Newsom's vetoes of healthcare legislation reflects health insurer priorities

An analysis of Newsom's actions reveal that he is aligned with the healthcare status-quo.

By Artemis T. Douglas | artemis@theneedlenews.com

On Oct. 13, California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed 49 bills and signed 113 more into law.

Of those 49 vetoes, four had to do with healthcare directly and one dealt with healthcare infrastructure in the form of a nursing training degree pilot program.

The nursing training bill, AB 1400, would have expanded access to bachelor’s degrees in nursing at low cost via California’s community college system.

The four vetoed healthcare bills were AB 546, AB 1032, SB 418, and AB 554.

AB 546 would have mandated coverage for a portable HEPA purifier for those who are pregnant, have asthma or COPD, or resided in an area affected by wildfire disasters.

AB 1032 would have required coverage for 12 visits with a licensed behavioural health provider specifically for recovering from the trauma related to a wildfire.

SB 418, as covered previously by The Needle and Trans News Network, would have mandated coverage for 12 month stockpiles of HRT for trans people and anyone else on HRT, such as post-menopausal cis women.

AB 554, as covered previously by The Needle and Trans News Network, would have mandated coverage for PrEP- pre-exposure prophylaxis to limit the spread of HIV.

Governor Newsom's office issued on Oct. 13 a "Legislative Update" that includes links to his veto notes for each of this bills.

His veto notes for two of them (AB 1032, SB 418) explicitly mention "UM" or "utilization management" in the context of the bill mandating something that would bypass UM.

According to American Action Forum, "Utilization management (UM) is a broad label for various insurance company policies designed to optimize health care value, including consumer and provider costs."

Additionally, as stated in a guide for health professionals published online, its "processes include interventions that take place before, during, and after the clinical encounter."

This means that UM is the industry term for insurance providers intervening in medical care deemed appropriate by a doctor or clinician so that they can manage costs.

Newsom also cites worries of increased health care costs for all four vetoes covered in this article.

Interestingly, while Newsom vetoed these healthcare bills, he signed on the same day two bills related to reproductive healthcare. Specifically, SB 62 which mandates an expansion to covered fertility treatments and AB 82 which makes California a sanctuary state for reproductive healthcare providers involved in abortion care.

He isn't universally opposed to increasing healthcare benefits or healthcare costs, as the signing of SB 62 reveals.

In other words, Newsom agrees with promoting the fertility of cis women (even at increased cost) but does not agree with ensuring that trans and gay bodies are healthy, or that survivors of the climate crisis (wildfire disasters) need to be cared for after a disaster.

Another veto, which Newsom's office did not issue a veto note for (unlike the others), took place on Oct 11. for AB 1326. AB 1326 would have mandated a right to wear health masks (KN95 or better) in public spaces statewide and enabled people to better protect themselves from ongoing issues like COVID-19 and other airborne illnesses.

The pattern is clear: Newsom's actions align with existing payment structures in healthcare, and he cites the same reasons for denying expanded coverage for the vulnerable (transsexuals, pregnant people, people with chronic diseases) that insurers use to manage and deny existing coverage- "cost increases."

Newsom’s interests and those of the health insurance lobby appear to be one and the same.