Issue link: https://nnumagazine.uberflip.com/i/117852
other concerned groups, stood at the gates to the governors��� mansion on Superbowl Sunday and engaged in mock ceremonies at Oscar night parties. Chicago, New York, Phoenix. Wherever the governor travelled outside the state, there were the nurses, including in a driving snowstorm in Washington D.C. As the Los Angeles Times wrote ���Everywhere Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger goes these days, there���s a crowd. But they���re not looking for his autograph.��� Lauded as one of the most innovative political campaigns of all time, nurses even followed the governor online, putting him up for auction on eBay. By now, the nurses were in good company as teachers, ���re���ghters, and thousands of other Californians targeted by Schwarzenegger in his attack on public employee pensions joined with RNs in persistently and creatively protesting the governor and his policies. Under siege by the most respected members of our communities, Schwarzenegger���s public image changed from adored celebrity to just another politician who, in the words of a CNA billboard, ���wheels and deals��� while nurses ���heal.��� By early summer, Schwarzenegger was in a political crisis: His approval rating had dropped to just 37 percent. He also suffered another setback when a judge ruled against him and CNA was successful in securing a permanent injunction on June 21, 2005 against his emergency ratios regulations. The ruling, issued by Superior Court Judge Hersher, commanded the state Department of Health Services to set aside each of the emergency regulations on the grounds that the regulations were not within the scope of authority conferred by the statute; there was no substantial evidence to support the determination that the regulations are reasonably necessary to effectuate the purpose of the statute; and that DHS abused its discretion and failed to follow the procedure established by law in determining that the regulations were necessary for the immediate preservation of public health and safety. The ruling further stated that the ���express language of the statute makes clear that the legislation was intended to protect a speci���c NOVEMBER 2012 segment of the general population, namely, ���patients,��� and more speci���cally, ���patients in acute-care settings.��� The Court cannot simply ignore this language in interpreting the meaning of the statute. Accordingly, it is the Court���s interpretation that considerations of nursing shortages and economic impacts are outside the scope of the rulemaking because such considerations are inconsistent with the fundamental purposes of the statute to ensure that nurses be accessible and availThe banner that able to meet the needs of ���patients in acute���kickstarted��� the care settings.��� Respondent DHS was under a California nurses' non-discretionary statutory mandate to war against Arnold adopt nurse-to-patient staf���ng ratios withSchwarzenegger out consideration of nurse availability or in 2004. economic impacts to the hospitals.��� In other words, the stated grounds for DHS��� decision to enact the emergency regulations were fundamentally inconsistent with the purposes of the ratios law. The Legislature made fundamental policy decisions that quality of patient care is jeopardized because of staf���ng changes implemented in response to managed care, and that to ensure the adequate protection of patients in acute-care settings, it is essential that quali���ed registered nurses and other licensed nurses be accessible and available to meet the needs of patients. Staf���ng in the acute-care setting should be based on the patient���s care needs, the severity of condition, services needed, and the complexity surrounding those services���not whether hospitals claimed they were having money problems. The ruling also said ���the Legislature implemented this policy through an explicit statutory mandate directing DHS to adopt regulations establishing minimum, speci���c, and numerical nurse-topatient ratios by licensed nurse classi���cation and by hospital unit for all acute-care hospitals. Even if DHS believes changes to the policy of AB 394 would be desirable from a public health and safety standpoint, neither DHS nor this Court has the authority to change the statutory mandate. Only the Legislature has that power.��� Schwarzenegger���s administration appealed the decision. Schwarzenegger gambled on a comeback. He called for a special election, hoping to pass four measures cloaked as ���reform��� that were actually intended to increase his power over the state budget and Legislature and erode the voices of his sharpest critics: nurses, teachers, and ���re���ghters. And so the CNA campaign continued, including a protest outside a Rolling Stones concert in Boston where the governor was holding a $100,000-a-seat fundraising affair. Rumor has it that the nurses��� presence prompted Mick Jagger to shout from the stage, ���We love nurses!��� As the campaign entered its ���nal weekend, actor Warren Beatty, who had addressed the CNA convention in September, and his wife and actor Annette Benning joined CNA for a ���Truth Squad��� bus tour that shadowed the governor���s campaign caravan and reached out to small towns and communities. With the nurses��� campaign still fresh in their minds, voters turned out on Nov. 8 and pulled the ���no��� lever eight times. The defeat of every single measure on the ballot was widely seen as a personal rejection of Schwarzenegger and his year of attacks on nurses, teachers, and ���re���ghters which all began with his effort to roll back the ratios to please his corporate hospital donors. On Nov. 10, Schwarzenegger admitted defeat and pulled his appeal of the court decision striking down his emergency regulations. California���s ratio law was safe (for now) and America���s RNs had a new model of organizing to inspire them. ���Gerard Brogan, RN W W W. N AT I O N A L N U R S E S U N I T E D . O R G N AT I O N A L N U R S E 17