Regrettably over 4,500 professional athletes have found a loophole in our worker’s comp system.  They have been able to score six-figure paydays even though they played only a few games in the state, costing the state’s workers’ compensation system millions of dollars. Former Dallas Cowboy star and Dancing with the Stars contestant Michael Irvin received $249,000 from our state system. Past Denver Broncos running back Terrell Davis received a $199,000 injury settlement from workers’ compensation for his football injuries despite having NFL health care AND a $6.8 million contract. While this might have been acceptable had they played for California NFL teams, they only play sporadic games in the Golden State. Remember that they were already covered by their own team’s insurance, disability insurance, and their own pensions.  In addition, 99% of these claims are for cash, and not medical benefits! While taxpayers are not liable for these payments, state businesses fund the program and when their costs rise, they ultimately pass those costs on to the consumer.

The reason that professional athletes have decided to file their claims in California as opposed to other states is because we have more liberal workers’ compensation laws. Unlike other states, California provides additional money for the cumulative effect of sports injuries. Athletes also have more time to file a claim here compared to just a year or two in other states. In addition, California judges have ruled that any athlete who plays professionally here can receive benefits for injuries, even if they only played one game in our state. Therefore, nearly all pro athletes have a legal basis to apply for state benefits.

When the State of California pays six figures to an injured out-of-state athlete, fewer resources are available for the average worker who desperately needs assistance to make ends meet. This is simply unacceptable at a time when our workers’ compensation system is struggling to meet its obligations and job creators are already paying high insurance bills.

As Vice Chair of the Assembly Insurance Committee, I co-authored legislation (AB1309) that would prevent this outrageous abuse. We need to close this loophole. Reforms should protect the ability of athletes to seek cumulative trauma benefits under state law, only as long as they play for a California-based team.

As negotiations on a potential legislative solution to close this ambiguity moves forward, I hope athletes and their leagues will work out a solution on their own. Players who put their bodies through abuse on the playing field deserve to have their medical expenses fully paid for by their teams, but they should not exploit resources that are intended to help the average worker recover from a costly on-the-job injury.

“I am grateful for the opportunity to remain a part of the Assembly Republican Leadership team,” said Assemblyman Hagman.  “I will continue to use this position to fight for reforms that spur private sector job creation, secure education funding, and help government live within its means again.”

As Floor Manager, Hagman is the lead Republican helping to ensure the smooth operation of the business of the Legislature during Assembly session, and that common-sense measures receive full and fair consideration during legislative debate.  He also coordinates caucus communications strategy on the floor, managing a team of whips and working with the Majority Floor Leader to ensure that Republican priorities are heard.

Hagman was elected to his third term in 2012, representing the 55^thAssembly District.  He additionally serves as Vice Chair of the Assembly Insurance Committee, and as a member of the powerful Assembly Rules Committee.

In 2011, he was appointed as a member of the State Allocation Board, which works with the Office of Public School Construction in funding allocations to applicable school districts ensuring appropriate school construction.  He owns several small businesses and previously served as both Mayor and Councilmember for the City of Chino Hills.

“Over the years, Curt Hagman has distinguished himself as one of our party’s most influential voices, and I am pleased that he will continue to serve as a member of my leadership team,” said Assembly Republican Leader Connie Conway, of Tulare.  “He will play an important role for the caucus this year as we work together to hold the majority party accountable to taxpayers.”

“Ensuring access to affordable care is a goal shared by all, but we must ensure the sustainability of both the program and funding,” stated Assemblyman Hagman. “This is not the time to enroll another 1.4 million people into a flawed program at the expense of taxpayers and quality of care.”

The Medi-Cal system already has a very limited network of providers, low patient satisfaction, and pays low provider reimbursement rates. New mandates will only increase insurance premiums while decreasing quality of care. In addition, the non-partisan Legislative Analyst believes this expansion will cost taxpayers $3 to $10 billion over the next ten years, even with federal funding.

AB 1X passed the Assembly with a vote of 53-22.

“Assembly Bill 856 will permit smaller businesses to utilize many of the same funding sources corporations have access to already,” said Assemblyman Hagman. “This step will help both startups and established businesses having trouble getting loans to raise money.” Hagman added.

Currently, corporations are permitted to issue shares to official investors in addition to investors meeting roughly half the net-worth or annual compensation amounts required of an accredited investor. LLC’s are limited to accredited investors only. This amendment is a logical step in allowing LLC’s to garner the operating capital they will require in today’s more restrictive funding markets.

