry input.  AB 558, authored by Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles), would have imposed significant chemical reporting requirements on entities in the state by incorrectly assuming that any use of “hazardous materials” automatically poses risks to human health and the environment.  The measure also would have threatened companies’ confidential business information by requiring public disclosure of all chemicals used in the manufacturing process and the amounts of each.  CHI expects to see these proposals again next year and will continue to oppose them.

University of California Receives Large Donations

• On Monday, Sept. 10, Eli Broad announced a $20 million donation to UCLA to enhance its embryonic and adult stem cell programs.  The gift, the latest in a series of large donations that are positioning California's universities at the forefront of this promising field, will be used to purchase laboratory supplies, provide research grants and endow professorships. UCLA will change the name of its Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Medicine to the Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research.
• UC-Berkeley received a $113 million gift from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation on Monday, marking the largest donation in the school’s history.  The funding will provide the institution with a major new source of endowed funds to attract and support world-class faculty and graduate students.  The gift represents a turning point in the financing of public higher education, providing endowment support that will help to close the funding gap between the nation’s preeminent public university and its elite private peers.

Electoral “Reform” Initiative Moves Ahead, But Is It Constitutional?
Republican activists are gathering signatures for a June 2008 voter initiative to change the rules for the 2008 presidential election. Last week, their plan to revise the state's method for allocating its 53 electoral votes was endorsed by the state GOP and cleared by the California secretary of state.  The “Presidential Election Reform Act,” as the measure is called, would discard the current winner-take-all system in favor of one that divides electoral votes by congressional districts.  In 2004, President Bush received no electoral votes from California, though he won majorities in 22 of California's congressional districts. If the proposed referendum had been law, he would have picked up 22 additional electoral votes.  That amounts to a state the size of Ohio, enough to swing a close election.  Apart from questions about fairness and how this plays in national politics, some legal scholars maintain that the initiative is blatantly unconstitutional. The U.S. Constitution, according to this argument, explicitly prohibits a ballot measure that would overturn a state legislature's process for appointing electors. In Article II, Section 1, the Constitution declares that electors shall be appointed by states "in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct." In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language strictly.  California could alter its winner-take-all approach and adopt a district-by-district system for allocating electors (as Maine and Nebraska do). But the state legislature would have to approve the change. Since both chambers of the California legislature have substantial Democratic majorities, the state assembly and senate would be unreceptive to this “reform,” which is why its sponsors decided to appeal directly to the voters.