California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Enacted

SB 90 — Health: hospitals: Medi-Cal.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 19, Statutes of 2011.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. ✓
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2011. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 74% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 3 sponsors

    1 primary, 2 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 6 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

(1) Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which basic health care services are provided to qualified low-income persons. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid provisions. Existing law authorizes the Director of Health Care Services to limit the rates of payment for health care services provided under the Medi-Cal program. Existing law requires, subject to federal approval, the department to freeze rates applicable to inpatient hospital services, as specified, and authorizes the department to modify the rate freeze in order to comply with federal Medicaid requirements. This bill would provide that the rate freeze pursuant to these provisions shall become inoperative, and that any rate that was frozen pursuant to those provisions shall be restored retroactively to the rate that would have been in effect absent those provisions, on the effective date of this bill. (2) Existing law requires the department to seek a demonstration project or federal waiver of Medicaid law to implement specified objectives, which may include better care coordination for seniors, persons with disabilities, and children with special health care needs. Existing law provides that to the extent the provisions under the Medi-Cal Hospital/Uninsured Care Demonstration Project Act do not conflict with the provisions of, or the Special Terms and Conditions of, this demonstration project, the provisions of the Medi-Cal Hospital/Uninsured Care Demonstration Project Act shall apply. Existing law requires the department to reduce disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospitals by 10%, as specified. This bill would provide that, in addition to the 10% reduction, disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospitals shall be reduced in the 2010–11 fiscal year by an additional $30 million in General Fund moneys and by the corresponding federal financial participation. To the extent permitted by federal law, the bill would provide that the additional room under the federal Upper Payment Limit created by this reduction shall be used to increase the above-described supplemental payments. This bill would also provide that, in addition to the 10% reduction, disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospitals shall be reduced in the 2011–12 fiscal year by an additional $75 million in General Fund moneys and by the corresponding federal financial participation. To the extent permitted by federal law, the bill would provide that the additional room under the federal Upper Payment Limit created by this reduction shall be used to increase supplemental payments under subsequent legislation extending or creating a new supplemental hospital payment program supported by a fee. (3) Existing law, until January 1, 2013, reduces interim payments by 10% for inpatient hospital services provided on and after July 1, 2008, at all hospitals that receive Medi-Cal reimbursement from the department and that are not under selective contracts with the department. This bill would, commencing on the effective date of this bill, provide that these provisions shall no longer be applicable to fee-for-service hospital rates but shall continue to be applicable as specified. (4) Existing law, subject to federal approval, imposes a quality assurance fee, as specified, on certain general acute care hospitals through and including December 31, 2010. Existing law creates the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund in the State Treasury and requires that the money collected from the quality assurance fee be deposited into the fund. Existing law, subject to federal approval, requires the department to make supplemental payments for certain services, as specified, to private hospitals, nondesignated public hospitals, and designated public hospitals, as defined, for subject fiscal years, as defined. Existing law also requires the department to increase capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed care plans, increase payments to mental health plans, and make direct grants to designated public hospitals, as specified. Existing law provides that the moneys in the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund shall, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be available only for certain purposes, including providing the supplemental payments to hospitals, direct grants to designated public hospitals, increased capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed care plans, and increased payments to mental health plans. Existing law also establishes the continuously appropriated Distressed Hospital Fund, which consists of moneys transferred to the fund or appropriated by the Legislature and used as the nonfederal share of payments to distressed hospitals, as defined. This bill would, subject to federal approval, commencing January 1, 2011, through and including June 30, 2011, impose a quality assurance fee, as specified, on certain general acute care hospitals. This bill would require that the moneys collected from the quality assurance fee be deposited into the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund. The bill would, subject to federal approval, provide that the moneys in the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund shall, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be available only for certain purposes, including providing supplemental payments for certain services to private hospitals, increased capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed care plans, and increased payments to mental health plans. The bill would provide that if quality assurance fee payments are remitted to the department after the date determined by the department to be the final date for calculating the final supplemental payments, the fee payments shall be retained in the fund for purposes of funding supplemental payments supported by a hospital quality assurance fee program under subsequent legislation, but provides that if supplemental payments are not implemented under subsequent legislation, then those quality assurance fee payments shall be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund. The bill would also provide that if amounts of the quality assurance fees are collected in excess of the funds required to make the payments above and federal rules prohibit the department from refunding the fee payments to the general acute care hospitals, the excess funds shall be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund. By increasing the amount of money that may be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund, this bill would make an appropriation. The bill would also require that the department design and implement, in consultation with the designated and nondesignated public hospitals, an intergovernmental transfer program relating to Medi-Cal managed care services provided by designated and nondesignated public hospitals in order to increase capitation payments for the purpose of increasing their reimbursement. (5) Existing law requires, after January 1, 2008, that any general acute care hospital building that is determined to be a potential risk of collapse or pose significant loss of life may only be used for nonacute care hospital purposes, unless granted an extension as prescribed. This bill would authorize the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development to grant a hospital an additional extension of up to 7 years for a hospital building that it owns or operates if the hospital meets specified milestones. This bill would require a hospital that applies for this extension to pay the office an additional fee, to be determined by the office, sufficient to cover the additional reasonable costs incurred by the office for maintaining the additional reporting requirements established by these provisions. This bill would provide that this provision shall become operative on the date the department receives all necessary federal approvals for a 2011–12 fiscal year hospital quality assurance fee program that includes $320 million in fee revenue to pay for health care coverage for children, as specified. (6) This bill would become operative only if AB 113 of the 2011–12 Regular Session of the Legislature is enacted. (7) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 19, Statutes of 2011.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 31. Noes 5. Page 567.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. Urgency clause adopted.