But Texas Governor Rick Perry is betting that Californians will flee to his state.  He was in California recently trying to convince local job creators to move and invest in Texas, wooing them with lower taxes and less complicated regulations. He released a radio ad criticizing California’s business climate, saying that it is “next to impossible” to build a business here but is much easier to do so in Texas. Even Governor Branstad from Iowa, calling California a “happy hunting ground”, is now making a business recruiting trip to our state.

How did our own Governor, Jerry Brown, respond? He crudely dismissed the ad, saying it was “barely a fart” and insinuated that nobody wants to live in Texas anyway. Other politicians and commentators attacked the Lone Star State by pointing out its supposed shortcomings in education and health care. There is no doubt that Texas is far from perfect but at least its people have a better chance of finding jobs there than in our state. The simple truth is that California’s unemployment rate is 9.8 percent, the second-worst in the nation and far higher than the U.S. rate of 7.8 percent. In contrast, Texas’ unemployment rate is 6.1 percent. While it is true that Texas has a higher percentage of its residents in minimum wage jobs compared to California, they have jobs and live in a state with a much lower cost of living.

California needs to encourage more job creation, but the Legislature has instead passed various mandates that have made it more difficult and expensive to do so. It is no surprise Chief Executive Magazine rated California as the worst state to do business in and why CNBC ranked us 48th among 50 states for the same reason. We are also home to the highest business income tax rate in the West, the highest sales tax in the nation, the second-highest gas tax, and the second-highest top income tax rate. We are also a haven for frivolous and unnecessary lawsuits. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, we have the nation’s fourth-worst lawsuit climate.

So it should come as no surprise as to why Governor Perry is attempting to poach jobs from our state. According to the non-partisan Manhattan Institute, Texas took in the largest number of former Californians between 2000 and 2010 and received $4 billion of income formerly paid in California. That income, that is now missing in California’s economy, use to be used in our restaurants, gas stations, small businesses, service industry, etc.  The lost income has a vast ripple effect throughout our state’s economic base.  And still we continue to see large corporations leave as now Chevron recently announced it would move up to 800 jobs from the San Francisco Bay Area to Houston.

I do not blame Governor Perry for coming over to our state, feeling that he can successfully lure Californians away. It is time for Sacramento politicians to do some self-reflection and find out why California jobs have indeed moved away to other states. Perhaps Governor Brown should travel to Texas and woo its job creators. Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom did that last year. If he is so confident in his abilities and policies, he should have no problem convincing Texan entrepreneurs to move here and invest in our communities.

It is quite evident to me that California’s unbeatable weather is not enough to keep job creators in our state. I want our state to win the job creation game against Texas and every other state in our nation. It is time for Sacramento to re-examine its complicated taxes and regulations to ensure that people like Governor Perry will not have a case to make the next time they come here to pilfer another California business.

Charters schools are a unique, positive element of California’s public educational system. The state authorized the creation of these schools in response to parents who demanded more educational options for their children. The growth of charter schools has steadily increased. As of fall 2012, more than 1,000 charter schools across the state serve more than 484,000 students. Charter schools operate in diverse school districts focusing on the needs of children in both affluent and economically disadvantaged communities.

The success of the charter school movement can be traced to its basics. They are designed and governed by the community they serve, instead of a distant authority. They have more flexibility to design curriculum, to instruct students, and to be free from many of the burdensome mandates that impair traditional schools. Most importantly, charter schools have to respond to parent concerns given that parents have the “right of exit,” to take their children to another school should they find the school unsatisfactory. The system provides accountability for the school along with real choices for the parents.

Despite its successes, California’s charter school movement faces opposition from several areas. In the past, legislators have introduced proposals that would hamper or strip charter schools of important tools essential to their unique status. While the worst of these proposals did not become law, one should not be surprised if legislators try to push these proposals again this year. Charters are held to a “higher” standard. For example, in 2003, AB 1137 was passed which requires charter schools to show a certain level of academic performance to have their charters renewed.  Why isn’t a certain level of performance mandated for each public school too?

Nevertheless, the state has made important progress for the charter movement.  As a member of the State Allocation Board, I helped convince my board colleagues to make available almost $29 million in bond sale proceeds not only for design and site acquisition, but also to allow charter schools to use those funds on construction costs. This will help build the facilities that many charter schools need to grow.

Like other schools, charter schools face challenges of their own. Some fail to live up to expectations while others simply fail to deliver. There is no question that the charter school community must lead the way on accountability and demand results.  The California Charter School Association recommended closing 10 charter schools that were failing kids.  Public charter schools are subject to the truest test of accountability from their parents. No amount of oversight can ever replace that accountability factor.

In the months ahead, I will do everything I can to support the charter school movement in the Legislature. I am hopeful that my colleagues can come together to help charter schools succeed because numerous communities have seen the positive change charter schools have made. After all, public education choice and excellence are neither Democrat nor Republican issues. Let us make 2013 the best year yet for charters schools and the students they serve.

 “The SRA fire tax revenue is being diverted to fund administrative expenditures that have nothing to do with fighting wildfires,” said Assemblyman Hagman. “We owe it to property owners and the public to make sure the revenue collected from these taxes is going toward their specified purposes: fighting fires and protecting families.”

It recently was discovered that the State Attorney General authorized the transfer of $3.6 million from CAL FIRE’s settlement monies to be spent questionably on expenditures having nothing to do with reimbursing the state for firefighting costs.

Assemblyman Hagman said that although Brown acknowledged California’s budget is in better financial shape than in recent years, it is largely due to tax increases, rosy assumptions, and deferred debt repayments. Assemblyman Hagman stated there is still a long way to go, but agreed with the Governor’s emphasis on long-term fiscal solvency depending on exercising restraint. He pledged to join Brown in resisting the call by some in Sacramento to overspend.

“I look forward to keeping our promises to the voters with the Governor,” stated Assemblyman Hagman. “We must ensure taxpayer dollars are directed according to their demands to truly prioritize education, business, and getting our state officially back on track.”

The Assemblyman also encouraged Californians to visitCABudgetFactCheck.com to learn more about the budget and submit their solutions for reducing spending and improving California.

How will our idea be paid for? It would be paid with Proposition 30 funds that the voters passed last November. It is a statewide tax increase to generate $50 billion in new revenue over seven years for public education. Although I believe we could have protected education by cutting spending in other areas and growing the economy, the voters sided with the Governor. The election is over and we should uphold the people’s will.

When campaigning for Proposition 30 at college campuses throughout the state, the Governor promised that students would see relief if they voted for his measure. However, if you read the fine print of the proposition, it leaves a loophole for spendthrift politicians to use the money for other programs. While there is a provision to ensure new revenue flows directly to schools, there isanother provision in the measure which allows the Legislature to reduce current General Fund dollars for K-14 education.

Even more problematic is the fact that funding increases for UC or CSU campuses are NOT guaranteed, despite what supporters of the measure said to students during the campaign. While the Governor increases funding for higher education in his budget, it is not guaranteed money and the Legislature can rescind it on a simple majority vote.

Our students deserve better. For far too long, politicians across the ideological spectrum have made promises that they did not keep. By passing AB 67, we would ensure that the voters’ will is upheld.

As a UC graduate and parent of a teenager, I understand how difficult it is for college students and families to pay tuition and fees that just keep going up and up. They deserve stability in the rates they pay each year. The voters’ have made their voices heard and freezing tuition should be easily agreeable.

Sacramento says “trust us” when it comes to Proposition 30, but Ronald Reagan once said, “trust, but verify.” The Governor and the Democrat legislative supermajority can verify their rhetoric by passing AB 67 without delay.

Assemblyman Hagman noted that although the state’s projected budget deficit is smaller than in recent years, the Legislature still has serious issues to sort out, including renewing support for public education and encouraging private sector job growth. Assemblyman Hagman cautioned that an optimistic budget outlook is not a signal to increase spending and that majority party leaders in the Senate and Assembly should heed the Governor’s advice to exercise restraint this coming year.

Assemblyman Hagman said that one of his most important budget priorities is ensuring that the Legislature upholds its promise to voters by making education funding an important priority. Assemblyman Hagman has co-authored Assembly Bill 67 (Gorell), which will provide a seven-year tuition freeze at the state’s public colleges and universities while the Proposition 30 taxes are in effect, and use this money to increase higher education funding.

 “I hope to be provided the opportunity to work with the Governor and Democrats to craft responsible solutions and be a part of the budget process,” said Assemblyman Hagman. “Although general fund spending has dropped, overall state spending has increased $68 billion over the last decade. I agree with the Governor that California’s K-12 and college students should be the state’s top funding priority, but we need to be open and transparent when conducting the budget process, focus on curtailing spending growth in costly programs we cannot afford, and enact pro-jobs reforms that will help grow the economy and get people working again.”