Defining a ’California Indian tribe’ + Consent for sex ed + Expanding mental health coverage

Happy Wednesday, California. Thanks for starting your day with the AM Alert!

DEFINE THAT

Back in August, I was following legislation that aimed to strengthen a California native tribes’ authority in handling their ancestors’ remains, a process called “repatriation.”

I talked to tribal leaders about their processes to honor their ancestors.

Winnemem Wintu Chief Caleen Sisk told me last summer that the 126 tribe members ask forgiveness from their ancestors during a special ceremony to rebury the remains.

“It is a hardship on us, to rebury them, to put them back,” Sisk said. “You don’t mess around in graveyards. You don’t dig them up, you don’t move them, you don’t touch them. We ask for forgiveness that we have to do this.”

But despite his effort, Assemblyman James Ramos’ Assembly Bill 275 would have accidentally stripped tribes like the Winnemem Wintu from repatriation rights.

Ramos use the legal definition of “tribe” outlined in the 2001 California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, which states a “California Indian Tribe” must be federally recognized. If it’s not, the tribe must be in the petitioning process for recognition or be eligible to apply for the status.

That was bad news for the Winnemem Wintu tribe, which had recognition until 1985, before the federal government terminated its status. The tribe’s members now rely on a 2008 Assembly resolution to reaffirm their rights as indigenous peoples.

Ramos decided to pause the bill in August, and said he’d work on a satisfactory definition and path forward for the bill to protect tribal rights.

Ramos, D-Highland, will get the wheels turning again today during an informational hearing with both federally and non-federally recognized indigenous leaders and academics.

On the agenda:

• California’s tribal history
• Federally and non-federally recognized status in the state
• Impacts of terminating federal recognition of California tribes
• Defining native tribes “for inclusivity”

“At stake is what will be required of archaeologists, developers, universities, researchers, and others who find or possess artifacts of daily life, art works, or human remains, including requirements and policies of repatriation of these items,” a press advisory said.

The hearing is scheduled to start at 1:30 p.m. in room 127.

SEX ED

Under the California Healthy Youth Act, school districts throughout the state are required to provide comprehensive sex education for middle and high school students.

According to the ACLU, the law ensures students have the tools, through public education, to navigate information on reproductive health, STD prevention, pregnancy, gender identities, body development and sexual orientations, among other things.

Parents are allowed to opt their children out of the curriculum. School districts are prohibited from creating “active consent” measures, such as requiring students to obtain permission from their parents in order to participate in the educational offerings.

A Senate bill, however, would reverse that, and make it so parents must opt their kids in through the signing of a permission slip. It also would also increase transparency, its proponents say, by requiring components of the curriculum to be posted online for parental review.

Sen. Mike Morrell, R-Rancho Cucamonga, the bill’s author, is hosting a press conference today at 8 a.m. on the south steps of the Capitol with supporting parents, faith leaders and grassroots organizers, according to a release for the event.

The Senate Education Committee will then hear the bill at 9 a.m. in room 4203. A rally is scheduled for the conclusion of the hearing, the press release includes.

“Parents have the right to know what lessons are being covered in the classroom,” Morrell said in a press statement provided by the California Family Council. “We want them to be engaged and involved in the education of their children. This sensitive material needs to be transparent.”

The bill is likely to fail, given the Republican author and California’s more liberal sex education values.

“We know all students benefit from this education,” said Sam Garrett-Pate, communications director for Equality California, continuing that the curriculum also helps drive down bullying for LGBTQ kids.

“We’ve had far right, anti-LGBTQ extremist groups that have been fear-mongering and trying to mobilize every conservative parents to oppose the education,” Garrett-Pate said. “We don’t let one parent dictate what other children learn. So if a parent wants to decide their child should be opted out of a comprehensive public education, while unfortunate and not a personal decision we would make as an organization, the law allows that parent to decide that.”

GOTCHA COVERED

Via Sophia Bollag

Lawmakers Tuesday unveiled two bills to put additional requirements on health insurance plans to cover mental illness and addiction treatment, just days after Gov. Gavin Newsom promised more enforcement of the issue.

Senate Bill 855 by Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, would require insurance companies to fund all mental health and addiction treatment deemed “medically necessary” by a doctor. Senate Bill 854 by Sen. Jim Beall, D-San Jose, would prevent insurance companies from requiring patients to get prior authorization or start with less effective treatments before being prescribed medication-assisted treatment for addiction.

Federal law already broadly requires insurance plans to provide comparable coverage for mental and physical illnesses, what’s known as mental health parity. California law also has parity requirements.

Health insurance plans argue they already follow existing health parity laws and disagree with the lawmakers’ assertion that their proposals would improve mental health care, said Mary Ellen Grant, spokeswoman for the California Association of Health Plans.

“We think that they are less about mental health parity and more about creating new mandates and lawsuits,” Grant said. “Mental health care is a really high priority for health plans.”

During his Friday budget announcement, Newsom said his Department of Managed Health Care will “aggressively” step up enforcement of existing mental health parity laws, which he argues aren’t being followed by some health insurers.

“I don’t need legislation to do that,” Newsom said. “There are folks out there that are not doing the right thing, and they will be fined and they will be held accountable. And I will deeply highlight their lack of accountability in this space.”

But lawmakers at the Tuesday news conference argued the state does need more legislation on parity, even as they applauded Newsom’s plans to increase enforcement.

Enforcement after a health plan has violated the law and prevented or delayed someone from accessing treatment isn’t enough, Beall said.

“That’s too little too late,” he said. “It’s good to have parity enforcement, but we need to have a stiffer, tougher approach on insurance like our two bills do, which is to deal with it up front.”

Assembly Republican Leader Marie Waldron, Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, Democratic Assemblywoman Cecilia Aguiar-Curry and former U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy, who authored federal parity legislation also attended the news conference in support of the bills.

ICYMI — A bill to ban the sale of cosmetics containing carcinogens, toxins and other harmful chemicals made it out of the Assembly Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials on Tuesday, with five votes in support of the measure.

Best of The Bee:

• A California congressman wants to allow states to apply for emergency funding for homelessness crises in the same way they’re granted funding for natural disasters like wildfires or hurricanes, by Kate Irby

• Even as he announced plans to spend $222 billion in next year’s budget, Gov. Gavin Newsom noted billions of dollars for kindergarten, housing and mental health programs allocated in past years that still haven’t been spent, by Sophia Bollag

• State officials who set traffic fees are now acknowledging that the high amounts are threatening the financial stability of lower-income drivers who can’t afford to pay those amounts. Gov. Newsom wants to do something about that, by Tony Bizjak

This story was originally published January 15, 2020 at 4:55 AM.