Legislature Faces Record 105 Bills to Combat AIDS

Searching for election year remedies to a crisis that will not go away, state legislators have introduced a record number of bills this year aimed at slowing the spread of AIDS.

Unable to establish a clear-cut policy to address acquired immune deficiency syndrome, lawmakers have offered, at last count, 105 AIDS measures--more than all the AIDS bills proposed in previous years.

“Everybody has to have his or her name on a bill,” said Assemblyman William J. Filante (R-Greenbrae), the Legislature’s only physician member and a leader on AIDS issues.

Some of the bills are likely to spark renewed partisan battling over such controversial issues as mandatory testing of potential AIDS patients and the broader disclosure of test results that are now kept confidential.

But in a victory for conservative Republicans, some Democratic legislators are sponsoring bills that would loosen the confidentiality requirements. Unlike last year, however, the Democrats are not insisting on linking the confidentiality issue to a provision outlawing discrimination against AIDS patients.

In the hope of overcoming Republican opposition, Democrats this year have also made significant concessions on the issue of AIDS education for teen-agers, proposing a compromise that would allow each school district to develop its own program of AIDS instruction.

‘Get Out of Hand’

“I think many of these people realize they have allowed this crisis to get out of hand and are concerned lest the public perceive their performance to be less than adequate in this area,” said Sen. John Doolittle (R-Rocklin), an outspoken conservative who has been stymied by the Democratic majority in his efforts to increase AIDS testing and relax confidentiality requirements.

“You’ve got a raging fire, and they’re taking a Band-Aid approach,” he said.

Nearly half the members of the Legislature--ranging from liberal Democrats to conservative Republicans--are offering AIDS bills this year.

If they accomplish nothing else, they will at least have something to put in their campaign brochures this fall.

“Sadly, I think there’s still a tendency to try to politicize the issue in an election year and to make political games of the disease,” said Assemblyman Mike Roos (D-Los Angeles), one of 57 legislators sponsoring AIDS measures this year. Roos, whose district contains a large homosexual population, long has been a leader in AIDS legislation.

This year’s explosion of AIDS legislation, combined with about 40 measures carried over from 1987, will force the Legislature to consider a broad range of difficult issues.

A variety of bills would clear the way for the mandatory testing of selected groups of people to determine whether they have been exposed to the AIDS virus, including patients going into surgery, kidney dialysis patients, convicted prostitutes, prisoners, criminal suspects and mental hospital patients.

Other Measures Cited

Other measures would loosen the state’s confidentiality law to allow a physician to tell other doctors, nurses and health workers that a patient has AIDS. And one bill would allow doctors to disclose a patient’s positive test result to any person believed to have had sex or shared a hypodermic needle with the patient.

In another significant change from the current law, several bills would eliminate the requirement that doctors obtain a patient’s written consent before testing for the presence of AIDS antibodies. Instead, the doctor would have to obtain only a patient’s verbal “informed consent.”

Still other bills would permit insurance companies to begin using the AIDS antibody test to disqualify carriers of the virus from buying health and life insurance. Under one such proposal, the state would establish a catastrophic illness insurance program to aid those who cannot obtain health insurance.

Legislation has also been offered for the first time that would restrict the sale of home AIDS test kits and require that businesses provide AIDS education to their employees. Additional measures would expand treatment facilities for intravenous drug users and prohibit physicians from refusing to treat AIDS patients without first finding other doctors to care for them.

‘Doing Something’

“Many incumbents feel the need to demonstrate to their constituents that they are doing something about AIDS,” said Bruce Decker, Gov. George Deukmejian’s appointee to the California AIDS Advisory Committee. “We’re going to see a spectrum of AIDS-response legislation that will range from serious and responsible to nitwitted.”

The proliferation of bills is due in part to the fact that there has been no clear political leadership on the issue of AIDS.

Deukmejian has offered no legislative program to attack the disease, saying instead, “We’re going to continue to work with those who have taken active leadership roles on this issue . . . and try to be as helpful and cooperative as we possibly can.”

And in a marked departure from last year, when he proposed doubling the AIDS budget to $65 million, Deukmejian is advocating an increase of $5 million for the fiscal year that begins July 1. That would bring total state spending on AIDS to $70 million.

California’s AIDS caseload, however, continues to grow. As of Feb. 29, there were 11,994 reported cases of AIDS, state officials said. Of those people, 6,647 have died. During the month of February, there were 259 deaths from AIDS and 278 new cases reported.

50,000 in 1991

Health experts estimate that by 1991, 50,000 Californians will have come down with the disease. Some officials are worried that the state will not have the resources to adequately house and treat such a large number of people.

“The (legislative) approaches to this problem are really piecemeal,” said Stan Hadden, an aide to Senate President Pro Tem David A. Roberti (D-Los Angeles). “Even if you look at all these bills, I’m not sure we’re doing what is necessary to move ahead.”

