Portantino Reintroduces Pay-as-You-Go Measure

On a day that usually celebrates festiveness and freedom, Assemblyman Anthony Portantino (D-La Canada Flintridge) presented again a bill that he says would help put the clamps on wayward government spending.  This comes a day after the Assemblyman’s gained approval by the State Assembly Committee on Health.

Money was the matter Thursday for Portantino’s ACA 5, otherwise called the Pay As You Go Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2011. The fiscal accountability measure -  introduced several times before, but never successfully - demands “future legislation, initiatives and general obligation bonds issued by the state to identify a revenue source or savings” for 10 years, according to a release from Portantino’s office and state documents.

Portantino’s office emphasized the bill’s following points:

• No legislative bill may be enacted that spends over $250,000 unless it also specifies savings or a new revenue source to pay for the measure.

• No initiative that spends more than $250,000 can be placed on the ballot or take effect unless it specifies saving or a new revenue source.

• The State Treasurer is prohibited from offering for sale or issuing general obligation bonds unless the sale also identifies savings or additional revenue to repay the bond.

“Getting our budget under control is my top priority,” said Portantino in the release.  “We need to embrace budget reform.  That’s why I reintroduced Pay-As-You-Go. As elected leaders we have a responsibility to reign-in spending and ensure tax dollars are being spent in a responsible manner.  The PAYGO policy will force California to live within its means and encourage us to look for savings.”

But a budget assembly committee analysis of the measure said that ACA 5 as it stands now could "undermine" public health and safety in the event of a disaster.

"Unlike other fiscal measures that constrain spending, this measure does not include any exemption in the case of an emergency, such as a massive disaster … which could limit the State's ability to respond to a natural disaster, public health emergency, or war if this measure was in effect," the analysis said, adding that there could also be "disruptions" to the funding of various projects, such as those in transportation, housing and school construction.

On Wednesday, Portantino's legislation requesting that health insurers provide fertility options to preserve eggs and sperm of cancer patients, AB 428, was pushed through to the State Appropriations Committee on the back of a 13-6 vote from the Assembly Committee on Health.

While most insurers cover cancer treatments and resulting procedures such as reconstructive surgery, the ability to preserve reproductive ability, often lost as a result of chemotherapy, is not currently an option, Portantino has pointed out. Many times patients delay treatment or chose less-effective courses of care in order to preserve their ability to have children.

“Young people who face cancer treatments shouldn’t have to choose between future fertility and life-saving treatment,” said Portantino in a statement. “I have two daughters of my own and if they were facing this dilemma, I would want them to be able to choose the treatment that is best for their own health.”

The health committee's analysis points out that according to the state's Health Benefits Review Program, about 22 million people within the Department of Managed Health Care's network of plans and policies could be affected, and that 5.4 percent of those people are covered for fertility preservation. The analysis also notes that "no publicly funded DMHC-regulated plans currently include coverage for fertility preservation services."