  6. From committee: That the Assembly amendments be concurred in. (Ayes 7. Noes 2. Page 580.)

  7. From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on HEALTH pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. (Ayes 3. Noes 0. Page 566.) Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.

  8. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10.

  9. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  10. Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 64. Noes 6. Page 874.) Ordered to the Senate.

  11. Unanimous consent granted to take up without reference to file. (Page 874.)

  12. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  13. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (April 6).

  14. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 14. Noes 1.) (April 5). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  15. Joint Rule 62(a) suspended. (Page 808.)

  16. Assembly Rule 56 suspended. (Page 808.)

  17. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.

  18. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.

  19. Referred to Com. on BUDGET.

  20. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  21. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 22. Noes 2. Page 169.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  22. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  23. Ordered to second reading.

  24. Withdrawn from committee.

  25. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  26. From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 10.

  27. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Hernandez · Cosponsor
  • Monning · Cosponsor
  • Steinberg · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 2 co-sponsors · 119 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Steinberg

Co-sponsors (2)

  • Hernandez
  • Monning

Not signed on (119)

119 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 119 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Passed 64 Yea · 6 Nay · 9 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 59609
Democratic 3000
Republican 2000
Total 64609
% of votes cast 81%8%0%11%
How each member voted (79)
Member Party Vote
Hagman — Yea
Hall — Yea
Butler — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Carter — Yea
Hill — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Conway — Yea
Cook — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Williams — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Davis — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Knight — Yea
Perea — Yea
Silva — Yea
Valadao — Yea
Yamada — Nay
Campos — Yea
Gatto — Nay
Gorell — Not Voting
Chesbro — Nay
Halderman — Not Voting
Bonilla — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hayashi — Nay
Dickinson — Yea
Portantino — Not Voting
Mitchell — Not Voting
Block — Yea
Lara — Yea
Ma — Not Voting
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Norby — Yea
Skinner — Not Voting
Solorio — Yea
Swanson — Nay
Torres — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Achadjian — Yea
Ammiano — Nay
Beall — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Huber — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Logue — Yea
Mansoor — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Pan — Yea
Smyth — Yea
Eng — Yea
Donnelly — Not Voting
Fuentes — Yea
Furutani — Not Voting
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Bonnie Lowenthal — Not Voting
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 31 Yea · 5 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 28504
Republican 1000
Democratic 2000
Total 31504
% of votes cast 78%13%0%10%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Hancock — Nay
Evans — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Runner — Yea
De León — Yea
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Harman — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Blakeslee — Nay
Dutton — Yea
Huff — Yea
Leno — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Price — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Yee — Nay
Lowenthal — Not Voting
Corbett — Not Voting
Alquist — Yea
Anderson — Nay
Kehoe — Yea
Lieu — Not Voting
Liu — Yea
Vargas — Yea
Wright — Yea
Wyland — Nay
Emmerson — Yea
Correa — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Beth Gaines — Not Voting
Bill Berryhill — Yea
La Malfa — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 16 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 15001
Democratic 1000
Total 16001
% of votes cast 94%0%0%6%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Gatto — Yea
Hall — Not Voting
Harkey — Yea
Hill — Yea
Campos — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Norby — Yea
Davis — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 14 Yea · 1 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 14104
Total 14104
% of votes cast 74%5%0%21%
How each member voted (19)
Member Party Vote
Mitchell — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Monning — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Silva — Yea
Williams — Yea
Gordon — Not Voting
Ammiano — Nay
Hayashi — Not Voting
Knight — Yea
Logue — Yea
Mansoor — Yea
Pan — Yea
Eng — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Bonnie Lowenthal — Not Voting
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Not Voting