During the Legislature’s fall recess last year, seven separate legislative committees held hearings on AIDS. One panel, the Senate Select Committee on AIDS, produced a 20-bill package that covers issues ranging from AIDS education to testing prisoners to increasing treatment for drug abusers.

Democratic legislators in particular feel pressure to take action before the June primary election when voters will again decide whether to approve an AIDS initiative sponsored by political extremist Lyndon LaRouche. The ballot measure, Proposition 69, would require doctors to report to health officials the names of AIDS patients and those who test positive for AIDS antibodies. This could subject carriers of the disease to quarantine, state officials say.

“There is some concern that if something is not done, it would make the LaRouche initiative more attractive,” said Susan Jetton, press secretary to Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco).

Offspring of Earlier Bills

Many of this year’s bills are the descendants of rival measures carried by Doolittle and liberal former Assemblyman Art Agnos, who was recently elected mayor of San Francisco.

With the Agnos bill stalled in the Assembly, two liberal legislators have incorporated in separate legislation a portion of the measure that would ban discrimination against AIDS patients.

And while Doolittle has had little success in the Democratic-controlled Legislature with his package, nearly all of his proposals have been picked up, modified and introduced by Democrats this year.

Bills that would permit the use of AIDS antibody tests in screening applicants for insurance, make donating blood contaminated with the AIDS virus a crime, and require the testing of prison inmates, convicted prostitutes and mental health patients for exposure to the AIDS virus were all introduced by Doolittle last year.

“I think they’re headed toward enacting basically all of the bills I have proposed,” Doolittle said.

The senator, who has angered liberals by pushing for widespread testing, said he will continue to attempt to win passage of his legislation. He is also supporting an initiative proposed for the November ballot that he said would incorporate much of his legislative package. The proposed ballot measure is sponsored by Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton) and Republican activist Paul Gann, who contracted AIDS from a blood transfusion.

In a reversal from two years ago, Doolittle said he will oppose LaRouche’s Proposition 69. Doolittle was a leading supporter of LaRouche’s first initiative but now brands him a “very clever manipulator” who has a “hidden agenda.”

Some Democrats are still taking a tough stance against Doolittle’s proposals. Assemblyman Terry B. Friedman (D-Tarzana), the author of one anti-discrimination bill, charged that Doolittle’s bills represent “a punitive approach to punish those who have fallen victim” to AIDS.

But other liberals, such as Sen. Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara), have softened their views somewhat after they were unable to enact their major proposals in 1987.

Hart, chairman of the Senate Select Committee on AIDS, was the author last year of a bill that would have required all school districts to show an AIDS prevention videotape to students in the seventh through 12th grades. The measure was vetoed by Deukmejian at the urging of Assembly Republicans.

This year, he has introduced a bill that would require AIDS education in the schools but would allow each district to decide what kind of instruction to provide.

The state Board of Education, made up of Deukmejian appointees, has already given its stamp of approval to Hart’s new proposal. And the governor’s chief medical adviser, state Health Services Director Kenneth W. Kizer, has been outspoken in support of AIDS education in the schools.

‘Have to Be Educated’

“Teen-agers have to be educated about this disease,” Kizer said. “AIDS is a part of the future of our young people. It’s something they have to be prepared for.”

Hart has also introduced legislation backed by the California Medical Assn. that would allow health care workers to know whether a patient they are treating has AIDS. And he has introduced a bill that would allow a court to order the testing of a criminal defendant if there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has exposed a victim to blood or semen.

“A consensus is emerging that we need to have flexibility in the (confidentiality) law,” Hart said. “My preference would be to strengthen the anti-discrimination law, but I think sharing the information with the health care team needs to be done.”

Some Democrats worry that proposals to weaken the state’s confidentiality law will scare people away from getting tested to see whether they have been exposed to the virus.

Public health officials believe that voluntary, anonymous testing is still one of the most effective weapons in stopping the spread of the disease. The state has established 73 alternative centers to provide such testing.

Fear Consequences

But even now, many potential carriers of the disease fear that they may lose their jobs, homes and health insurance if it becomes known they tested positive for exposure to the virus.

“Even though confidential testing has been available since 1985, people are (not aware) they can be tested anonymously,” said Hadden, the aide to Roberti. “They fear the information is going to be used against them. We need to find ways to encourage people to get tested.”

Despite the many disagreements on AIDS policy, Assemblyman Filante is optimistic that something will come from the scores of bills awaiting the Legislature’s action.

As the 1988 elections approach, he predicted that there will be agreement on such major issues as AIDS education in the schools and modification of the confidentiality laws.

“I see a change, what I would describe as a coming together of people on either side,” Filante said. “We’re moving off of dead center and starting to talk to each other.”