Official roll call →

Passed 22 Yea · 2 Nay · 14 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 202013
Democratic 2000
Republican 0001
Total 222014
% of votes cast 58%5%0%37%
How each member voted (38)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Wyland — Nay
Evans — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Cannella — Not Voting
Lowenthal — Yea
De León — Yea
Harman — Not Voting
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Huff — Not Voting
Corbett — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Anderson — Nay
Dutton — Not Voting
Price — Not Voting
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Not Voting
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Blakeslee — Not Voting
Pavley — Not Voting
Vargas — Yea
Emmerson — Not Voting
Correa — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Fuller — Not Voting
Beth Gaines — Not Voting
Bill Berryhill — Not Voting
La Malfa — Not Voting
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 90 do?
(1) Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which basic health care services are provided to qualified low-income persons. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid provisions. Existing law authorizes the Director of Health Care Services to limit the rates of payment for health care services provided under the Medi-Cal program. Existing law requires, subject to federal approval, the department to freeze rates applicable to inpatient hospital services, as specified, and authorizes the department to modify the rate freeze in order to comply with federal Medicaid requirements. This bill would provide that the rate freeze pursuant to these provisions shall become inoperative, and that any rate that was frozen pursuant to those provisions shall be restored retroactively to the rate that would have been in effect absent those provisions, on the effective date of this bill. (2) Existing law requires the department to seek a demonstration project or federal waiver of Medicaid law to implement specified objectives, which may include better care coordination for seniors, persons with disabilities, and children with special health care needs. Existing law provides that to the extent the provisions under the Medi-Cal Hospital/Uninsured Care Demonstration Project Act do not conflict with the provisions of, or the Special Terms and Conditions of, this demonstration project, the provisions of the Medi-Cal Hospital/Uninsured Care Demonstration Project Act shall apply. Existing law requires the department to reduce disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospitals by 10%, as specified. This bill would provide that, in addition to the 10% reduction, disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospitals shall be reduced in the 2010–11 fiscal year by an additional $30 million in General Fund moneys and by the corresponding federal financial participation. To the extent permitted by federal law, the bill would provide that the additional room under the federal Upper Payment Limit created by this reduction shall be used to increase the above-described supplemental payments. This bill would also provide that, in addition to the 10% reduction, disproportionate share hospital replacement payments to private hospitals shall be reduced in the 2011–12 fiscal year by an additional $75 million in General Fund moneys and by the corresponding federal financial participation. To the extent permitted by federal law, the bill would provide that the additional room under the federal Upper Payment Limit created by this reduction shall be used to increase supplemental payments under subsequent legislation extending or creating a new supplemental hospital payment program supported by a fee. (3) Existing law, until January 1, 2013, reduces interim payments by 10% for inpatient hospital services provided on and after July 1, 2008, at all hospitals that receive Medi-Cal reimbursement from the department and that are not under selective contracts with the department. This bill would, commencing on the effective date of this bill, provide that these provisions shall no longer be applicable to fee-for-service hospital rates but shall continue to be applicable as specified. (4) Existing law, subject to federal approval, imposes a quality assurance fee, as specified, on certain general acute care hospitals through and including December 31, 2010. Existing law creates the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund in the State Treasury and requires that the money collected from the quality assurance fee be deposited into the fund. Existing law, subject to federal approval, requires the department to make supplemental payments for certain services, as specified, to private hospitals, nondesignated public hospitals, and designated public hospitals, as defined, for subject fiscal years, as defined. Existing law also requires the department to increase capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed care plans, increase payments to mental health plans, and make direct grants to designated public hospitals, as specified. Existing law provides that the moneys in the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund shall, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be available only for certain purposes, including providing the supplemental payments to hospitals, direct grants to designated public hospitals, increased capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed care plans, and increased payments to mental health plans. Existing law also establishes the continuously appropriated Distressed Hospital Fund, which consists of moneys transferred to the fund or appropriated by the Legislature and used as the nonfederal share of payments to distressed hospitals, as defined. This bill would, subject to federal approval, commencing January 1, 2011, through and including June 30, 2011, impose a quality assurance fee, as specified, on certain general acute care hospitals. This bill would require that the moneys collected from the quality assurance fee be deposited into the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund. The bill would, subject to federal approval, provide that the moneys in the Hospital Quality Assurance Revenue Fund shall, upon appropriation by the Legislature, be available only for certain purposes, including providing supplemental payments for certain services to private hospitals, increased capitation payments to Medi-Cal managed care plans, and increased payments to mental health plans. The bill would provide that if quality assurance fee payments are remitted to the department after the date determined by the department to be the final date for calculating the final supplemental payments, the fee payments shall be retained in the fund for purposes of funding supplemental payments supported by a hospital quality assurance fee program under subsequent legislation, but provides that if supplemental payments are not implemented under subsequent legislation, then those quality assurance fee payments shall be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund. The bill would also provide that if amounts of the quality assurance fees are collected in excess of the funds required to make the payments above and federal rules prohibit the department from refunding the fee payments to the general acute care hospitals, the excess funds shall be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund. By increasing the amount of money that may be deposited into the Distressed Hospital Fund, this bill would make an appropriation. The bill would also require that the department design and implement, in consultation with the designated and nondesignated public hospitals, an intergovernmental transfer program relating to Medi-Cal managed care services provided by designated and nondesignated public hospitals in order to increase capitation payments for the purpose of increasing their reimbursement. (5) Existing law requires, after January 1, 2008, that any general acute care hospital building that is determined to be a potential risk of collapse or pose significant loss of life may only be used for nonacute care hospital purposes, unless granted an extension as prescribed. This bill would authorize the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development to grant a hospital an additional extension of up to 7 years for a hospital building that it owns or operates if the hospital meets specified milestones. This bill would require a hospital that applies for this extension to pay the office an additional fee, to be determined by the office, sufficient to cover the additional reasonable costs incurred by the office for maintaining the additional reporting requirements established by these provisions. This bill would provide that this provision shall become operative on the date the department receives all necessary federal approvals for a 2011–12 fiscal year hospital quality assurance fee program that includes $320 million in fee revenue to pay for health care coverage for children, as specified. (6) This bill would become operative only if AB 113 of the 2011–12 Regular Session of the Legislature is enacted. (7) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Who sponsors SB 90?
SB 90 is sponsored by Hernandez, Monning, and Steinberg.
What is the current status of SB 90?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2011. Enacted.
Where can I track SB 90?
Track SB 90 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 90

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of SB 90

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →