SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS
PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT WILL COME TO ORDER
GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. THANKS
FOR BEING HERE. AS WE CONTINUE
TO TAKE SOME PRECAUTIONS TO
MANAGE ONGOING COVID RISK. THE
SENATE CONTINUES TO WELCOME THE
PUBLIC AND HAS PROVIDED ACCESS
TO BOTH IN PERSON AND
TELECONFERENCE. PARTICIPATION
FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. SO WELCOME.
FOR ALL INDIVIDUALS WISHING TO
PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT. THE
PARTICIPANT, TOLL FREE NUMBER
AND ACCESS CODE IS POSTED ON A
COMMITTEE WEBSITE. IT WILL BE
DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN. AND I
WILL ANNOUNCE IT NOW. TODAY'S
PARTICIPANT NUMBER IS 844291636. AND THE ACCESS CODE IS
852484185. I WILL MAINTAIN THE
QUORUM DURING THIS HEARING, ANY
INDIVIDUAL WHO IS DISRUPTIVE MAY
BE REMOVED FROM THE REMOTE
MEETING SERVICE. HAVE THEIR
CONNECTIONS MUTED OR THIS ROOM
FOR THAT MATTER. WE WERE HOLDING
TODAY'S COMMITTEE HEARING AND
ARE 10 21 ST LOCATION, SO I'LL
ASK ALL MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE TO CONVENE HERE IN
ROOM 1200, SO AT THE APPROPRIATE
TIME, WE WILL BE ABLE TO
ESTABLISH OUR QUORUM. IN THE
INTERIM, WE'RE GOING TO FUNCTION
AS A SUBCOMMITTEE AND MOVE
FORWARD WITH HEARING ON THE
BILLS ON THE AGENDA. SPEAKING OF
THAT WE HAVE 20 BILLS ON TODAY'S
AGENDA. FILE ITEM NUMBER 10
ASSEMBLY BILL 21 50 HAS BEEN
REMOVED FROM OUR FILE AND WILL
NOT BE CONSIDERED TODAY. LET'S
MOVE FORWARD WITH FILE ITEM
NUMBER ONE BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
COOPER WELCOME ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
. YOU HAVE TWO BILLS ON OUR
AGENDA TODAY. LET'S BEGIN WITH
FILE ITEM ONE. A. B 6 57, PLEASE
PROCEED WHEN READY. GOOD MORNING
, MR CHAIR AND THANK YOU SINCE
ROE VERSUS WADE HAS BEEN
OVERTURNED, WOMEN WILL NOW
TRAVEL TO CALIFORNIA TO SEEK
ABORTION SERVICES, WHICH WILL
RESULT IN AN INCREASE OF ALMOST
3000% AND PEOPLE SEEKING CARE.
IN CALIFORNIA. CALIFORNIA MUST
TAKE STEPS NOW TO ENSURE THE
GROWTH OF A NETWORK OF
CLINICIANS, TRAINING, ABORTION
AND SEXUAL REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH
CARE. A B 657 WOULD REQUIRE THE
MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA THEY
OSTEOPATHIC MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA, THE BOARD OF
REGISTERED NURSING IN THE
PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT BOARD TO
EXPEDITE THE LICENSOR. PROCESS
OF AN APPLICANT WHO CAN
DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY INTEND TO
PROVIDE ABORTION SERVICES WITHIN
THEIR SCOPE OF PRACTICE. A B 657
IS CRITICAL TO MEET THE
INCREASING DEMAND IN CALIFORNIA.
FOR ABORTION SERVICES. WITH ME
TODAY ARE LAURIE KIM, VICE
PRESIDENT OF BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT AT PLANNED
PARENTHOOD SPECIFIC HOUSE,
SOUTHWEST AND HOLLY SMITH,
CALIFORNIA NORTH MIDWIVES
ASSOCIATION HEALTH POLICY CHAIR.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE ON THE PHONE.
WITNESSES WITNESSES, PLEASE
PROCEED. REMEMBER THE LIMIT?
HERE IS THREE MINUTES PER SIDE.
SO THREE MINUTES TOTAL FOR YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR ROSS AND
MEMBERS MY NAME IS LAURIE TIME.
I AM THE VICE PRESIDENT OF
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT FOR PLANNED
PARENTHOOD AT THE PACIFIC
SOUTHWEST. WE OPERATE 19 HEALTH
CENTERS IN SAN DIEGO, IMPERIAL
AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES, AND WE
PROVIDE 250,000 PATIENT VISITS
EACH YEAR. AS YOU'RE AWARE. ON
FRIDAY, THE SUPREME COURT RULED
ON THE CASE THAT OVERTURNED ROE
V. WADE LEADING PROTECTING
ABORTION ACCESS UP TO THE STATE.
WHEN WE OPENED OUR CONTACT
CENTER SCHEDULING QUÊ OFF FRIDAY
MORNING. WE ALREADY HAD 10
PEOPLE ON HOLD, WAITING TO TALK
WITH OUR STAFF ABOUT WHAT
DECISION MEANT FOR THEM. BY THE
END OF THE DAY, WE HAD BOOKED 78
PATIENTS JUST CALLING FROM
ARIZONA TO GET THEIR ABORTION
OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO WITH
US. THIS IS NOT QUICK ENOUGH.
OUR GOALS TO SEE PATIENTS AND AT
LEAST FIVE DAYS AS YOU'RE ALSO
POLITICALLY AWARE WITH ROE BEING
OVERTURNED. 26 STATES ARE LIKELY
TO BAN ABORTION. IN FACT, WE
KNOW, AT LEAST ABOUT 12 STATES
HAVE TRIGGER BANDS THAT WENT
INTO EFFECT ALREADY AND TO STOP
PROVIDING ABORTION CARE. AN
IMBALANCE OF CAUTION AND,
FRANKLY, CONFUSION ABOUT PRO PRE
ROLL LAWS ON THE BOOKS IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE STATE
OF ARIZONA. NO PRACTICES ARE
PROVIDING ABORTION CARE AT ALL
THIS WEEK. CURRENTLY 40
CALIFORNIA COUNTIES HAVE NO
CLINICS, PROVIDING ABORTION AND
MANY PEOPLE EVEN HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, MUST TRAVEL OUT OF
THEIR HOMETOWN TREE RECEIVE THE
CARE THEY NEED. CALIFORNIA'S
PLANNED PARENTHOOD HEALTH
CENTERS HAVE BEEN SEEN ON
AVERAGE 1500 PATIENTS FROM OUT
OF STATE EVERY MONTH. ON TOP OF
OUR TYPICAL PATIENT VOLUME. I'M
SINCERELY WORRIED ABOUT THE
SPILLOVER EFFECT WHEN OTHER
NEARBY STATES WILL NO LONGER BE
ABLE TO SEE PATIENTS AND WHAT
THIS MEANS FOR OUR HEALTH
CENTERS IN CALIFORNIA. THERE IS
A NEED TO INCREASE PROVIDERS IN
OUR STATE TO ENSURE WE CAN MEET
THE NEEDS OF CALIFORNIANS AND
ALL PEOPLE WHO ARE SEEKING CARE
HERE. IN FACT, MY COLLEAGUE FROM
ARIZONA HAVE BEEN LOOKING INTO
BEING LICENSED HERE TO ENSURE
THEY CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE
CARE TO THOSE WHO NEED IT IN
CALIFORNIA. SOME HAVE BEGUN THE
LICENSURE PROCESS AND HAVE BEEN
TOLD THAT IT COULD EASILY TAKE
UP TO SIX MONTHS. MANY MEDICAL
PROVIDERS WORK AT PLANNED
PARENTHOOD TO PROVIDE ABORTION.
THAT RIGHT AND PURPOSE FOR WHY
THEY DO. THE JOB WAS JUST
STRIPPED AWAY FOR SO MANY OF OUR
COLLEAGUES AROUND THE COUNTRY
JUST ON FRIDAY. THEY ARE
DESPERATE TO CONTINUE JUMPING IN
. WE WILL NEED THEM IN OUR
STATES AND WE NEED THIS TO BE AN
EASIER AND QUICKER PROCESS. WITH
THE FALL OF ROW, WE MUST
URGENTLY FILL THE GAPS IN
CALIFORNIA'S PROVIDER NETWORK
AND EXPEDITING A LICENSURE
PROCESS WILL IMPROVE OUR ABILITY
TO DO SO. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
THAT YOU SUPPORT THIS BILL
TODAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MA'AM. MISS SMITH, YOU HAVE
ABOUT ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU. HI
THERE. MY NAME IS HOLLY SMITH
AND I'M THE HEALTH POLICY CHAIR
OF THE CALIFORNIA NURSES
ASSOCIATION TO MAKE AS A MEMBER
OF THE FUTURE OF ABORTION
COUNCIL AND PARTICIPATED IN THE
WORK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS.
THANK YOU, SENATOR ROSS AND THIS
COMMITTEE FOR GIVING ME THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. FRIDAY'S
SUPREME COURT DECISION WASN'T
EARTHQUAKE ON SATURDAY MORNING,
WOMEN ACROSS AMERICA WOKE UP
KNOWING THEIR BODIES ARE
CONTROLLED BY INTENSITY OTHER
THAN THEMSELVES. AND WITH THAT
AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE
PROFOUND RISKS, THEIR LIVES AND
WELL BEING. THAT THEY MAY BE
FORCED TO TAKE. LUCKILY
CALIFORNIA IS POISED TO HELP AS
MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE IN OUR
OWN STATE AND THOSE WHO WILL BE
FORCED TO TRAVEL HERE. BUT AS
YOU KNOW, CALIFORNIA ALREADY HAS
A REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE
WORKFORCE CRISIS. WITH MANY
COUNTIES DESCRIBED AS LIMITED
ACCESS AREAS AND MATERNITY
DESERT. SO IT IS CLEAR THAT WE
NEED EXACTLY EVERY MECHANISM IN
PLACE TO EXPEDITE THE ABILITY TO
PRACTICE, INCLUDING BY
EXPEDITING LICENSURE. AS A
HEALTH POLICY CHAIR FOR CMA. I
CAN TELL YOU THAT MIDWIVES
FILLED GEOGRAPHIC GAPS IN CARE.
WE SERVE OUR OWNCOMMITTEES,
COMMUNITIES, AND MANY ARE ALSO
COMPELLED TO GO WHERE THEY'RE
NEEDED. ESPECIALLY NOW SINCE THE
VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE AFFECTED
BY ABORTION RESTRICTIONS WILL BE
BLACK, INDIGENOUS AND OTHERS WHO
ALREADY FACED A MULTITUDE OF
BARRIERS. WE ARE READY TOGETHER
WITH OUR PHYSICIAN COLLEAGUES.
NURSE PRACTITIONERS PHYSICIAN
SYSTEM TO DO THIS WORK. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK CLEAR. I VOTE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
NOW LET'S MOVE TO WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT IN THE HEARING ROOM. ANY
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT. PLEASE
STEP UP NAME, AFFILIATION AND
POSITION ON THE MEASURE ONLY
PLEASE MOLLY ROBSON WITH PLANNED
PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA WERE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. RENT
SPENCER ON BEHALF OF THE
AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBGYN,
RYAN'S DISTRICT NINE. THEY ARE
THE SPONSORS OF THE MEASURE IN
SPORT. THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM IN
SUPPORT, SEEING NONE. LET'S MOVE
TO THE TELECONFERENCE SERVICE
MODERATOR. POLICE PROMPT
ANYBODY. ANY INDIVIDUAL WEIGHT
AND TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THIS
MEASURE, WHICH IS ASSEMBLY BILL
657. WE WILL BEGIN WITH THEM.
THANK YOU IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK
IN SUPPORT OF A B 657, PLEASE
PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO AT THIS
TIME. LINE. 27, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
I MEAN OPPOSITION. I APOLOGIZE.
I'M ON THE WRONG LINE. BLIND 48,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. TURN MEMBERS.
THIS IS AARON EVANS ON BEHALF OF
NARAL PRO CHOICE CALIFORNIA IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. I HAVE NO FURTHER
COMMENTS AND QUÊ. OKAY LET'S NOW
FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS AND HEAR
FROM ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
. MY UNDERSTANDING IS SUSAN
ARNOLD, WITH THE RIGHT TO LIFE
LEAGUE IS ON THE LINE IN
OPPOSITION, MISS ARNOLD. THANK
YOU, CHAIRMAN ROSS. MY NAME IS
SUSAN SWIFT. ARNOLD I'M AN
ATTORNEY WITH THE RIGHT TO LIFE
LEAGUE, AMERICA'S FIRST PRO LIFE
ORGANIZATION. WE REPRESENT 55
PRO LIFE ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS
THE STATE. AND MILLIONS OF PRO
LIFE CALIFORNIA CITIZENS IN EACH
OF YOUR DISTRICTS. A B 657
ADVANCES A RADICAL ABORTION
AGENDA, WHICH WILL DIVERT MUCH
NEEDED FUNDING FROM OTHER
BUSINESSES TO PROVIDE EVEN MORE
MONEY FOR THE ABORTION INDUSTRY.
A B 6 57 WILL EXPEDITE THE
LICENSURE PROCESS FOR APPLICANTS
WHO INTEND TO PROVIDE ABORTION,
NOT ANY OTHER FORM OF
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE, SUCH
AS FERTILITY OF STEP TRICKLE
CARE FOR DELIVERING BABIES OR
NEIL NATO CARE FOR BABIES BORN
IN CALIFORNIA. A B 657 ONLY
SEEKS TO EXPEDITE THE LICENSING
PROCESS FOR ABORTION. WHY THERE
IS NO CRISIS IN OBTAINING
ABORTIONS AND CALIFORNIA
GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE SHOWS THAT
ABORTIONS IN CALIFORNIA ARE UP
16% FROM 2015 TO 2020, REVERSING
A 30 YEAR DECLINE. GUTTMACHER
ATTRIBUTES TO SHIFT TO FEWER
NUMBERS OF PREGNANCIES AND A
LARGER PROPORTION NUMBER OF
ABORTIONS. THIS DATA
CONCLUSIVELY SHOWS THERE IS NO
LACK OF ABORTION ACCESS. IN OUR
STATE. BUT THERE IS A CRISIS.
THERE IS A CRISIS IN
CALIFORNIA'S DECLINING BIRTH
RATE. THE PUBLIC POLICY
INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA STATES
THAT SINCE 2000 AND SEVEN
CALIFORNIA'S BIRTH RATE FELL
FASTER THAN THE NATION'S FROM
2.2 DOWN TO ABOUT 1.5. BELOW
REPLACEMENT LEVEL LATINA WOMEN
HAD THE LARGEST DECLINE IN
CALIFORNIA BIRTHRATE. OUR STATES
BIRTH RATE IS BELOW REPLACEMENT
LIVE BIRTHS ARE DECLINING EVEN
AS ABORTIONS ARE INCREASING. THE
PUBLIC POLICIES, POLICY
INSTITUTE WARNS QUOTE. IF
FERTILITY RATES DO NOT RECOVER
IN CALIFORNIA, IT WILL HAVE WIDE
RANGING EFFECTS ON SOCIETY AND
THE STATE. MOST IMMEDIATELY
FEWER CHILDREN WILL LEAD TO
DECLINING SCHOOL ENROLLMENT AND
MORE SCHOOLS WERE CLOSED. LONGER
TERM, THE STATE MAY NEED TO
REDIRECT FUNDS, FOR INSTANCE,
INFRASTRUCTURE AND HOUSING AS
POPULATIONS IN CERTAIN AREAS
DWINDLE, UNQUOTE. NOW IS NOT THE
TIME TO EXPEDITE MORE ABORTIONS
. ABORTIONS WILL FURTHER SLASH
THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN BORN IN
OUR STATE AT A TIME WHEN
CALIFORNIA NEEDS MORE CHILDREN
TO BE BORN. WE ENCOURAGE. WE
NEED TO ENCOURAGE LIFE GIVING
ASPECTS OF REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH,
INCLUDING OBSTETRICS AND RELATED
FIELDS, SUCH AS MALE AND
INFERTILITY CARE FOR FEMALES, SO
AS TO SERVE A MUCH BROADER NEEDS
TO IMPROVE THE BIRTH RATE IN
CALIFORNIA. A B 657 DOES NONE OF
THAT. IT STILL SERVES A VERY
NARROW INTERESTS OF THE ABORTION
CARTEL TO PROVIDE BASICALLY,
CHILDREN OF COLOR TO BE KILLED
IN OUR STATE. THEY'RE GOING TO
PROFIT FROM THE DEATH OF
CHILDREN OF COLOR. WE SHOULD
FOCUS ON THE LARGER BUSINESS
COMMUNITY AND THE NEEDS OF
CALIFORNIA FAMILIES FOR MORE
CHILDREN. PLEASE VOTE NO ON A B
657. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. LET'S MOVE TO ANY
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM. AND THE OTHER
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM. PLEASE STEP
FORWARD NAME, AFFILIATION AND
POSITION ON THE BILL. ONLY
PLEASE. UM MY NAME IS MAX BANIA
AND I'M WITH HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF PRO LIFE
CALIFORNIANS AND OPPOSITION TO
THIS BILL. THANK YOU, SIR. ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION,
PLEASE STEP FORWARD. NAME
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURE ONLY. STEPHANIE DEGREE I
REPRESENT TAKE A STAND.
STANISLAS SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
LIBERTY COALITION AND NURSES FOR
MEDICAL FREEDOM. AND WE OPPOSE
THIS BILL. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE. HELLO SERENA LODGE
, PLASTER COUNTY MOM OF THREE.
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF LADIES OF
LIBERTY. AND. FOR PRO PRO LIFE
AND PRO CHOICE. UM WE WERE
ASKING FOR A STRONG NO ON THIS
BILL. THANK YOU, MA'AM. THANK
YOU, TOM. EXCLUSIVE, INCLUSIVE.
NEXT, PLEASE. NAME AFFILIATION
AND POSITION ON THE MEASURE.
ONLY I'M JAKE CLEO CHICO. I
REPRESENT PLENTY OF FATHERS IN
THE CENTRAL VALLEY OF CALIFORNIA
. I'M A FATHER OF SEVEN
CHILDREN. AND I VOTE. NO I URGE
YOU TO PLEASE VOTE NO ON A B 657
NEXT, PLEASE. MY NAME IS
GABRIELLE, CONSTITUENT OF
SACRAMENTO COUNTY. AND I ASKED
YOU VOTE NOW, PLEASE. GOOD
MORNING. PASHA WILLIAMS,
REPRESENTING MYSELF IN THE
LADIES FOR LIBERTY, ASKING FOR A
NO VOTE ON A B 657. THANK YOU
NEXT, PLEASE. GOOD MORNING,
JULIUS GILES, WHICH THEY WOULD
RELEASE ON YOUTUBE PRO LIFE
ADVOCATE AND I VOTE NO FOR A B
657. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. HI
I'M VANESSA FROM STANISLAUS
COUNTY. AND WE'RE HOPING YOU
BOTH KNOW ON THAT BILL. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH NEXT, PLEASE. MY
NAME IS JACOB KLECZKA FROM
STANISLAUS COUNTY. I'M WITH MY
FATHER. I'M SECOND OF SEVEN
CHILDREN. AND I URGE YOU TO
VOTE. NO, THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT,
PLEASE. HI I'M JONATHAN JACZKO
FROM SANDS LAWS, COUNTY AND I
SPOKE THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
I'M JOSEPH CLEOPATRA CO. FROM
SANTA'S LAST COUNTY. AND I'M
ALSO CHILD OF MY FATHER HAS
AMONG SIX SIBLINGS AND I URGE
YOU TO VOTE NO ON A B 657. THANK
YOU, SIR. WE LIKE YOUR SHIRT
NEXT, PLEASE. AUGUST TELEPHONE
MOTHER OF THREE FROM SAN
FERNANDO VALLEY. I OPPOSE A BILL
A B 657. THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT,
PLEASE. THE LU AGGIE LARD,
FOUNDER OF HOPE DEALERS IN
ACTION, A PRODUCT OF PREGNANCY
WITH A STRONG NO, THANK YOU,
MA'AM, ANY OTHER OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM,
PLEASE STEP FORWARD NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURE, PLEASE. OUT FOR A SEC
STROKE FROM ORANGE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA AND I STAND WITH
PARENTS AND CHILDREN ACROSS THE
WORLD. AND I WOULD SAY A STRONG
NO, THANK YOU. NEXT PLEASE ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
HERE IN THE HEARING ROOM? SEEING
NONE. LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT
ANYONE WISHING TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY BILL 6
57. WE WILL CONTINUE WITH THEM.
THANK YOU IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK
IN OPPOSITION TO A B 657 PLEASE
PRESS 1 10 0 AT THIS TIME. LANE.
50, PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES MY NAME
IS KAREN .COM PARA AND I ASK
THAT YOU VOTE. NO, THANK YOU.
THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. 27. GOOD
MORNING. THANK YOU FOR HEARING
US. MY NAME IS T. HUCKABEE IN ON
BEHALF OF BROAD CARPET CHURCH.
BAKERSFIELD CALVARY CHURCH,
VISALIA, TILLERY, EXETER AND
PORTABLE COALITION FOR FREEDOM,
INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO LIFE IN
STRONG OPPOSITION. RESPECTFULLY
ASKING A NO VOTE ON A B 657.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE 13. MY NAME IS
ALISON SORAYA FROM ORANGE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA STRONG
OPPOSITION OF A B 657. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. I
HAVE NO FURTHER COMMENTS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MODERATOR.
THAT'S NOT BRING THE DISCUSSION
BACK TO THE DIESS. SENATOR ANY
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS?
SEEING NONE. UM, SO REMEMBER,
COOPER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE
OUR STEPHANIE ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S COOPER WILL
TAKE THIS MATTER UP WHEN WE HAVE
A QUORUM. YOUR NEXT MATTER IS
ITEM NUMBER TWO ASSEMBLY BILL 28
94. CHAIRMAN I HAVE AN EMERGENCY
DENTAL APPOINTMENT. I GOT A
CRACKED TOOTH AND I WAS
WONDERING IF YOU WOULD ALLOW
WOMEN WOULD PRESENT FOR ME.
ABSOLUTELY GET IN BEFORE
SESSIONS. SO THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. AND THANK YOU FOR
INDULGING THAT TOOTH. HE'S A
DENTIST. THERE'S NO TOOLS,
THOUGH. WE'LL DO IT RIGHT HERE.
HERE'S THE CHAIR TO BE MY
ASSISTANT. THANK YOU THINK I
NEED TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION?
NO, YOU DON'T. THAT'S FINE. WILL
TRAIN YOU ON THE JOB, SENATOR.
OKAY THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO
ASSEMBLY BILL 28 94. SOME
REMEMBER. WOULD PLEASE PROCEED
WHEN READY, OBVIOUSLY ON BEHALF
OF ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S COOPER,
CHAIR AND MEMBERS, A B 28 94
REQUIRES THE LICENSED CONTRACTOR
TO INFORM THE CONTRACTOR STATE
LICENSE BOARD. OF THEIR WORKERS
COMPENSATION CLASSIFICATION CODE
. ADDITIONALLY THE BILL REQUIRES
C S L B TO POST THAT INFORMATION
ON THE INTERNET WEB ON THIS
INTERNET WEBSITE. CURRENTLY THE
CSL B LICENSE STATUS LOOK UP
TOOL SHOWS WHETHER OR NOT A
COMPANY IS CARRYING A WORKERS
COMPENSATION INSURANCE POLICY
DOES NOT INDICATE THAT FOUR
DIGIT WCC CODE ASSOCIATED WITH
OBTAINING THE POLICY. SINCE
RATES FOR WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE VARY BASED ON THE FOUR
DIGIT CODE, SOME CONTRACTORS MAY
INTENTIONALLY MISCLASSIFIED
THEIR EMPLOYEES TO OBTAIN LOWER
RATES. A B 28 94 WILL PROTECT
WORKERS BY REQUIRING LICENSED
CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE
INFORMATION TO THE C S. L B. TO
ENSURE EMPLOYEES ARE PROPERLY
INSURED AND WILL PREVENT
UNSCRUPULOUS CONTRACTORS FROM
PURCHASING LESS EXPENSIVE
COVERAGE HERE TODAY TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT IS KEITH DONE WITH
THE DISTRICT COUNCIL OF
IRONWORKERS OF CALIFORNIA. THE
SPONSORS OF A B 28 94. THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR, MR. WOODS, FIRST
PINCH HITTING FOR US. HERE TODAY
ON BEHALF OF THE DISTRICT
COUNCIL OF IRONWORKERS AND
SUPPORT THIS MEASURE. WE THINK
IT'S A GOOD SERVICE TO THE
PUBLIC WHO UTILIZES CONTRACTORS
TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE FULLY
INSURED TO PROTECT THEIR
WORKERS. WE'VE BEEN WORKING
CLOSELY WITH THE STATE BOARD TO
MAKE SURE THAT ITS
IMPLEMENTATION WORKS FOR THEM
AND THEIR PROCESS AND DOESN'T
CREATE ANY UNNECESSARY HURDLES
OR COSTS. WITH THAT. I'M HAPPY
TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT DONE. LET'S NOW
HEAR FROM ANY OTHER WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT IN THE HEARING ROOM.
ANY WITNESSES AND SUPPORT PLEASE
STEP FORWARD NAME, AFFILIATION
AND POSITION ON THE MEASURE.
PLEASE MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY
QUEST ON BEHALF OF THE STATE
BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES
COUNCIL ALSO IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM
AND SUPPORT, SAYING NONE. LET'S
MOVE TO THE TELECONFERENCE
SERVICE MODERATOR, IF YOU WOULD
PLEASE PROMPT ANYONE WAITING TO
TESTIFY AND SUPPORT. OF ASSEMBLY
BILL 28 94, WE WILL BEGIN WITH
THEM. THANK YOU IF YOU WISH TO
SPEAK AGAINST SUPPORT OF A B 28
94 PLEASE PRESS 10 AT THIS TIME.
I CURRENTLY HAVE NO COMMENTS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LET'S
FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS AND HEAR
FROM ANY WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
TO THE MEASURE. FIRST WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION IN THE HEARING
ROOM AND HE OPPOSITION
WITNESSES. SAYING NONE LET'S
MOVE TO WITNESSES WAITING TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION VIA THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE. THAT'S
OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY. BILL 28
94 MODERATOR. IF YOU WOULD
PLEASE PROMPT ANY WITNESSES
WILLING TO TESTIFY? THANK YOU IF
YOU WISH TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION
TO A B 28 94, PLEASE PRESS ONE,
THEN ZERO AT THIS TIME. I HAVE
NO COMMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
, MODERATOR. LET'S NOT BRING THE
CONVERSATION BACK TO THE MEMBERS
ON THE DIETS, COLLEAGUES ANY
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS?
OKAY, SEEING NONE. SOME REMEMBER
. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE
FOR ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S COOPER WHEN
THE TIME COMES, JUST
RESPECTFULLY ASK HER AND I VOTE
ON HIS BEHALF. OKAY AND WHEN
THAT WHEN WE ESTABLISHED A
QUORUM, WE WILL BE VOTING ON THE
BILL. THANK YOU, SIR. DID I MISS
SOMETHING? YOU HAVE ANOTHER ONE
OF MY BILL. WELL, LET ME ASK YOU
A QUESTION. LET ME TELL YOU WHAT
THE LINEUP TODAY IS. MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THE ASSEMBLY
HAS SORT OF A MANDATORY
FORMATION AT ONE P.M. IS THAT
CORRECT? AND WE HAVE SENATE
FLORIDA TOO. SO UM, DO YOU THINK
YOU CAN. FINISH YOUR BILL IN 30
MINUTES. DOCTOR WOULD. YES, I
DO. YEAH. OKAY? RIGHT WHY DON'T
WE? I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
OKAY? COULD WE TAKE? WOULD YOU
MIND IF WE TOOK? UH
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SMITH, WHO'S
FILLING IN FOR ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CHEN? THIS IS THE DAY OF
SUBSTITUTES THINK HIS BILL WILL
BE QUICK. I'M AND THEN I'M HAPPY
TO STICK YOURS AND WE CAN PAUSE
IT. OKAY? THAT MAKES SENSE.
SURE. DON'T GO VERY FAR. UP. I
WON'T OKAY. AND REMEMBER, SMITH
, YOU'RE HERE ON FOR MR CHEN ON
ITEM NUMBER FOUR ASSEMBLY BUILD
. 17 04. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
PRESENT A B 1704. ON BEHALF OF
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CHEN. CURRENT
CURRENT LAW STATES THAT IN ORDER
FOR AN INDIVIDUAL TO PERFORM X
RAYS ON THE FOOT OR ANKLE. THEY
NEED TO AT LEAST CALIFORNIA X
RAY TECHNICIANS LIMITED PERMIT
WITH EITHER EXTREMITIES,
CATEGORY OR LEG. PODIATRIC
CATEGORY. HOWEVER THERE IS NO
SCHOOL IN CALIFORNIA OFFERS THIS
PERMIT. THIS HAS LEFT A DIRE
SHORTAGE FOR INDIVIDUALS
AVAILABLE TO ASSIST IN THE
PERFORMANCE OF X RAYS. OF THE
OFFICE, WHICH CREATES A
SITUATION THAT HARMS INDIVIDUALS
IN SMALL GROUP PRACTICES,
ABILITY TO PROVIDE PROPER CARE.
RESULTING IN X RAYS EITHER NOT
BEING PERFORMED. REFERRED TO
OUTSIDE CENTERS OR OTHER
INFERIOR METHODS BEING EMPLOYED.
SIMPLY PUT DOCTORS OF PODIATRIC
MEDICINE CANNOT FIND X RAY
TECHNICIANS WHO ARE WILLING TO
WORK IN A PODIATRIC OFFICE AND
BE LIMITED TO ONLY PERFORMING
READY PODIATRIC RADIO RADIO
BIOGRAPHY. A B 17. OH, FOUR WILL
CREATE AN ALTERNATE PATH FOR X
RAY TECHNICIANS TO TAKE A
COMPREHENSIVE COURSE AND EXAM TO
PERFORM THESE X RAYS ON
SPECIALIST CARDIAC TRICK X RAY
EQUIPMENT. WITH BUILT IN SAFETY
FEATURES SPECIFIC TO THE FOOT
AND ANKLE. THIS PATHWAY WOULD BE
JOINTLY DEVELOPED BY THE PARTY,
HATTRICK MEDICAL BOARD AND THE
RE CREATE THAT RADIOLOGY HEALTH
BRANCH FOR THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH.
THEREBY PREVENTING THE OVER
CERTIFICATION OF OUR TECHNICIANS
ENCOURAGED THE FIELD. WITH
BARIATRIC TO QUALIFIED
APPLICANTS. TESTIFYING SUPPORT
BY HEALTH CARE IN MOBILE AND DR
DEREK BALL ON THE LINE. I DO
BELIEVE OKAY, WITNESSES THREE
MINUTES TOTAL. PLEASE PROCEED.
THIS IS DR DEREK BALL, AND I'M
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
PODIATRIC MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.
THANK YOU, ASSEMBLYMAN. MR CHAIR
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO
SPEAK TODAY. WE IN PODIATRIC
MEDICINE HAVE A PROBLEM AND WE
NEED YOUR HELP. THAT IS THE
INABILITY TO FIND AN EMPLOYED
QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS TO PERFORM
LIMITED X RAYS OF THE FOOT AND
ANKLE. ON ANY GIVEN DAY IN
PEDIATRIC MEDICAL PRACTICE. ONLY
ABOUT 20% OF OUR PATIENTS
REQUIRE AN X RAY. THIS PROCESS
INVOLVES USE OF PLAIN X RAYS
USING A TYPE OF DIGITAL
EQUIPMENT, WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY
THE FOOT AND ANKLE AND WHICH HAS
BUILT IN SAFETY FEATURES AS
MENTIONED. MANY OF THE COMMON
PATHOLOGIES WE TREAT REQUIRE AN
IMMEDIATE X RAY REALLY READING
TO DETERMINE PROPER TREATMENT.
FAILURE TO OBTAIN THAT IMMEDIATE
READING CAN DIRECTLY AFFECTED
TRAJECTORY OF THOSE PATHOLOGIES.
WITHOUT QUALIFIED STAFF
AVAILABLE TO US THE REALITY OF
TIME MANAGEMENT MAKES IT
DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE FOR
PODIATRIST TO TAKE OUR OWN X
RAYS. THE RESULT IS AN X RAY
STUDIES ARE EITHER AVOIDED
ENTIRELY OR SENT TO A TURKISH
AIR FACILITY WITH THE RESULTING
DELAY IN CARE. TO ENSURE
PATIENTS RECEIVED THE IMMEDIATE
ACCESS TO CARE THEY DESERVED BUT
ACTUALLY SEEK ASSISTANCE TO
PERFORM THE IN OFFICE. X RAYS.
THESE PODIATRIC MEDICAL
ASSISTANCE ARE DIFFERENT FROM
OTHER TECHNICIANS WHO PERFORM X
RAYS. IN THAT THEIR PRIMARY DUTY
AS CHAIR SIDE ASSISTING WHILE
PUT AN ANKLE. X RAYS ARE
SECONDARY DUTY. IT COULD BE
MISUNDERSTOOD THAT CERTIFIED
EXTREMITY XT, SUCH AS ONE WHO
MAY WORK FOR AN ORTHOPEDIC
GROUP. COULD BE EMPLOYED HERE.
HOWEVER THIS WOULD BE AN ERROR.
THOSE EXTREMITY EXT.
UNDERSTANDABLY ELECT TO PRACTICE
THEIR FULL SCOPE ALMOST SOLELY
AS RADIOLOGY TECHS AND NOT
PRIMARILY AS MEDICAL ASSISTANCE.
WE NEED A B 17 4 TO BE ABLE TO
TRAIN THESE LIMITED X RAY TEXT.
I WILL YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME
TO DR RUBLES. OKAY DR KAREN
RUBLE. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF
THE PODIATRIC. CELL PHONE.
YOU'RE PRETTY STRICT MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION AND I'D LIKE TO ADD
A BIT OF HISTORY. FOR DECADES
PRIOR TO 2013 ARE EMPLOYED
PODIATRIC EMMA'S WOULD TAKE IT
AVAILABLE COURSE, WHICH WAS
APPROVED BY THE RHB IN RADIATION
TECHNIQUE AND SAFETY, WHICH WAS
OFFERED OVER A PERIOD OF SEVERAL
WEEKENDS. AFTER PASSING THE TEST
, DETERMINED BY THE RHB THERE
WERE AWARDED THAT TOOK VACATION.
MANY MÁS COMPLETED THIS COURSE.
IT WAS A GOOD SYSTEM. BUT IN
2013, THE REGULATION THAT
ALLOWED THIS WAS REMOVED IN THE
ACCORDANCE WITH THE RTC AND RHB
THE ABILITY OF OUR MÁS TO BECOME
EDUCATED, AS LIKE PODIATRIC XT
NO LONGER EXISTS BECAUSE THERE
ARE CURRENTLY NO SCHOOLS IN
CALIFORNIA THAT OFFER OR ARE
WILLING TO OFFER. COURSES IN A
SPECIFIC CATEGORY. ALSO NOW
THOSE LEG PODIATRIC EXCUSE WHO
TOOK THAT COURSE HAVE BEEN LOST
TO ATTRITION, AND IN FACT, ONLY
A HANDFUL REMAIN IN CALIFORNIA.
THIS HAS CREATED A CRISIS
SITUATION AND THAT'S WHY WE COME
TO YOU FOR A SOLUTION TODAY.
SIMPLY PUT AGAIN, BUT I JUST
CANNOT FIND XPS WHO ARE WILLING
TO WORK IN A PODIATRIC OFFICE
AND PERFORM ONLY CONTINENTAL
RADIOGRAPHY. PODIATRIST NEED A
NEW PATHWAY SIMILAR TO OTHER
STATES TO HAVE OUR MÁS TRAINED
TO SAFELY AND COMPETENTLY TAKE
FOOT AND ANKLE X RAYS. WITH A B
17. OH FOUR. THESE PODIATRIC
EXCUSE WOULD STILL BE REQUIRED
TO TAKE A TEST TO PROVE BY THE
RHB IN SAFETY AND TECHNIQUES,
MAINTAINING THE HIGH STANDARDS
CURRENTLY IN PLACE. AND I WANT
TO BE CLEAR THIS BILL DOES NOT
INCREASE THE SCOPE OF THE PMS IN
ANY WAY. A B 17. OH, FOUR
CREATES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A
SOLUTION TO THIS CRISIS, AND WE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. GOOD WORK THREE MINUTES
. LET'S HEAR FROM ANY OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN THE HEARING
ROOM. ANY WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
IN THE HEARING ROOM, SEEING NONE
LET'S MOVE TO WITNESSES WAITING
TO TESTIFY VIA TELECONFERENCE
SERVICE. MODERATOR IF YOU PLEASE
PROMPT ANY SUCH INDIVIDUALS
WAITING TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF
ASSEMBLY, BILL 17. OH, FOUR WILL
BEGIN WITH THEM. THANK YOU. IF
YOU WISH TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF%
A B 17 OH, FOUR, PLEASE PRESS 10
AT THIS TIME. AS NO COMMENTS IN
QUÊ MODERATOR, LET'S MOVE TO
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION FIRST
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM. ANY OPPOSITION
WITNESSES SEEING NONE. LET'S
MOVE TO THE TELECONFERENCE
SERVICE. ONCE AGAIN, MODERATOR
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT ANY
WITNESSES. WAITING TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS MEASURE. SOME
PEOPLE 17 OH, FOUR WILL CONTINUE
WITH THEM. THANK YOU IF YOU WISH
TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO A B 17
OH, FOUR, PLEASE PRESS 10 AT
THIS TIME. I HAVE NO COMMENT.
THANK YOU. LET'S BRING THE
CONVERSATION BACK TO MY
COLLEAGUES ON THE DIOCESE
COLLEAGUES ANY QUESTIONS,
COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? SAYING
NONE. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SMITH.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE MR CHAIR
AND MEMBERS? I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR MY VOTE. OKAY IT'S SUCH TIME
AS WE HAVE A QUORUM WILL TAKE A
MOTION AND WILL VOTE ON THE
MEASURE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SIR. DOCTOR WOULD ITEM NUMBER
THREE. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS TODAY I AM PRESENTING A
B 52 WHICH IS A FOLLOW UP BILL
TO MY A B 27 1989 OF 2018
RELATED TO THE ELECTRONIC DATA
TRANSMISSION OF PRESCRIPTIONS IN
CALIFORNIA. AS PART OF
NEGOTIATIONS ON A B 27 89 IN
2018. WE AGREED TO A THREE YEAR
DELAYED IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD.
WE LISTENED TO AND CONCERNED
CONCERNED, LISTENED TO AND HEARD
CONCERNS FROM THE PROVIDER AND
PHARMACY COMMUNITIES REGARDING
THE TECHNOLOGY CHALLENGES THIS
BILL MIGHT CREATE. WE AGREED TO
A THREE YEAR PERIOD IN ORDER TO
ENSURE SUFFICIENT LEAD TIME WAS
PROVIDED SO THAT WHEN WE GO LIVE
WHEN THE GO LIVE OCCURRED ON
JANUARY 1ST 2022 ALL PARTIES
WOULD BE PREPARED TO COMPLY WITH
THE ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION
REQUIREMENTS FOR OVER THREE
YEARS, NEARLY 40 MONTHS FROM THE
DATE OF PASSAGE. WE HEARD
CRICKETS WE LITERALLY HEARD
NOTHING. AS THE IMPLEMENTATION
DATE GREW CLOSER. WE WERE ASKED
BY THE BOARD OF PHARMACY TO
CARRY CLARIFYING AMENDMENTS
PROVIDER COMMUNITY ALSO ASKED US
TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL
EXEMPTIONS. WE AGREED TO ALL
THESE REQUESTS, AND THAT IS WHAT
A B 8 50 TO ACCOMPLISH THIS. ONE
OF THE CLARIFICATIONS WE MADE
WAS THAT A PHARMACY COULD NOT
REFUSE A PRESCRIPTION FROM A
PROVIDERS SOLELY BECAUSE OF
PRESCRIPTION IS NOT SUBMITTED ON
WHERE IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH
THEIR PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE. THE
INTENT OR 27. 89 WAS ALWAYS THAT
PHARMACIES ACCEPT ELECTRONIC
TRANSMISSIONS SUBMITTED FROM
PROVIDERS USING REPUTABLE
SOFTWARES. HOWEVER THIS
CLARIFYING AMENDMENT RESULTED IN
SOME CONCERNS FROM THE PHARMACY
COMMUNITY AND WE ENGAGED IN
DISCUSSIONS MEETING SEVERAL
TIMES. WE AGREED TO AMENDMENTS
THAT WOULD CLARIFY THE
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH A
PHARMACY COULD DECLINE A
TRANSMISSION. A B 8 52 MAKES
ELECTRONS ELECTRONIC
TRANSMISSION LAW CLEARER AND
RESPONSE TO PRESCRIBER AND
PHARMACY ASKS HERE TO TESTIFY ON
BEHALF OF A B 8 52. AS DAVID
FORD WITH THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION. WE STEP FORWARD,
SIR. THREE MINUTES. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. MR CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU,
DOCTOR WOULD FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD AND FOR THE OPEN
PROCESS, WHICH IS NOT ENGAGED
WITH US, AS WE HAVE DEVELOPED
WHAT'S CURRENTLY SITS IN FRONT
OF US A B 852. THE CALIFORNIA
ELECTRONIC PRESCRIBING MANDATE
WAS LOOSELY PATTERNED AFTER A
SIMILAR BUT MORE LIMITED MANDATE
IN THE MEDICARE PROGRAM. UM AND
THEN IN THE FALL. OF 2021.
MEDICARE ACTUALLY MADE SOME
TWEAKS TO THEIR REQUIREMENT.
SPECIFICALLY ALLOWING LOW VOLUME
PROVIDERS NOT TO COMPLY WITH THE
ELECTRONIC PRESCRIBING MANDATE,
MAKING SOME ACCOMMODATIONS FOR
PROVIDERS WHO OPERATE IN AREAS
THAT ARE SUBJECT TO NATURAL
DISASTERS, WHICH IS
UNFORTUNATELY, ALL TOO FREQUENT
HERE IN CALIFORNIA. UM AND A FEW
OTHER SMALL CHANGES LIKE THAT.
UM AND WHAT A V 852 DOES IS
TAKES THOSE EXEMPTIONS FROM
MEDICARE AND COPIES THEM INTO
STATE LAW. UM SO IT REALLY JUST
FILE SOME ROUGH EDGES THAT WE
FOUND IN THE ELECTRONIC
PRESCRIBING MANDATE AS
IMPLEMENTATION HAS BEGUN. SO
AGAIN, THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND SEE
HIM. THEY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU ANY OTHER WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT IN THE HEARING ROOM
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT OF THE
MEASURE IN THE HEARING ROOM.
PLEASE STEP FORWARD, SEEING NONE
. OKAY SNOOZE, YOU LOSE NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURE. RYAN SPENCER ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA PODIATRIC
MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES AND SUPPORTING THE
HEARING ROOM? LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT ANY
INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO TESTIFY
IN SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY BILL 852
. WE WILL BEGIN WITH THEM. THANK
YOU IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT OF A B 852 PLEASE PRESS
10 AT THIS TIME. LINE. 69,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. AFTERNOON MR
CURRENT MEMBERS OF THE BRAND
CALIFORNIA DENTAL ASSOCIATION
SUPPORT THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. I HAVE TWO MORE
COMMENTS. IT'LL JUST BE ONE
MOMENT FOR THE NEXT COMMENT.
LINE 68. ERIN BONE WITH THE
MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA. WE
HAVE A SUPPORT POSITION ON THE
ELECTRONIC PRESCRIBING
PROVISIONS OF THE BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU LINE 35. HI THIS IS
JARED MARKS OF THE ASSOCIATION
OF CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE
DISTRICTS. AND WE SUPPORT THIS
BILL. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. I HAVE NO FURTHER
COMMENTS IN QUÊ. OKAY LETS
FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS AND HEAR
FROM ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES
FIRST IN THE OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM
THREE MINUTES. PLEASE STEP
FORWARD. GOOD MORNING, JENNIFER
SNYDER. GOOD AFTERNOON. I GUESS
HUH? JENNIFER SNYDER ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA RETAILERS
ASSOCIATION AND ALSO THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHAIN
DRUGSTORES. WE REGRETFULLY
REMAIN WITH AN OPPOSING LESS
AMENDED POSITION ON A B 852.
FIRST VERY THANKFUL TO THE
AUTHOR FOR WORKING WITH US OVER
A LONG PERIOD OF TIME TRYING TO
COME UP WITH SOME SOLUTIONS TO
OUR CONCERNS. I THINK WHAT'S
REMAINING FOR OUR PHARMACIES AT
THIS POINT IS THAT WITH THE
PROVISIONS AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN
IN 852 WERE NOT ABLE TO HAVE THE
LEAD TIME AND THE PROCESS
AVAILABLE TO OUR PHARMACIES TO
ACTUALLY VET A NEW SOFTWARE
VENDOR. OR HAVE A PERIOD OF TIME
TO ACTUALLY ESTABLISH A CONTRACT
WITH A SOFTWARE VENDOR. SO
WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IN
OUR MARKET IS WE HAVE A FEW OR
AT LEAST ONE WAYWARD COMPANY
THAT'S APPROACHING PRESCRIBERS
AND TELLING THEM I GOT A GREAT
DEAL FOR YOU. AND THEN THE
PRESCRIPTION HEADS INTO THE
PHARMACY. PHARMACY DOESN'T KNOW
IT'S COMING AND THERE IS NO
CONTRACT OR ANY WAY THAT THE
PHARMACY IS ALREADY VETTED THAT
VENDOR AND SO THE HOPE WAS AS WE
COULD COME UP WITH SOME WAY TO
PROVIDE SOME TYPE OF AMENDMENT
TO 85 TO THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR
PHARMACIES TO HAVE AT LEAST
EITHER A TIME TO VET THAT NEW E
PRESCRIBING SOFTWARE VENDOR OR
HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UM SIGN A
CONTRACT OR DO SOME TYPE OF
PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT
VENDOR IS HAS THE APPROPRIATE
PATIENT PRIVACY RULES IN PLACE,
MAKING SURE THAT THEY COMPLY
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER
THINGS? FIRST YOU KNOW, LET ME
JUST END BY SAYING PHARMACIES
WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF BABY 27
89 STILL ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF
THE PRESCRIPTION, UM, 90% OF OUR
PHARMACIES NOW THAT ARE OUT
THERE IN THE MARKET. A SMOOTH
PROCESS HAPPENS BETWEEN THE
MEDICAL RECORD PROVIDER THE
PRESCRIBER. THE SOFTWARE VENDORS
THAT ARE OUT THERE AND THEY ARE
ALL COMPATIBLE WITH OUR
PHARMACIES THAT ARE IN PLACE
NOW. OVER 90% OF OUR CONCERN IS
SOME OF THESE WAYWARD COMPANIES
THAT WILL TRY TO PREVENT OUR
ABILITY TO WORK WITH THEM FIRST.
SO AGAIN, WE APOLOGIZE THAT WE
HAVE TO REMAIN OPPOSED UNLESS
AMENDED, BUT I HOPE THAT WE CAN
LOOK FOR US SOLUTION TO THE
PROBLEM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM?
STEP FORWARD NAME, AFFILIATION
AND POSITION ON THE MEASURE
ONLY, PLEASE RHONDA PONTS
PRIVATE VOTING CITIZEN AND JUST
SIMPLY NOT POSITION. NO REAL
ARGUMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER OPPOSITION WITNESSES.
OKAY LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT ANY
INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO TESTIFY
IN OPPOSITION TO THE MEASURE,
WHICH IS ASSEMBLY BILL 852. WE
WILL CONTINUE WITH THEM. THANK
YOU IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 852 PLEASE
PRESS 10 AT THE TIME. I HAVE NO
COMMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
LET'S BRING THE CONVERSATION
BACK TO MY COLLEAGUES ON THE
DIOCESE. UM DOCTOR WOULD LET ME
ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS FIRST,
BECAUSE I'M I'M A LITTLE
CONFUSED. BY HOW THIS WORKS. HOW
DO YOU ENVISION THIS? BEING
IMPLEMENTED IF THE BILL IS
SIGNED. LET ME LET ME TELL YOU
WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION. MY
UNDERSTANDING RIGHT NOW IS WE
HAVE THIS SURE SCRIPTS. E
PRESCRIBING SYSTEM THAT'S
APPARENTLY IN PLAY. WITH THE
SIGN LANGUAGE GOING ON HERE WITH
THE CHAIN DRUGSTORES. AND THEN
WE HAVE THIS OTHER OPERATOR WHO
HAS PROVIDERS. SIGNED UP CALLED
WE KNOW. IN TRYING IN READING
THROUGH THE ANALYSIS, I ASSUME
THAT IF AXES IS AN ACCEPTABLE
WAY OF SENDING A PRESCRIPTION
FROM A PROVIDER TO A PHARMACY
UNDER THE ELECTRONIC
PRESCRIBING. I BELIEVE SO, YES.
SO IF YOU DON'T CHOOSE TO USE
EFFECTS AND YOU SIGN UP WITH WE
KNOW HOW ARE WE ARE WE REQUIRING
PHARMACIES TO SIGN WITH
PARTICULAR PROVIDERS. BECAUSE
WHAT HAPPENS IF THE SOFTWARE OF
ONE IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE
OTHER AND WE IMPOSE A
REQUIREMENT. IS THERE AN
OFFERING? IF I MAY, ACTUALLY IF
I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO THE
OPPOSITION AND MAYBE MY ROCKS.
RESPONSE, OPPOSITION WILL
CLARIFY OFFICIAL THAT IS THAT.
IS THAT OKAY? ACCEPTABLE OKAY.
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, FRANKLY, I'M
AND CANNED OF INSULTED AND MORE
THAN A LITTLE FRUSTRATED BY THE
OPPOSITION. WE ARE READY. THERE
WAS A THREE YEAR DELAY AS PART
OF THE LEGISLATION. UM AND.
THREE YEAR DELAYED TO ENSURE
PRESCRIPTIONS ARE SUBMITTED AND
MATTER THAT'S BEEN SHOWN TO BE
SAFE. REDUCE MEDICATION ERRORS,
FRAUD AND THE NUMBER OF OPIOID
PRESCRIPTIONS AVAILABLE IN OUR
COMMUNITIES. WHILE WE HAVE BEEN
QUOTE UNQUOTE DELAYING SEVERAL
OTHER STATES HAVE IMPLEMENTED
THIS REQUIREMENT. THEY'VE
LEAPFROGGED US. IN ESSENCE, NOW
WE'RE BEING TOLD THAT A B 8 52
WOULDN'T GIVE PHARMACIES
ADEQUATE TIME TO COMPLY. THEY'RE
ASKING FOR MORE TIME. I DON'T
KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT THREE YEARS
SEEMS LIKE MORE THAN SUFFICIENT
TO ME. THEY ALSO DON'T WANT THEY
DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO ACCEPT
ELECTRONIC PRESCRIPTIONS FROM
ANY AND ALL E PRESCRIBING
VENDORS. LET'S BE CLEAR. BY ANY
AND ALL THAT MEANS NOT OURS.
THEY WANT TO USE SPECIFIC
PROPRIETARY. UH, SOFTWARE AND
KIND OF FORCED PEOPLE INTO THAT
THE AMENDMENT BEING SOUGHT-WOULDN'T JUST ALLOW PHARMACIES
TO REJECT PRESCRIPTIONS FROM
UNRELIABLE SOFTWARES, BUT FROM
ALL SOFTWARE THAT IS NOT THE ONE
THEY ARE CURRENTLY USING, EVEN
THOUGH IT WOULD MEAN PATIENTS
AND PRESCRIBERS WOULD BE
NEGATIVELY IMPACTED. WHY BECAUSE
IT WOULD COST THEM MORE MONEY TO
INTEGRATE ADDITIONAL SOFTWARES
INTO THEIR BUSINESSES. I WANT TO
REMIND YOU THAT IT'S NOT THE
SMALL INDEPENDENT PHARMACIES
WE'RE HEARING FROM. IT'S SOME OF
THE LARGEST CORPORATIONS IN
AMERICA. THIS LAW INTENDED TO
PROTECT PATIENTS HAS A COST TO
IT. MANY PRESCRIBERS HAD TO
IMPLEMENT ELECTRONIC RECORD
ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION
CAPABILITY INTO THEIR PRACTICES
. THEY HAD TO DO RESEARCH AND
DECIDE WHICH SOFTWARE WAS BEST
BEST YEAR OF THEIR PATIENTS AND
THEIR PRACTICE. THEY HAD TO BEAR
THE COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING THAT
CHOSEN SYSTEM. FOR PHARMACIES
THAT SHOULD HAVE MEANT ADAPTING
TO BE ABLE TO SERVE PRESCRIBERS
WHO ARE USING A DIFFERENT
SOFTWARE. I ALWAYS HATE TO PULL
THIS CARD. BUT I'M A HEALTHCARE
PROVIDER. I KNOW THE IMPACT THAT
THESE TYPES OF REQUIREMENTS HAVE
ON HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS AND
BUSINESSES. I DON'T INTRODUCE
THEM LIGHTLY, AND I ALWAYS DO
THE COST BENEFIT OUT ANALYSIS TO
SEE IF THE BENEFITS OUTWEIGH THE
COSTS. WE ARE ASKING THE SYSTEM
TO INCUR. I'M ALL ABOUT HEALTH
CARE COST CONTAINMENT. HOWEVER
ELECTRONIC DATA TRANSMISSION OF
PRESCRIPTIONS IS A PATIENT
SAFETY ISSUE. A B 27 89 THIS
BILL A B 8 52 OR PATIENT SAFETY
MEASURES WILL THAT WILL REDUCE
HOT PATIENT HOSPITAL DAYS,
HOSPITALIZATIONS AND DEATHS FROM
TAKING THE WRONG MEDICATION. THE
WRONG DOSAGES OR THE RIGHT
MEDICINES ARE OVERDOSING ON
OPIOIDS OBTAINED THROUGH
PRESCRIPTION FRAUD. I THANK YOU
FOR INDULGING ME, MR CHAIR. I
HOPE THAT'S ANSWERED SOME OF
YOUR QUESTIONS. UM, AND IF NOT,
I'LL ENDEAVOR TO WELL, I MEAN,
WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH AND YOU
KNOW, LOOK, I SUPPORT MHM. WELL
LET ME JUST ASK THIS ARE ALL
ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS
SYSTEMS. INTERCHANGEABLE AND
COMPATIBLE. NO AND THAT'S A
THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER ISSUE. MY
POINT IS IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL
ARENA, FOR EXAMPLE. IS THIS
SIMPLY A MATTER OF THE CHAIN
PHARMACY, MODIFYING SURE SCRIPTS
TO ACCEPT DATA FROM THIS RIGHT
NOW FROM THIS PARTICULAR WE KNOW
SYSTEM. IS THAT WHAT WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT? I THINK AND LET
ME ASK THE TWO PART QUESTION.
AND IF THE ANSWER IS YES, THEN
THE NEXT TIME THAT SOMEONE COMES
UP WITH ANOTHER PRESCRIPTION
SOFTWARE SYSTEM. DO WE THEN TURN
TO ALL THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
FILLING PRESCRIPTIONS TO SAY,
MODIFY YOUR SYSTEM AGAIN? OR IS
THERE WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN THIS AND MEDICAL
RECORDS? FOR EXAMPLE? WELL RIGHT
NOW WITH MEDICAL RECORDS. THEY
DON'T. OH, THEY DON'T ALL THEY
DON'T ALL COMMUNICATE WELL, AND
WE HAVE THE PROBLEM. WE USED TO
HAVE THE PROBLEM AND I HAD A
BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE THAT DEALT
WITH IT. WITH CAL VET AND THE VÀ
HOMES AND UST VÀ, THE U. S
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION ON
HEALTHCARE BECAUSE WE'D MOVE A
VET FROM A CALVET HOME TO A
VETERANS HOSPITAL, AND THEY
WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET THE VETS
MEDICAL RECORD. SURE. I THINK I
THINK I'LL GO BACK TO MY
ORIGINAL ORIGINAL COMMENTS. I
THINK THIS IS WHAT I GUESS.
WHAT'S MOST FRUSTRATING FOR ME
HERE IS THAT IT'S NOT THE SMALL
PHARMACIES THAT ARE COMPLAINING,
SO THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY ABLE TO
ACCEPT A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT
FORMATS. IS THE LARGE CHAIN
PHARMACIES THAT ARE COMPLAINING
THEY CAN TAKE AN EFFECTS THEY
CAN SO IT'S THE LARGE CHAINS
THAT ARE THAT ARE THAT WANT TO
PUT EVERYBODY INTO THEIR OWN
PROPRIETARY SYSTEM. AND THE
REALITY IS THAT I DON'T THINK
IT'S THAT DIFFICULT. THEY'VE HAD
THREE YEARS TO FIGURE THIS OUT,
AND IT'S BEING DONE IN OTHER
STATES SUCCESSFULLY. SO THE SO
THE CHOICE REALLY IS TO MODIFY
YOUR OWN SYSTEM OR ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT. WITH THE PROVIDER TO
EMBED THAT SYSTEM IN YOUR OWN
OPERATION, SO YOU CAN ACCEPT
PRESCRIPTIONS THAT WAY. THAT IS
MY UNDERSTANDING, OKAY? I DON'T
BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE A HUGE
NUMBER OF VENDORS OUT THERE.
QUITE FRANKLY, SO I DON'T
BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO BE LIKE
ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS WERE
GOING TO SUDDENLY HAVE 50 OR 60
OF THEM THAT ARE FLOATING AROUND
OUT THERE. I SUSPECT MY
COLLEAGUE. DR PAN HAS QUESTIONS.
ACTUALLY I PROBABLY DO SO DOCTOR
WOULD FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU.
SO MUCH FOR YOUR WORK IN E
PRESCRIBING AND BOTH YOUR
PREVIOUS BILL AND THIS BILL, AND
I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. YES,
THE, UM QUESTION I HAVE IS THAT,
UM TO ME? WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE
HRS AND SO FORTH, AND I'VE HEARD
ABOUT, YOU KNOW EACH OTHER'S NOT
HAVING PELLEAS AFFORD, BUT WHEN
IT COMES TO PRESCRIPTIONS
BECAUSE YOU WRITE PRESCRIPTIONS,
I'VE WRITTEN PRESCRIPTIONS. TH
AMOUNT OF INFORMATION IS PRETTY
STANDARDIZED. I MEAN, ON THE
PRESCRIPTION FORM, RIGHT? AND,
UM, AND THAT AT LEAST. MY
UNDERSTANDING, ALTHOUGH I MAY BE
WRONG BECAUSE I THINK YOU KNOW
MORE ABOUT THIS. HAVING WORKED
IN THIS POLICY SPACE. IS THAT
REALLY WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO
SAYING OKAY, I WANT TO BE ABLE
TO TRANSMIT A E PRESCRIBED FROM%
WHATEVER YOU HR SYSTEM USING TO
WHATEVER SYSTEM THEY'RE USING IS
REALLY ABOUT COMMUNICATING OF
FAIRLY SET. SET OF INFORMATION
AND THERE ARE STANDARDS,
ALTHOUGH I GUESS WE COULD SAY WE
MAY NEED MORE IN TERMS OF HOW TO
COMMUNICATE. THAT INFORMATION
WAS NOT. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO
DUMP THE HOLY HR ON THEM, RIGHT.
IT'S BASICALLY IT'S YOU KNOW.
THE DRUG. YOU KNOW THE DOSAGE
THE HOW YOU TAKE IT, YOU KNOW,
FREQUENCY, ETCETERA. IT'S A
FAIRLY SET AND THAT ACTUALLY, I
BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME OF THESE
ÁP IS IN PLACE SO THAT WHATEVER
UHR COULD INTERFACE WITH A
PRESCRIPTION. A SYSTEM IS THAT
IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS
MORE OF AN EXPERT IN THIS AREA.
THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. YOU
KNOW, MIKE, MY PHYSICIANS THERE,
EACH THR COMMUNICATES DIRECTLY
WITH THE PHARMACY HAS BEEN THAT
WAY FOR YEARS. UM IT'S A LARGE,
IT'S A LARGE SYSTEM. AND THAT
THE SYSTEM THE SYSTEM WORKS. I
JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT'S AS
COMPLICATED AS THE CHAIN
PHARMACIES ARE MAKING THIS OUT
TO BE, UM AND LIKE I SAID, THIS
HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN OTHER
STATES. UM OTHER STATES HAVE
LEAPFROGGED US. THAT'S WHY WE
DID THE DELAY IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION TO ALLOW FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO CATCH UP AND
INTEGRATE. SO UM, PART OF THE
CHALLENGE WAS THAT WE FOUND THAT
SOME DOCTORS IN REMOTE AREAS
WERE HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME
THEY ACTUALLY HAD A LOT ADD TO
ADD ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS TO
THEIR SYSTEMS. TO BE ABLE TO DO
THAT. THAT WAS A BIG EXPENSE, A
BIG ACCOMMODATION FOR SMALL
PRACTICES. OFTENTIMES HERE WE
HAVE SOME OF THE LARGEST
CORPORATIONS IN COUNTY IN THE
COUNTRY THAT DON'T WANT TO DON'T
WANT TO ACCOMMODATE. UM AND THEY
CAN CERTAINLY AFFORD IT FROM MY
PERSPECTIVE. OKAY WELL, I
APPRECIATE THAT. AND I KNOW THAT
WHEN YOU DID YOUR FIRST
LEGISLATION, DIVORCE AND
CONCERNS FOR SMALL PRACTICES,
THEY MADE THAT INVESTMENT. AND
THAT, YOU KNOW, HRS DO HAVE
THOSE ÁP IS TO CONNECT FOR ON
THE PRESCRIPTION SIDE. SO IT
PUZZLES ME AS TO WHY THE UM,
RESPECTIVELY, IS THAT THE LARGE
PHARMACIES CAN'T CONNECT UP WITH
THAT, UNLESS THEY HAVE
PARTICULAR THINGS. THEY'RE
TRYING TO PICK UP THAT GO BEYOND
WHAT THE HR THINKS IT'S
NECESSARY TO COMMUNICATE FOR
PRESCRIPTION. I THINK THEY CAN.
I THINK IT'S JUST A WILL TO
ACTUALLY DO QUITE FRANKLY. OKAY
WELL, UM, THIS WE STILL DON'T
HAVE. I UNDERSTAND. WE DON'T
HAVE IT. WE HAVE A CORE OF OKAY.
WE UNDERTOOK WELL, I'LL BE HAPPY
TO MOVE THE BILL AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME. AND IF I LEFT
SOMETHING OUT, MR FORD, IF YOU
HAVE ANYTHING YOU IF THROUGH THE
CHAIR IF, IF I'VE MISSED LEFT
SOMETHING OUT, I APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY. I'LL JUST CLARIFY
ONE THING REGARDING SHORT
SCRIPTS. UM MY UNDERSTANDING,
AND THAT MEANS THE PHARMACIES
CAN DISAGREE WITH THIS, BUT I
BELIEVE IT'S 95 OR SO PERCENT OF
PHARMACIES NATIONALLY ARE
CONNECTED TO SHORT SCRIPTS AND
SHORT SCRIPT TO ACTUALLY
CERTIFIES MOST. THE VAST
MAJORITY OF THE ELECTRONIC
PRESCRIBING VENDORS SO THAT THEY
CAN COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR
SCRIPTS TO SHARE SCRIPTS,
ESSENTIALLY SO I'M NOT FAMILIAR
WITH THE ONE THAT'S BEEN RAISED
HERE IN COMMITTEE. UM BUT I KNOW
THAT IKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IN CMA,
I'VE HELPED PERSONALLY HELPED
HUNDREDS OF PHYSICIANS COMPLY
WITH SOMETHING ABOUT 2789. AND
THE FIRST THING WE TELL THEM IS
FIND A SHORT SCRIPT CERTIFIED
VENDOR. IT'LL MAKE YOUR LIFE
EASIER. UM SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT
LIKE NEW VENDORS COMING ON TO
THE TO THE MARKET, IT'S NOT
NECESSARILY A MATTER OF THEM
GOING PHARMACY BY PHARMACY TO
GET CERTIFIED. IT'S A MATTER OF
THEM, WORKING OUT AN
ACCOMMODATION WITH SHORT SCRIPTS
TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN
COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR SCRIPT
CERTIFIED OTHER SORT SCRIPT
CERTIFIED VENDORS. THANK YOU
BEFORE I GO TO SENATOR NEWMAN.
MY CONCERN WAS THAT WE PUT THE
PHARMACIES IN A BETWEEN A ROCK
AND A HARD SPOT WHERE A VENDOR
WON'T NEGOTIATE WITH THEM. THEIR
SYSTEM CAN'T BE MODIFIED. IT'S
CLEAR THEY COULD WORK ON
MODIFYING THEIR SYSTEM. THE
ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT THE
CONTRACT WITH ANOTHER SOFTWARE
PROVIDER IS A DECISION THEY HAVE
TO MAKE. BUT I AM COMFORTED BY
THE FACT THAT YOU'VE INDICATED
THAT PROVIDER MAY E FAX A
PRESCRIPTION TO A PHARMACY TO BE
FILLED AND THAT WOULD COMPLY.
WITH THE BILL, SO THE PHARMACY
IS NOT IN VIOLATION OF YOUR
BILL. USING AN EFFECTS
PRESCRIPTION. THAT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING, BUT I HAVE BEEN
KNOWN TO BE WRONG IN THE PAST.
OH DON'T SAY THAT DOCTOR WOULD.
WELL, I YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SAY
I'M PERFECT. I CAN'T DO THAT. MR
NEWMAN. I'VE NEVER KNOWN THE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BE WRONG BEFORE
, SO IF I'M FOLLOWING THIS, IT
SOUNDS AS IF WE'RE SORT OF
DESCRIBING THE ENTITIES MOST
EQUIPPED. TO BUILD OUT THEIR
SYSTEMS VIA A PR SOME OTHER WAY
OR THE ONES LEAST INCLINED TO DO
IT. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS
CORRECT, SO IT'S A LITTLE
PUZZLING. SO IF I COULD HAVE, I
COULD HAVE MISS SNYDER COME UP
AND AT LEAST SEE IF YOU CAN
ARTICULATE. AND WHAT THE ISSUE
OR ISSUES ARE THAT ARE UM,
BEFORE US RIGHT NOW, THAT MIGHT
JUSTIFY NOT MOVING THIS BILL.
JENNIFER SNYDER, CALIFORNIA
RETAILERS ASSOCIATION NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION TO CHANGE DRUGSTORES
GETTING ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE
AUTHOR, UM OF INCLUDED IN A B
852 IS NOW A NEW REQUIREMENT ON
TOP OF WHAT 27 89 INCLUDED,
WHICH WAS TO REQUIRE PHARMACIES
TO TAKE ANY PRESCRIPTIONS HAD NO
PROBLEM WITH THAT AND DIDN'T
ACTUALLY EVEN NEED MUCH OF A
DELAY WHEN 27 89 WAS PUT IN
PLACE. UM THE NEW LANGUAGE IN
852 REQUIRES THAT, UM, A
PHARMACY CAN'T REFUSE A
PRESCRIPTION IF IT'S NOT
COMPATIBLE WITH THEIR SYSTEM.
AND SO THAT IS THE NEW LANGUAGE
THAT IS NOW CONCERNING TO US,
BECAUSE WE KNOW OF ONE
PARTICULAR COMPANY THAT'S PRETTY
ACTIVE OUT THERE IN THE MARKET
THAT IS FUNCTIONING LIKE A SURE
SCRIPT AND UM, AND SAYING THAT
THEY CAN SPEAK TO OUR SYSTEMS
THAT THEY ARE COMPATIBLE WITH
OUR SYSTEMS WITHOUT FIRST COMING
TO THE PHARMACIES FIRST, SO IT'S
NOT EVEN A MATTER OF THEM,
ACTUALLY APPROACHING SURE
SCRIPTS OR APPROACHING THE
PHARMACIES. SO IN A SENSE, OUR
CONCERN AND THIS IS A NEW
COMPANY, SO IT JUST KIND OF
MATERIALIZED IN THE LAST SIX
MONTHS, AND SO THE CONCERN IS TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE
ABILITY TO VET THAT COMPANY
BEFORE, UM, BEFORE THEY ACTUALLY
MOVE IN THE MARKET AND ADVERTISE
THEMSELVES AS BEING UM,
COMPATIBLE WITH OUR SYSTEMS.
SORRY I DO. I MAKE SENSE. SO I
GUESS THROUGH THE CHAIR BACK TO
YOU ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WHAT YOU
KNOW, IN THAT PARTICULAR
INSTANCE ABOUT VETTING ONE OR
MORE COMPANIES TECHNOLOGY TO
ONBOARD THEM. HOW THAT SEEMS
LIKE SOMETHING YOU COULD HANDLE
OR THE AMENDMENT MIGHT HANDLE.
HOW DO YOU HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO
THAT? I GUESS I GUESS THE
PROBLEM I HAVE IS THAT YOU KNOW
THE THESE LARGER PHARMACY
ENTITIES HAVE HAD. THREE YEARS,
40 MONTHS TO ACTUALLY DO THIS.
AND IT WASN'T UNTIL YOU KNOW WE
STARTED HEARING THAT THERE WERE
PROBLEMS. UM WE DIDN'T HEAR
ANYTHING AT ALL UNTIL UNTIL
RIGHT BEFORE THIS BILL WAS DUE
TO GO INTO EFFECT. AND SO THAT'S
THAT'S MY THAT'S MY FRUSTRATION
AND THEN THE IDEA THAT THAT THAT
THAT THESE LARGER ENTITIES WANT
TO PIGEONHOLE PEOPLE INTO THEIR
OWN PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE. UM I'M
SORRY. THAT'S THAT'S DOESN'T
FEEL LIKE A FREE MARKET TO ME,
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT
DIFFICULT. QUITE FRANKLY, SO IS
IT ABOUT PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE?
OR IS IT ABOUT UM, YOU KNOW,
ENSURING THAT THAT A PARTICULAR
TECHNOLOGY VENDOR IS VETTED TO
WORK ACROSS ALL THESE SYSTEMS.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. IT'S THE
VETTING. IT'S NOT THE
PROPRIETARY. AT LEAST THAT IS
WHAT I AM TOLD BY MY CLIENTS. SO
OKAY, UM. SEEMS LIKE THAT.
THAT'S AMENDABLE IF THAT'S THE
ISSUE IF IT'S NOT SIMPLY A
WILLINGNESS OR UNWILLINGNESS TO
DO IT IF IT'S ABOUT A STANDARD
STANDARD THAT HAS BEEN MET.
THERE ARE THERE ARE STANDARDS
WITHIN THE INDUSTRY WITHOUT
THROUGH THE CHAIR. THERE ARE
STANDARDS THROUGH THE INDUSTRY.
AS MR FORD MENTIONED. THERE ARE
STANDARDS. IF THE COMPANY IS
COMPLYING WITH THOSE STANDARDS.
I'M NOT SURE WHY YOU NEED MONTHS
TO VET SOMETHING. THAT'S THE
ISSUE. WHETHER OR NOT THIS
PARTICULAR SOFTWARE VENDOR IS OR
IS NOT COMPLYING WITH THE
STANDARDS, WHICH SEEMS LIKE AN
ANSWERABLE QUESTION. PROBABLY
NOT GONNA ANSWER HERE. SO LET ME
DEFER TO SENATOR LIVING HERE.
THANK YOU, MISSIONARY. YOU DON'T
HAVE TO COME BACK UP. BUT MY
QUESTION WOULD BE IF THERE'S A
PARTICULAR VENDOR OUT THERE THAT
YOU KNOW THEY'RE PEDDLING THEIR
WARES. AND THEY AREN'T
COMPATIBLE. COULDN'T YOU JUST
TELL YOUR PHARMACIES DON'T USE
THEM. I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE
EASIEST THING TO DO, BECAUSE YOU
DO HAVE TO COME BACK UP. THE NEW
LANGUAGE THAT'S IN A B 852 WOULD
NOT ALLOW FOR US TO REFUSE THAT
PRESCRIPTION BASED ON IT NOT
BEING COMPATIBLE WITH OUR
SYSTEMS. WELL, I'M NOT CURRENT
LANGUAGE. YOU KNOW, CURRENT LAW
IS NO PROBLEM. IT'S THE 52 NEW
LANGUAGE, BUT I'M NOT SAYING
THAT THEY CAN REFUSE A
PRESCRIPTION. MAYBE I
MISUNDERSTOOD YOU. I THOUGHT I
HEARD YOU SAY THAT THERE WAS
SOMEONE OUT THERE PEDDLING. YOU
KNOW THEIR SOFTWARE AND IT
WASN'T COMPATIBLE AND THE
CONCERN WAS THAT YOUR PHARMACY'S
MIGHT START USING THEM. AND THEN
THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO COMPLY
WITH THIS BILL. SO THAT'S NOT
THE CASE IT'S COMPATIBLE. IT'S
JUST. THEY CAN'T ACCEPT THAT
PRESCRIPTION. IF THE SOFTWARE
VENDOR HASN'T CREATED A. A
CONTRACT WITH THEM, AND SO
THEY'RE GETTING A PRESCRIPTION
OUT OF THE BLUE, RIGHT? THAT'S
BEING YOU KNOW, THEN NEEDS TO BE
FACTS TO THEM BECAUSE THE VENDOR
HASN'T COME TO THEM FIRST TO
SAY. HEY WE'VE GOT THIS SOFTWARE
THAT WE'RE NEED TO USE WITH YOUR
SYSTEM. AND COULD YOU ASK THAT
VENDOR TO DO THAT? YES WE COULD
. WE JUST NEED TIME TO DO IT IN
THREE MONTHS OR THREE YEARS
WASN'T ENOUGH. THIS IS A NEW
COMPANY. SO IT'S THE NEW
LANGUAGE IN 852 THAT THAT SAYS
THAT IT HAS TO BE. YOU CAN'T
REFUSE IT BASED ON ITS
COMPATIBILITY. WHICH WE
UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS FOR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WOULD WHERE
HE'S COMING FROM. WE DON'T WANT
, UM, WE DON'T WANT PHARMACIES
REFUSING IT JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE
NOT WILLING TO DO THE WORK TO
HAVE THE CONTRACT. IT'S JUST
WHAT'S HAPPENING IS THEY'RE
SHOWING UP. IN OUR PHARMACIES.
PRESCRIPTIONS ARE WITHOUT THE
PHARMACY FIRST KNOWING THAT
THEY'RE COMING, AND IT'S A
SOFTWARE VENDOR THAT HAS AN
ARRANGED, UM ANY TYPE OF
AGREEMENT WITH THE PHARMACY AND
SOUNDS LIKE THE VENDOR IS THE
PROBLEM. THANK YOU, AND I AND I
WOULD JUST ALSO SAY THAT
SOMETIMES IT'S NOT A LACK OF HOW
TO IT'S A LACK OF WILL TO AND I
THINK YOU WOULD REFERENCE THAT
YOURSELF ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WOULD
IF DR PAN DIDN'T MOVE THE BILL,
I'D BE HAPPY TO MOVE THE BILL
PAN DID MISS SNYDER. MAY I ASK A
QUESTION? I APOLOGIZE. YOU'RE A
POPULAR PERSON. SO. IF. AN
EFFECTS PRESCRIPTION IS
ACCEPTABLE UNDER LAW AND THIS
BILL, WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE IT
IS ACTUALLY AND I NEED TO
CLARIFY, SENATOR I WAS LOOKING
AT MY DICK TRACY DEVICE HERE.
AND IT AND FROM MY STAFF, AND AN
EFFECT IS NOT. THAT IS WHY WE'RE
EXACTLY WHY IS THAT IN THE IS
THAT IN THE LAW BECAUSE, AS I
READ THE DEFINITION OF
ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION
PRESCRIPTION. AS BOTH AN IMAGE
AND DATA PRESCRIPTIONS AND ANY
PRESCRIPTION ORDER FOR WHICH
AFFECTS SIMILARLY OF THE ORDER
IS RECEIVED BY A PHARMACY FROM A
LICENSED PRESCRIBER. AND ANY
PRESCRIPTION ORDER OTHER THAN AN
ELECTRONIC IMAGE TRANSMISSION
PRESCRIPTIONS THAT THE ISSUE
THAT IS ELECTRONIC LEE,
TRANSMITTED FROM A LICENSED
PRESCRIBER TO A PHARMACY. LET'S
SEE. ANSWER. IT IS NOT. THAT IS
NOT THE FORMAT IN WHICH WITH THE
WE ORIGINALLY ENVISIONED IN THE
BILL, WHICH IS AN ELECT, WHICH
IS AN ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION
DÂN ELECTRONIC PRESCRIPTION,
WHICH HAS SPECIFIC FILLED FIELDS
THAT ARE THAT ARE POPULATED. SO
IN EFFECT COULD TECHNICALLY BE
THAT YOU ACTUALLY WRITE A FACTS
OUT WHERE YOU WRITE OUT A
PRESCRIPTION ON A ON A PIECE OF
PAPER AND FAX IT TO THE FACT
THAT THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. WELL
THAT'S NOT WHAT IT IN THE 21ST
CENTURY. THAT'S NOT HOW YOU DO
FAXES ANYMORE. NOBODY USES THE
FAX MACHINE AGREED. BUT IF WE'RE
IF WE'RE MAYBE MAYBE MR FORD CAN
CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT, SIR? SURE
THANK YOU. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY
TWO DEFINITIONS IN CALIFORNIA
LAW, ELECTRONIC IMAGE
TRANSMISSION, ELECTRONIC DATA
TRANSMISSION. THE ELECTRONIC
PRESCRIBING MANDATE SPECIFICALLY
STIPULATES ELECTRONIC DATA
TRANSMISSION. THE IMPORTANCE OF
THAT DEFINITION, UM, TO GET A
LITTLE WEEPY IS THAT IT'S
STRUCTURED DATA. SO THAT IT EVEN
WITH THE FACT THAT SOMEBODY ELSE
HAS TO TAKE AN ELECTRONIC FACTS
AND TYPE IT INTO THEIR SYSTEM,
WHEREAS A ELECTRONIC DATA
TRANSMISSION IS STRUCTURED DATA
THAT FLOWS FROM ONE ELECTRONIC
SYSTEM TO ANOTHER WITHOUT THE
INTERVENTION OF A PERSON. WELL.
YOU KNOW, LISTEN, I'M GOING TO
SUPPORT THIS THING TODAY, BUT IT
OCCURS TO ME THAT IF YOU'RE
DEALING WITH T SOFTWARE
PRESCRIPTION SOFTWARE COMPANIES
WERE CHAIN THAT'S USING ONE AND
YOU'VE GOT ANOTHER BUNCH OF
PROVIDERS THAT ARE USING THE
OTHER. IN ORDER FOR ONE TO
MODIFY THE SYSTEM TO ACCEPT DATA
FROM ANOTHER. THERE HAS TO BE
COOPERATION, PROBABLY BECAUSE
YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE
REQUIREMENTS ARE FOR THE FOR THE
INCOMING IN ORDER TO DESIGN THE
RECEIVING TO ACCEPT IT. AND SO
ARE WE CREATING A BILL HERE?
IT'S AN URGENCY BILL THAT
AUTOMATICALLY PUTS A WHOLE BUNCH
OF CHAIN PHARMACIES IN DEEP DOG
DOO DOO BECAUSE MAYBE THEY'RE
NOT GETTING COOPERATION FROM THE
PROVIDER ON THE OTHER END OF THE
STICK, AND IF IT'S NOT, WE KNOW
MAYBE IT'S NO NO. THE NEXT TIME
THAT'S MY PROBLEM. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
THE OPPOSITION IS NOT SAID IS,
ARE THEY GETTING COOPERATION? WE
HAVEN'T HEARD THAT. THEY SAY
THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING
COOPERATION. WHAT WE'VE HEARD IS
THAT THEY WANT TIME TO VET SO
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? DOES THEY
DO THEY DO THEY VET DECIDE? OH,
IT DOESN'T. WE DON'T LIKE IT
BECAUSE WE REALLY PREFER OUR
SYSTEM MORE. THAT'S WHAT OUR
PERCEPTION IS THAT THIS IS
REALLY ABOUT TRYING TO GET
EVERYBODY INTO THEIR PROPRIETARY
SYSTEM. AND NOT HAVING TO,
ACTUALLY, MAYBE, BUT I MEAN, YOU
KNOW, I COULD SEE A SITUATION
WHERE IF YOU DON'T GET
COOPERATION, YOU CAN'T MODIFY
YOUR SYSTEM. MAYBE THEY'RE BAD
ACTORS AND HAVEN'T DONE THE JOB.
BUT THIS IS AN URGENCY THAT
TAKES EFFECT IMMEDIATELY ON
PASSAGE AND SIGNING. AND WHAT
HAPPENS THE NEXT TIME WHEN NO.
NO COMES ALONG? THAT'S A
SOFTWARE PROVIDER THAT SIGNS UP
45. SOFTWARE COMPANY THAT SIGNS
UP 45 PROVIDERS. HOW DOES THIS
ALL WORK BECAUSE THERE ARE NO
APPARENTLY THERE ARE NO OFF
RAMPS. YOU CAN'T WALK IN WITH A
PAPER PRESCRIPTION. YOU CAN'T
EFFECTS THE PRESCRIPTION. WHAT
DO YOU DO? WELL I'M NOT AN I T
PERSON SO I DON'T REALLY KNOW
WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. WELL, I
GUESS PART OF MY FRUSTRATION IS
THAT WE'VE HAD THREE YEARS TO
FIGURE THIS OUT. WE HAD THREE
YEARS OF DELAYED IMPLEMENTATION
BECAUSE THE CHAIN PHARMACIES
ASKED FOR IT BECAUSE THE MEDICAL
COMMUNITY ASKED FOR IT. AND NOW
WE ARE IN JANUARY JANUARY THIS
YEAR, EVERYTHING WENT LIVE. AND
SUDDENLY THERE'S A PROBLEM. AND
SO HERE WE ARE. WE'RE HAPPY TO
WORK WITH THE MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION BECAUSE WE DID NOT
ANTICIPATE SOME OF THE
CHALLENGES WITH SMALLER RURAL
PRACTICES THAT MAY NOT HAVE THAT
MAY NOT HAVE HAD ELECTRONIC
HEALTH RECORDS HAPPY TO
ACCOMMODATE THAT. AND THAT IS
THAT IS THAT THAT WAS REALLY,
REALLY THE CRUX OF THIS FROM OUR
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE FROM THE
BEGINNING, BUT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT REALLY SOPHISTICATED
OPERATIONS HERE. LARGE CORPORATE
PHARMACY CHAIN PHARMACIES. I
DON'T THINK IT'S NOT ROCKET
SCIENCE. I THINK THERE'S MORE OF
A WILL TO NOT NOT BE
ACCOMMODATING HERE AND YOU KNOW
IF THERE'S A REAL PROBLEM WITH
THAT. YOU KNOW, I'M I'M I CAN'T
BELIEVE I'M GONNA SAY THIS.
OFFER THIS SOFTWARE TO THE TO
THE DOCTORS AND SET THEM UP FOR
NOTHING. IF YOU'RE SO CONCERNED
ABOUT ABOUT PIT, YOU KNOW, USING
THAT MAKE IT AFFORDABLE LIKE
MAKE IT ZERO COST. IF THAT'S
YEAR IF THAT'S THE ISSUE YOU
GOT, BUT I DON'T HEAR THAT OFFER
, EITHER. SO WE DIDN'T EVEN GET
INTO THE ECONOMICS BECAUSE
OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT IN THE
BUSINESS OF PREFERRING ONE
VENDOR OF OR ANOTHER OVER
ANOTHER OR PRESSURING NO. ONE
COMPANY TO SELECT A VENDOR. OKAY
WELL, I'M GOING TO STOP TALKING
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR
CONCERNS? LET'S ESTABLISH A
QUORUM. FIRST SENATOR ROSS. HEAR
HEAR MELINDA'S ARCHULETTA
ARCHULETTA HERE, BATES B. HERE.
IT'S HERE. HEAR HEAR BECKER HERE
. DODD EGGMAN POTATO. POTATO
HERE, JONES. JONES HERE LEVA
THURMOND NEWMAN. NEWMAN HERO
KOBO EBOOK HERE. PANTS HERE AND
HERE. WE HAVE A QUORUM. DOCTOR,
WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN VERY, VERY
PATIENT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY
THANK YOU, AND I APOLOGIZE THAT
I WAS INCORRECT ON SOME EARLIER
INFORMATION. I THINK WE'VE GOT
THAT CLEARED UP. I DON'T USUALLY
GET THIS FRUSTRATED, BUT I AM,
UM LONG TIME TO WAIT TO
IMPLEMENT SOMETHING HAVING A LOT
OF OTHER STATES LEAPFROG US AND
DO THIS SUCCESSFULLY, AND
SUDDENLY, THERE'S AN ISSUE
INVOLVING LARGE CHAINS. I THINK
IT'S EASY TO OVERCOME. I THINK
THERE ARE SOLUTIONS. I THINK I
THINK THIS IS A BILL WORTHY OF
PASSING. AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK
YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU, SIR. THE
BILL HAS BEEN MOVED BY SENATOR
PAN. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS. WE
REFER TO THE COMMITTEE ON
JUDICIARY. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MAYBE 8 52 MOTION IS DO PASS AND
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE AND
JUDICIARY. ROTH I MELINDA'S
ADADA TÔI BATES. BECKER. SPEAKER
I DODD. EGGMAN. HURTADO. POTATO.
I JONES. LEVER. LABOR. AMEN.
NEWMAN. PETROVO. PAN. CN I STILL
HAS SIX VOTES WILL HOLD THE ROAD
OPEN FOR ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH APPRECIATE. OKAY,
UM. I SEE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
PETRIE-NORRIS HERE. AND WHAT
WHAT? GIVEN THE ASSEMBLIES.
ACTIVITY. ONE O'CLOCK DO YOU
NEED TO TAKE A WHY DON'T WE? UH
WHAT DO YOU THINK? THEY'LL
FINISH THAT IN ABOUT 20 MINUTES.
OKAY. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS FOR
20 MINUTES. WE COULD DO THAT. WE
WOULD WE WOULD GO INTO RECESS.
AFTER WE TAKE A VOTE ON THE
BILLS. WE'RE GOING TO START
AGAIN AND DO THE.
LET'S DO OUR VOTES. FIRST
SENATOR LEVIN WANTS TO VOTE, SO
LET'S VOTE. LET'S UM CALLED THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. NO NONE. IT
SAYS WE DO. DO WE HAVE A CONSENT
CALENDAR? OKAY, WE DON'T HAVE A
CONSENT CALENDAR. WE COULD,
COULDN'T WE. LET'S TAKE UP FILE
ITEM NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS, UM A
B 6 57. AND WE NEED A MOTION. BY
SENATOR LEYVA. MOTION IS DUE
PASS. WE REFER THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAYBE 6 57 MOTION IS DO
PASS AND REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
ROTH MELINDA'S ARCHULETTA
ARCHULETTA. AYE, BATES BATES?
NO. BECKER BECKER. I DODD
EGGMAN. POTATO. POTATO. I JONES.
JONES NO LEYVA, EITHER. I'M IN
NEWMAN NEWMAN AYOTTE KOBO. T
ABOUT NO PAN AND I VOTE IS 7 TO
3 WILL HOLD THE ROPE AND PERHAPS
SOME MEMBERS. PICK UP. FILE ITEM
TO WHICH IS ASSEMBLY BILL 28 94.
SO MOVED MOTION BY SENATOR MANA
POTION IS DO PASS REAR FOR THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MAYBE 28
94 MOTIONS DO PASS AND REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS ROUGH I MELINDA'S
ARCHULETTA TÔI BATES. BATES I
BECKER DODD EGGMAN HER TAITO.
TÔI JONES JONES. NO, LEYVA. THEY
HAVE A AMEN NEWMAN PHOTOVOGUE
GUY PAN AND I. VOTE IS 9 TO 1
WILL HOLD THE ROLL OPEN FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS. ITEM NUMBER
FOUR. SIMPLY BUILT 17 04 SO
MOVED. MOVED BY DR PAN. EMOTION
IS DO PASS. WE REFER THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. A B 17 04
MOTIONS DO PASS AND REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
ROUGH. I AM MELINDA'S ARCHULETTA
TÔI BATES. STATES I BECKER DODD
EGGMAN HER TAITO. TÔI JONES. I'M
SORRY I MISSED THE BILL. 17 04
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, MAYBE. 17. OH,
FOUR. I JONES, I LEYVA LEVER.
AMEN. NEWMAN. NHNG AND I A JOB.
OKAY I PAN AND I VOTES WILL HOLD
THEIR OPEN FOR ABSENT MEMBERS.
NOW WE WILL BE IN. RECESS FOR 15
MINUTES UNTIL 1 30. WE CAN.
SPENDING ON WHO'S HERE? WE'LL
SEE IF WE CAN TAKE A BILL BEFORE
WE START THE FLOOR, TOO. ANY
OBJECTIONS. IT'S JUST A QUICK
QUESTION, MR CHAIR. ON THE FINAL
SEVERAL ITEMS 16 THROUGH 20 THAT
OUR ASSEMBLY BNP COMMITTEE BILLS
THAT PROBABLY ENJOY SUPPORT
SUPPORT. RECOMMENDATIONS. WOULD
WE BE ABLE TO HAVE YOU OR ONE OF
THE MEMBERS HERE, PRESENT TOES
AND DISPATCHED WITH THOSE WELL,
WE HAVE TO GET THE CONSENT OF
THE AUTHOR. I DON'T KNOW WHAT
THEY'REIS IT? MR BERMAN
PRESENTING THESE BILLS. YEAH. SO
WE'LL HAVE TO CHECK ON THAT.
OKAY JONES, HAPPY TO DO IT IF HE
WANTS ME TO DO IT FOR THE, UH,
TO ENJOY THE PRIVILEGE, RIGHT?
BE IN RECESS UNTIL 1 30.
IS VERY TO BE ME. SENATE
BUSINESS PROFESSIONS AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
IS RECONVENED. I'M GOING TO BE
PRESENTING THE ASSEMBLY'S
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
COMMITTEE. SUNSET BILLS FOR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BERMAN. I'M
GOING TO TURN THE GAVEL OVER TO
SENATOR OKO BOGUE AND I'M GOING
TO REQUEST PERMISSION TO PRESENT
FROM MY CHAIR. BROTHER. THANK
YOU. WELCOME SENATOR ROUGH AND
THANK YOU FOR PRESENTING THE
REMAINING FIVE BILLS. LET'S
START WITH A B 26 71. OKAY? THIS
IS THE OCCUPATIONAL AUTHORITY
THERAPY. SUNSET BILLET EXTENDS
UNTIL JANUARY. 1 2027 THE
PROVISIONS ESTABLISHING THE
CALIFORNIA BOARD OF OCCUPATIONAL
THERAPY. IT'S OCCUPATIONAL
THERAPIST TO THE MOSCONI KNOCKS
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ACT,
ESSENTIALLY ALLOWING
OCCUPATIONAL THERAPIST TO
PERFORM OR TO FORM PROFESSIONAL
CORPORATIONS. RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AND I VOTED THE APPROPRIATE
TIME. THANK YOU. SENATOR ROTH
WILL NOT MOVE ON TO ANYONE WHO
WISHES TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT. WE
WILL NOW HEAR FROM ANY
ADDITIONAL OH, LET'S SEE. WE'LL
HEAR FROM ANY ADDITIONAL
WITNESSES HERE IN IN THE HEARING
ROOM. DO WE HAVE ANYONE IN
SUPPORT OF 26 AS A B A. B 26 71.
CNN THANK YOU WILL NOW MOVE ON
TO WITNESSES WILLING TO TESTIFY
. THE, UH, THE TELECONFERENCE
SERVICES MODERATOR, IF YOU WOULD
PLEASE PROMPTED THE INDIVIDUALS
WILLING TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF
A B 26 26 71 WILL BEGIN. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF A B 26
71 YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN
ZERO, FEAR AND SUPPORT. AND WE
WILL GO TO LINE 102 UP. 102 YOU
TOOK YOURSELF OUT, PLEASE PRESS
ONE AND THEN ZERO AGAIN. AND WE
WILL GO TO LINE. 1 10. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS
LINDSAY BOLA HORN WITH THE
OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY ASSOCIATION
OF CALIFORNIA AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
AND WE HAVE NO FURTHER
SUPPORTING QUÊ AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU, MADAM MODERATOR.
HAVING HEARD FROM ALL THE
SUPPORTERS WILL NOW FOLLOW THE
SAME PROCESS AND HEAR FROM ANY
OPPOSITION. LET'S MOVE ON TO ANY
WITNESSES HERE AND HERE IN THE
HEAT OF HERE IN THE HEARING
ROOM. SEE NONE. THANK YOU MOVE
ON TO WITNESSES WILLING TO
TESTIFY. THE OTHER
TELECONFERENCE SERVICES
MODERATOR, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPTLY INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION OF A B 26
71. WE WILL BEGIN. THANK YOU FOR
NOT POSITION OF A B 26 71 YOU
MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO
FEAR AN OPPOSITION OF A B 26 71
. WE WILL GO TO LINE 99. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. I DON'T UNDERSTAND
WHY YOU'RE NOT HAVING WITNESSES
AND OPPOSITION THAT SPEAK FOR
SEVERAL MINUTES. THAT DOESN'T
MAKE SENSE TO ME. COULD YOU KIND
OF EXPLAIN THE PROCESS?
SHOULDN'T THERE BE WITNESSES AND. THANK YOU. WE HAVE NO FURTHER
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. UM, LET'S SEE.
MODERATOR. LET'S SEE. SO BRING
IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE
BILL. SEE, YOU KNOW FURTHER.
COMMENTS FROM OUR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS WILL NOW SEE. 20 LET'S
SEE. SENATOR ROTH. WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR MY VOTE. THANK YOU, SENATOR
ROTH. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? WE DO
HAVE A MOTION FROM SENATOR PAN
ON A B 26 71. THE BILL HAS BEEN
MOVED. THE MOTION IS DO PASS AND
WE REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. A B 26 71 MOTION IS DO
PASS AND REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
ROTH HIæN I. MELINDA'S
ARCHULETTA ARCHULETTA. AYE,
BATES. DE BECKER. DODD. EGGMAN.
POTATO. JONES. LEVER LEVER. I'M
IN. NEWMAN KOBO KOBO GUY PAN AND
I WE HAVE SIX VOTES FOR 26 7
YEAR OLD. WE'LL KEEP THE ROLE
OPEN FOR ARE ABSENT MEMBERS.
WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO FILE ITEM
NUMBER 17 BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BERMAN AND ON BEHALF OF ASSEMBLY
ROOM IN IT, I WILL HAVE SENATOR
ROB CONTINUED TO PRESENT. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THIS IS THE
NURSING SUNSET BILL REQUIRES THE
BOARD OF REGISTERED NURSING TO
ESTABLISH A NURSING EDUCATION
COMMITTEE REQUIRES THE BRNWS
EXECUTIVE OFFICER TO ESTABLISH
UNIFORM METHODS TO EVALUATE
REQUEST AND GRANT APPROVALS FOR
SCHOOLS OF NURSING PROHIBITS
PAYMENTS FOR CLINICAL PLACEMENT
LIMITS THE BRNWS UTILIZATION OF
WORKFORCE DATA ASSESSMENTS TO
DETERMINE SCHOOL APPROVAL OR
EXPANSION. AMONG OTHER CHANGES
RELATED TO THE BRN SUNSET REVIEW
OUR EXCEPT THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS OUTLINED IN THE
ANALYSIS AND DISTRIBUTED TO
STAKEHOLDERS WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AND I VOTED
THE APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK YOU,
SENATOR ROCK, AND WE ARE JUST
CONFIRMING THAT THE AMENDMENTS
WERE ACCEPTED. PERFECT WILL NOW
MOVE ON TO ANY WITNESSES WISH
YOU TESTIFY IN SUPPORT. I
BELIEVE WE HAVE LORETTA MELVIN
WITH THE BOARD OF REGISTERED
NURSING ON THE LINE IN SUPPORT.
MISS LORETTA. CORRECT. CAN YOU
HEAR ME? YES, PERFECT. PLEASE
PROCEED. THANK YOU. UM, WE TOOK
THE CONCEPTUAL LANGUAGE THAT'S
PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED AT THE
BOARD MEETING ON THURSDAY,
JANUARY 23RD AND OUR BOARD TOOK
A POSITION OF SUPPORT WITH
AMENDMENTS. THE BOARD VOICED
CONCERNS WITH JUST A FEW ITEMS
IN THIS SECTION FOR BPC 27 86.2
, 27, 86.3 AND 27 86.5. THEY
VOTED TO ACCEPT ALL OF THE
PROVISIONS OUTLINED IN THE NOW
23 PAGE DOCUMENT OF A MAN'S IN
ADDITION. WE LOOK FORWARD TO
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
LEGISLATIVE STAFF TO WORK
THROUGH THOSE AREAS THAT NEED
SOME WORK ONE I WANTED TO POINT
OUT. EXCUSE ME. WAS THERE WAS A
AND ASKED TO NOT HAVE ANY SEATS
DO CURRICULUM, UM, REVIEWS AND
APPROVALS AS PART OF THE UPDATED
TO 27 86.5. AND I BEG OF YOU
GUYS TO RECONSIDER THAT, AS THE
REMOVAL OF THAT REVIEW PROCESS
WOULD HAVE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES THAT WOULD BE A
DETRIMENT TO THE NEWLY
IMPLEMENTED PROCESS FOR THE
CALIFORNIA GRAD AFFECTING OVER
20,000 NEW GRADS ANNUALLY
SEEKING INITIAL LICENSE HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, JUST SOME QUICK
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THAT
WE AUTOMATED THE PROCESS. SO IF
YOU CAN. SEE HOW WE WANT TO
CONTINUE AND AUTOMATION AND NOT
HAVE TO HAVE A CURRICULAR REVIEW
FOR EACH GRAD. UM, SO I'D ASKED
FOR THAT CHANGE JUST BECAUSE OF
INTENTION. UNINTENTIONAL
CONSEQUENCES. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH SMELL BE. WE WILL
NOW HEAR FROM ANY ADDITIONAL
WITNESSES HERE IN THE HEARING
ROOM. THANK YOU. CHAIRWOMAN AND
MEMBERS JENNIFER TANNEHILL WITH
AARON REID AND ASSOCIATES ON
BEHALF OF WEST COAST UNIVERSITY.
SO AS YOU'RE AWARE THERE HAVE
BEEN THOUSANDS OF NURSING
STUDENTS TURNED AWAY ANNUALLY
EVERY YEAR FROM NURSING PROGRAMS
. AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE FACING
A NURSING SHORTAGE THAT'S
ACTUALLY A CUTE, VERY ACUTE IN
CERTAIN AREAS OF THE STATE. IN
FACT, 100,000 NURSING STUDENTS
WERE TURNED AWAY DURING THE TWO
YEARS OF THE PANDEMIC. AND IT'S
CRITICAL THAT THE BOARD
REGISTERED NURSING BE REFORMED
TO DEAL WITH THE BOARDS. CONTROL
OF ENROLMENT. WE BELIEVE THAT
ENROLLMENT SHOULD BE ALIGNED
WITH WHAT THE ACCREDITORS
REQUIRE. AND SO SINCE THE
ACQUIRED CREDITORS ARE THE
EXPERTS IN THE NURSING PROGRAMS
SO WE WOULD LIKE THE COMMITTEE
TO CONSIDER THOSE AMENDMENTS AND
WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO
DISCUSS THIS ISSUE WITH THE
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. SUPPORT.
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS DEBBIE,
SIR. AND I'M, THE VICE PRESIDENT
OF THE CALIFORNIA NURSING
STUDENTS ASSOCIATION AND A
STUDENT AT WEST COAST
UNIVERSITY. LOS ANGELES. I'M
HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT THIS
MEASURE AND URGED FUTURE
AMENDMENTS THAT WILL ALLOW
ACCREDITED HIGH PERFORMING
SCHOOLS TO MEET STUDENT DEMAND
TO ACCESS AND INCREASED
ENROLLMENTS AS APPROVED BY THE
CREDITOR. THE BRN SHOULD NOT BE
CHOOSING WHO WAS ABLE TO ACHIEVE
THEIR DREAMS. THANK YOU. HI MY
NAME IS KIANNA. ZAK AKANI. UM I
CURRENTLY ATTEND WEST COAST
UNIVERSITY, ONTARIO FOR THE
NURSING PROGRAM. AND RIGHT NOW
IT'S EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO GET
INTO SCHOOLS DUE TO THE LONG
WAIT LIST FOR NURSING PROGRAMS.
SO I'M HERE TO STRONGLY URGE YOU
TO CONSIDER INCREASING
ENROLLMENT FOR NURSING SCHOOL
PROGRAMS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH JUST FOR CLARIFICATION
PURPOSES. WE DID HAVE A QUESTION
WITH REGARD TO THE VERY FIRST
WITNESS HERE IN IN THE ROOM.
MISS JENNIFER, WERE YOU
TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT AND
OPPOSITION OF THIS BILL? WE ARE
TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT OF THE
SUNSET BEING EXTENDED, BUT WITH
THE REFORMS THAT WE SEEK THANK
YOU. AND JUST AS A REMINDER FOR
THE WITNESSES HERE IN THAT ARE
TESTIFYING WOULD LIKE TO HAVE
YOUR NAME. THE AGENCY THAT
YOU'RE REPRESENTING IN WHETHER
OR NOT YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. WERE IN OPPOSITION. HELLO
MY NAME IS OLIVIA NORMAN. I GO
TO WEST COAST UNIVERSITY. THANK
YOU. AROUND THE PANTS, PRIVATE
CITIZEN AS IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. WE'LL DOUBLE CHECK.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT HERE IN THE
HEARING ROOM? SEEN AND WILL NOW
MOVE ON TO WITNESSES WAITING TO
TESTIFY. THE OTHER
TELECONFERENCE SERVICES AND
MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPTLY INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF A B 26 84.
WE WILL BEGIN. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR IN SUPPORT OF A B 26 84 YOU
MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO
FUROR IN SUPPORT OF A B 26 84.
WE WILL GO LINE 99. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. SO YOU FIRED ALL THE
NURSES WITH YOUR FASCIST VACCINE
MANDATES AND THEN YOU MAKE IT
DIFFICULT. NEXT WITNESS, PLEASE
. PROBLEMS PLEASE. THE PEOPLE
KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, AND WE'RE
NOT GOING TO WE'RE JUST
CURRENTLY TAKING CALLS IN
SUPPORT NAME AFFILIATION. IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. AND ONE REMINDER IF
YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF A B 26 84
YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AND WE HAVE NO SUPPORTING QUÊ AT
THIS TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MADAM MODERATOR. HAVING HEARD
FROM ALL THE SUPPORTERS WILL NOW
FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS IN HERE
FROM ANY OPPOSITION. LET'S MOVE
ON TO ANY WITNESSES HERE IN THE
HEARING ROOM. SEEING NONE. WE
WILL NOW MOVE ON TO WITNESSES
WAITING TO TESTIFY HERE. THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICES
MODERATOR, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPTLY. INDIVIDUALS WILLING TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION OF 26 84.
WE WILL BEGIN. THANK YOU FOR AN
OPPOSITION OF A B 26 84 YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO. IF
YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION OF A B 26
84, WE WILL GO TO LINE 1 25 YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. YOU DON'T FOLLOW
YOUR OWN PROCESS. YOU DON'T TAKE
WITNESSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MA'AM, STACKED. WE WILL NOW MOVE
ON TO THE NEXT WITNESS OPPOSITE
THANK YOU. HERE IN OPPOSITION OF
A B 26 84. YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AND WE DO HAVE ONE IN
Q ONE MOMENT WHERE WE GET THEIR
LINE NUMBER. AND WE WILL GO TO
LINE. EXCUSE ME. HOME AGAIN. WE
ARE IN OPPOSITION OF A B 26 84.
AND. WE'LL GO TO LINE 95. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
HOW ARE YOU, SIR? I MENTIONED
CERVANTES THAT HAS BEEN A FRONT
KANA AND, UM I JUST SEE THAT
JUST BEING VERY HARMFUL AND NOT
HELPING US. THE PATIENTS OUT IN
GENERAL, SO I DO NOT AGREE WITH
THIS ONE. THANK YOU. I DON'T
THINK DID SHE HAVE ONE MORE IN
QUÊ? THAT'S LINE 99. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. YOU NEED TO FOLLOW YOUR
OWN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE
HAVE NO FURTHER SUPPORT
OPPOSITION IN Q AT THIS TIME.
PERFECT THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE
WILL NOW BRING THE DISCUSSION
BACK TO OUR MEMBERS. DO ANY OF
OUR MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS? THANK YOU. WE HAVE
A MOTION BY SENATOR NEWMAN.
SENATOR ROTH. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? OH I'M SORRY, SENATOR.
PANIC I APOLOGIZE. I'M SORRY.
THANK YOU. MAN CHAIR. YES THAT'S
THE BRIE FAMILIES THAT I KNOW
THAT WE'VE BEEN LOOKING OVER THE
BOARD OF NURSING FOR A WHILE. WE
HAVE THIS ISSUE AROUND THE
GRADATION. I APPRECIATE THAT
BEING BROUGHT UP. UM AH. YOU
KNOW, I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO
RESOLVE THAT IN THIS BILL. SO
CERTAINLY GONNA BE SUPPORTING
IT. BUT YOU KNOW THERE. I THINK
WE NEED TO DO CONTINUE
MONITORING GIVEN AT LEAST
CERTAINLY, UM, WHEN I ATTENDED
THE HEARING AND DOING THE SUNSET
REVIEW THERE'S STILL A LOT OF
OUTSTANDING ISSUES THAT WHILE
THEY'RE MAKING PROGRESS, I THINK
WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO MONITOR.
SO WITH THAT, UM I CERTAINLY
WILL BE SUPPORTING THE BILL, BUT
HOPING THAT WE'LL HAVE TO KEEP
KEEP AN EYE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. SENATOR PAN SENATOR
RECORD. DID YOU HAVE YOUR HANDS
UP? OH OKAY FOR HIM. SO, UM.
SENATOR ROTH. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY
VOTE WILL CERTAINLY CONSIDER THE
COMMENTS OF THE BORDER
REGISTERED NURSING. OF THE
INTENT IS TO TRY TO STREAMLINE
THE PROCEDURE AND TRY TO
EXPEDITE THE PROCESSING OF
NURSES FROM SCHOOL TO LICENSURE.
AND PROGRAMS IN THE SAME
FASHION, AND SO HAPPY TO TRY TO
WORK WITH THE BOARD TO MAKE SURE
THAT THEIR PROCESSES ARE AS
EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE AS THEY
CAN POSSIBLY BE LOOK FORWARD TO
THE CONVERSATION. WE HAVE A
MOTION BY SENATOR NEWMAN AND THE
RECOMMENDATION BY THE CHAIR IS
DO YOU PASS? SO, UM SO THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS AS AMENDED
AND RE REFER TO THE COMMITTEE
AND PUBLIC SAFETY CONSULTANT.
MADAM CONSULTANT. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. A B 26 84 MOTION IS
DUE PASS AS AMENDED AND REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. ROTH MELINDA'S.
ARCHULETTA ARCHULETTA, AYE BATES
BECKER BECKER I DODD EGGMAN.
POTATO. JONES LEYVA. THEN.
NEWMAN PHOTOVOGUE PLAN AND I
PEOPLE. WE HAVE EIGHT VOTES
OPEN. YEAH, BELIEVE THE ROLE
OPEN FOR ABSENT MEMBERS WILL NOW
MOVE ON TO FILE ITEM NUMBER 18
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BERMAN ON
BEHALF OF ASSEMBLY IN BERMAN
WILL HAVE SENATOR RUCK CONTINUED
TO PRESENT BILLS WILL NOW
PROCEED WITH A B 26 85. THIS IS
ASSEMBLY BILL 26 85. IT'S A
SUNSET BILL FOR THE NATURAL
PADDICK MATH PATHETIC MEDICINE
COMMITTEE. IN ADDITION TO
EXTENDING THE COMMITTEE'S SUNSET
DATE, THE BILL MAKES MINOR AND
TECHNICAL CHANGES IN RESPONSE TO
ISSUES RAISED DURING SUNSET
REVIEW. RESPECTFULLY AS YOUR I
VOTED THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SENATOR
RALPH WILL NOW MOVE ON TO ANY
WITNESSES WISHING TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT REBECCA MITCHELL, WITH
THE NATURAL PATHETIC MEDICINE
COMMITTEE IS ON THE LINE IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. CAN
YOU GUYS HEAR ME? YES, MA'AM. WE
CAN PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU.
GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE AND WE'RE BACK TO
MITCHELL, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THE
NATURE CATHOLIC MEDICINE
COMMITTEE SINCE JULY 2013. I'M
HAPPY TO BE HERE TO REPRESENT
THE COMMITTEE TODAY AS BEING IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF 26 85.
NATUROPATHIC MEDICINE COMMITTEES
OF SMALLER PROGRAM UNDER THE
UMBRELLA OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSUMER AFFAIRS CURRENTLY
WITHIN THE OSTEOPATHIC MEDICAL
BOARD OF CALIFORNIA, ALTHOUGH
THE COMMITTEE IS AUTONOMOUS OF
THE NBC THE COMMITTEE
APPRECIATES THE PROPOSAL TO
REMOVE THE PROGRAM FROM THE NBC
AND PLACE US AS A BOARD DIRECTLY
UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER
AFFAIRS. WE AGREE THAT THIS IS A
MORE APPROPRIATE PLACEMENT OF
OUR PROGRAM, AND WE JUST ASK
THAT THERE IS AN AMENDMENT OF
THE NAME TO BE CHANGED TO THE
CALIFORNIA BOARD OF NATURE,
PATHETIC MEDICINE. UM SINCE THE
COMMITTEE'S LAST SUNSET REVIEW,
THE COMMITTEE CONTINUES TO HAVE
CONCERNS WITH UNLICENSED
ACTIVITY WITH VIOLATIONS OF THE
MISUSE OF THE ND TITLE AND
INDIVIDUALS PORTRAYING
THEMSELVES AS LICENSED NDS AND
PROVIDING DIAGNOSIS AND
TREATMENT WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF
A LICENSE. THE COMMITTEE HAS
PROVIDED SEVERAL CONSUMER
OUTREACH CAMPAIGN BUT THE
CONTINUED USE OF THE
INTERCHANGEABLE TERM NATURE PATH
NATURE, PATHETIC PRACTITIONER
AND NATURE. EMPATHIC DOCTOR
SEEMS TO BE CONFUSING TO THE
LAYPERSON. AND CONTINUES TO
UNDERMINE CONSUMER PROTECTION.
WE HAVE TO APPRECIATE THE
PROPOSED EDITION OF THE STAFF
MEMBER WITHIN A B 26 85 THAT
WILL ASSIST WITH EDUCATION AND
ENFORCEMENT OF THE UNLICENSED
ACTIVITY. I'M HERE TO PROVIDE
ANY TECHNICAL TESTIMONY IS
NEEDED AND URGE YOUR SUPPORT AND
I VOTE TODAY FOR 26 85. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. MISS MITCHELL
WILL NOW HEAR FROM ANY
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES HERE IN THE
HEARING ROOM. WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT OF 26 85 SEEN NONE WILL
NOW MOVE ON TO WITNESSES WAITING
TO TESTIFY. THE OTHER
TELECONFERENCE SERVICES
MODERATOR, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPTLY INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF A B 26 85.
WE WILL BEGIN THANK YOU FOR YOUR
SUPPORT OF A B 26 85 YOU MAY
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO. IF
YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF A B 26 85.
WE DO HAVE ONE IN Q ONE MOMENT
WHILE WE GET THEIR LINE NUMBER.
AGAIN THAT IS SUPPORT OF A B 26
85. AND WE WILL GO TO LINE 99.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. IT'S THE
NATURAL POWERS LIKE THIS. I
SUPPORT OKAY, WE WILL GO TO LINE
1 22. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI THIS
IS DR JENNIFER BAR WITH THE
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC DOCTORS
ASSOCIATION CALLING IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. AND WE HAVE NO
FURTHER SUPPORTING QUÊ. THANK
YOU, MADAM. MODERATOR. HAVING
HER FROM ALL OF OUR SUPPORTERS
WILL NOW FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS
AND HEAR FROM ANY OPPOSITION.
LET'S MOVE ON TO ANY WITNESSES
HERE IN HERE IN THE HEARING
ROOM. SEEN NONE WILL NOW MOVE ON
TO WITNESSES WILLING TO TESTIFY
VIA TELECONFERENCE SERVICES.
MODERATE IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPT INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION OF A B 26
85. WE WILL BEGIN. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR OPPOSITION OF A B 26 85 YOU
MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE OF THEM ZERO
FOR OPPOSITION. WE WILL GO TO
LINE 1 38. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
HELLO. DIDN'T YOU HEAR ME? YES,
YES, WE CAN GO AHEAD. OKAY? I'M
ASSUMING THAT YOU COULD HEAR
THAT LAST LADY YOU HUNG UP ON.
YOU GUYS NEED TO STOP HANGING UP
ON PEOPLE WHEN THEY'RE MAKING
COMMENT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO
SAY. RIGHT NOW. KNOCK IT OFF.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
EXPRESSING YOUR YOUR YOUR
OPINION, UM I HAVE HERE THAT I
HAVE. ROXANNE GOULD ON BEHALF OF
MICHAEL SALAS, PRESIDENT OF THE
CALIFORNIA NATUROPATHIC
ASSOCIATION, BOTH HERE TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION. ARE THEY
HERE? OR ON THE LINE. THANK YOU,
pMIND CHECKING THE LINES ONE MORE
TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE
HEARD FROM ALL WITNESSES WAITING
TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU FOR OPPOSITION OF A B 26 85
. WE WILL DO WE DO HAVE LINE 1
25 YOUR LINE IS A 1 36 YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. LINE 1 36 HAIRLINE.
YES. ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. LINE 1
36. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. YES,
PROPOSED AMENDED. THANK YOU. AND
NEXT, WE'LL GO TO LINE 1 25.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PEOPLE DON'T
UNDERSTAND YOUR PHONES, AND YOU
DON'T EVEN FOLLOW YOUR OWN
PROCESS. WE'RE TRYING TO FOLLOW
THE SAME PROCESS AND EVERY
SINGLE BILL, MA'AM, UM, BUT
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CALLING.
WE HAVE NOTED YOUR YOUR OPINION,
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM DO WE
HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION TO 26 85? 86 WE HAVE
NO FURTHER OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL
NOW BRING IT BACK TO OUR WOULD
LIKE TO THANK ALL OUR SUPPORT
AND OPPOSITION WITNESSES WILL
NOW BRING THE DISCUSSION BACK TO
OUR MEMBERS. DO ANY OF OUR
MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS? PERFECT SENATOR ROTH.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE MY VOTE
? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SENATOR
ROTH. DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON A B
26 85? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE
BILL HAS BEEN MOVED BY SENATOR
BECKER. THE MOTION IS DO PASS
AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. EVERY 26 85 MOTION IS DO
PASS, AND WE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
ROTH MELINDA'S ARCHULETTA BATES
BECKER BECKER, I DODD. I EGGMAN
TATO JONES. LABOR MEN, NEWMAN.
PHGUE. I BROKE I PAN. WELL
WE VOTES WE HAVE FOUR VOTES WILL
WIN WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. YOU WILL NOW TAKE IT BACK
TO SENATOR RALPH. GREAT JOB.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SENATOR JOE
BUG. WE'RE GOING TO STAND IN
RECESS UNTIL THE CONCLUSION OF
THE SENATE SESSION TODAY I WILL
ANNOUNCE FROM THE FLOOR. WHEN WE
WILL RESUME THE BUSINESS
PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE HEARING
TODAY, SO WE'RE IN RECESS. THANK
YOU.
THE SENATE BUSINESS PROFESSIONS
IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE IS NOW RECONVENED.
IT'S CALLED FILE ITEM NUMBER
FIVE ASSEMBLY BUILT 18 94. IT'S
MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SENATOR
PEN WILL BE PRESENTING FOR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S THREE OF US.
YOUR CHOICE.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS. UM
FIRST I WANT TO SAY THAT WILL BE
A ON BEHALF OF DECEMBER.
THREE OF US WILL BE ACCEPTING
THE AMENDMENTS TODAY AND SECOND.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE
CLARIFICATION ON THE RECORD THAT
CAL NORMAL IS NOT A CO SPONSOR
OF THE BILL. IS THERE LISTENING
TO THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS? I
ALSO WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE
STAFF ARE WORKING WITH, UH,
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S, UH, USED HIS
TEAM AND THE AMENDMENTS. SO WHAT
DOES THIS BILL DO WELL WITH THE
AMENDMENTS, A B 18 64 SEEKS TO
PROHIBIT THE MARKETING OF
CANNABIS VAPES IN ANY WAY THAT
IMPLIES THAT THEY CAN BE
DISPOSED OF IN THE TRASH OR
RECYCLING SYSTEMS. ADDITIONALLY
MARKETERS AND ADVERTISERS MISS
MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE CANNABIS
VAPES MUST BE DISPOSED OF AS
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE AT ST
PERMITTED WASTE FACILITIES.
VAPES ARE NOT CURRENTLY BEING
MARKETED AS BEING DISPOSABLE
WHEN IN FACT THEY'RE NOT. LEAVES
ARE COMPOSED OF SPECIALTY
ELECTRONIC AND HAZARDOUS WASTE,
MAKING THEM ILLEGAL TO BE
DISPOSED OF IN ORDINARY
HOUSEHOLD TRASH. THIS IS CREATED
A PROBLEM WHERE CONSUMERS AND
NOT PROPERLY DISPOSING OF THEIR
VAPES AT THE END OF LIFE ARE NOT
PROPERLY DISPOSED OF THE CREATE
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
AND SAFETY ISSUES, ACCORDING TO
THE FDA. VAPES CAN CATCH ON
FIRE, EXPLORE, EXPLODE AND
SERIOUSLY HURT PEOPLE. HAVE BEEN
A NUMBER OF INCIDENCES WHERE OF
EXPLOSION AND FIRE INVOLVING
ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE OR ITS
BATTERY, WHICH OCCURRED WHEN THE
DEVICE WAS EITHER IN A POPULAR
ACTIVELY IN USE. THE VAPE PENS.
MAIN SAFETY ISSUE LIES IN THE
LITHIUM ION BATTERY. IT CONTAINS
THE FUEL THE HEATING ELEMENT OR
ATOMIZER. LITHIUM ISLAND.
BATTERIES ARE QUITE POWERFUL AND
CAN SPARK THERMAL EVENTS OR
FIRES WHEN THEY ARE DAMAGED. THE
SHAPE AND CONSTRUCTION OF
ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES CAN MAKE
THEM BEHAVE LIKE FLAMING ROCKETS
WHEN THE BATTERY FAILS, THE
FREQUENT GASOLINE CRUSHING AND
SHREDDING IN WASTE AND RECYCLING
STREAMS CAN CAUSE BATTERIES
SMOKING COMBUSTION OF ADJACENT
MATERIALS IN THE COLLECTION
TRUCK. MATERIALS RECOVERY
FACILITY SCRAPYARDS OF TRANSFER
STATIONS. IN ORDER TO PREVENT
CONSUMERS OF DISPOSING OF THESE
VAPES IN THEIR HOUSEHOLD WASTE
SPENDS OR LITERALLY THEM IN THE
STREET, WHICH CAUSES ISSUES FOR
HAULERS. CONSUMERS NEED TO BE
EDUCATED THAT WEBSTER HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. THEREFORE A B 18 94
TAKING A FIRST STEP AND CHANGE
THE WAY THAT THESE PRODUCTS ARE
MARKETED AND ADVERTISED TO
CONSUMERS BY CHANGING THE
NARRATIVE THAT VAPES ARE THE
THAT THEY ARE DISPOSABLE. AND
TODAY I HAVE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT
OF THE BILL JORDAN WELLS FROM
THE NATIONAL STEWARDSHIP ACTION
COUNCIL, AND AMY JENKINS,
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
CANNABIS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION.
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A NIGHT
OUT. THANK YOU. DR CHAN,
JORDAN'S AMY. TAKE IT AWAY.
THREE MINUTES, PLEASE. TOTAL.
MISS JENKINS. GOOD TO SEE YOU.
MY APOLOGIES, MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS AMY JENKINS HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
CANNABIS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION. I
WANT TO BEGIN BY THINKING THE
AUTHORS IN THE SPONSORS FOR
PROACTIVELY WORKING WITH C C. I
A ON THIS ON THIS PARTICULAR
BILL, WHICH IS REALLY A
CONSENSUS BILL. TO PERMIT THE
MANUFACTURING USE OF CANNABIS
VAPING PRODUCTS WHILE AT THE
SAME TIME ADVANCING SENSIBLE
PROVISIONS AIMED AT PROMOTING
THE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
OF THOSE PRODUCTS. CIA HAS A
PROUD TRACKER RECORD OF
SUPPORTING POLICIES THAT
ENCOURAGE THE USE OF RECYCLABLE
AND BIODEGRADABLE MATERIALS,
REDUCING LANDFILL WASTE AND
PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE CANNABIS
USE. WHILE MOST CANNABIS VAPES
ARE MADE WITH RECYCLABLE
MATERIALS. THEY ALSO INCLUDE
LITHIUM ION BATTERIES AND
HEATING ELEMENTS, WHICH SHOULD
BE DISPOSED OF AS HAZARDOUS
WASTE. A B 18 94 WILL PROVIDE
CONSUMERS WITH THE INFORMATION
THEY NEED TO PROPERLY DISPOSE OF
THESE PRODUCTS SAFELY AND IN
ACCORDANCE WITH EXISTING LAW BY
REQUIRING THE PACKAGE. EXCUSE ME
THE LABEL TO INCLUDE APPROPRIATE
DISPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS. CANNABIS
VAPES ARE LOWER COST ALTERNATIVE
TO OTHER CANNABIS PRODUCTS,
MAKING THEM MORE AFFORDABLE FOR
NEW CUSTOMERS AND PATIENTS IN
EMERGING LEGAL CANNABIS MARKETS
. THERE ARE ALSO MORE CONVENIENT
, PARTICULARLY FOR CRITICALLY
ILL PATIENTS AND INSTITUTIONAL
SETTINGS. 18 94 STRIKES A
REASONABLE BALANCE BY
RECOGNIZING THE CRITICAL
IMPORTANCE OF THESE PRODUCTS
WHILE ENSURING THAT APPROPRIATE
REQUIREMENTS ARE IN PLACE TO
ENCOURAGE RESPONSIBLE DISPOSAL.
FOR THOSE REASONS. WE ASK FOR
YOUR I VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR JENKINS, JORDAN'S WELLS
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? ANY OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN THE HEARING
ROOM. MR CHAIR MEMBERS, RAND
MARTIN ON BEHALF OF THE PARENT
COMPANY. WE HAVE HAD AN OPPOSED
POSITION ON THIS BILL. BUT WITH
THE AMENDMENTS THAT THE AUTHOR
IS TAKING, WE WILL BE MOVING TO
A SUPPORT POSITION. WE THINK
THAT THE COMMITTEE STAFF AND THE
CHAIR AND THE AUTHOR FOR MAKING
THOSE CHANGES. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER SUPPORT
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM?
MOVED TO THE TELECONFERENCE
SERVICE MODERATOR, PLEASE PROMPT
ANY INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY
BILL 18 94. AND WE WILL BEGIN
WITH THEM. THANKSGIVING SPORT OF
A B 18 94. YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND
THEN ZERO FOR SUPPORT. WE WILL
GO TO LINE 1 77. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR. MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE, MARCO PRAYER ON
BEHALF OF REPUBLIC SERVICES IN
SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE. THANK
YOU. NEXT WILL GO TO LINE 1 62.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HELLO THIS IS
CALLING ON BEHALF OF K PLANS
AGAINST WASTE IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. WE HAVE NO SUPPORTING QUÊ
AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. LET'S
FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS AND HEAR
FROM ANY OPPOSITION FIRST
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM AND THE OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM.
SEEING NONE. LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
ONCE AGAIN, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPT ANY INDIVIDUALS WAITING
TO FIRE AN OPPOSITION TO
ASSEMBLY BUILT 18 94 WILL
CONTINUE WITH THEM. THANK YOU
FOR NOT POSITION OF A B 18 94
YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO
FOR AN OPPOSITION OF A B 18 94.
AND MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. NOW LET'S MOVE BACK
TO THE DIOCESE AND MY COLLEAGUES
HERE AND ASK IF THERE ARE ANY
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS
WITH THE BILL. THERE WE GO. OR
GIVE IT TO SENATOR ARCHULETTA
THIS TIME. UM. SENATOR ON BEHALF
OF ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S RIVAS. WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE RESPECTIVELY
ASKED FOR AND I VOTE. THANK YOU.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED. WE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. BABY 18 94
MOTION IS DUE PASS AS A MINUTE
AND RE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE
ON APPROPRIATIONS ROTH. BROTH I
MELINDA'S BELINDA'S AYE
ARCHULETTA TÔI BATES BATES, I
BECKER DODD. EGGMAN HER TO TOE.
JONES LEYVA, A. I'M IN NEWMAN.
PHGUE. I THINK THE TURBO GUY
PAN AND I. BILL HAS SEVEN VOTES
WILL HOLD THE ROLL OPEN FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS. AUTHORS. LET ME
JUST CHECK THIS. SO INDEED, 18
1920.
OKAY MEMBERS. WE'RE GOING TO
MOVE THE FILE ITEMS 19 AND THEN
20 WITH THE CHAIRMAN PRESENTING
THESE ARE COMMITTEE BILLS. UM,
MR CHAIRMAN, WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. FOLLOWED IN 19 ASSEMBLY
BILL 26 86. THIS IS THE SPEECH
LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY, ETCETERA.
SUNSET BILL. MOST NOTABLY, THE
BILL ALLOWS THE BOARD TO REQUIRE
APPLICANTS AND LICENSEES TO
PROVIDE AN EMAIL ADDRESS TO
RECEIVE COMMUNICATION FROM THE
BOARD AUTHORIZES THE BOARD TO
TAKE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST
LICENSES WHO ACCEPT KICKBACKS
FOR PATIENT REFERRALS. EXTENDS
THE SUNSET DATE FOR THE BOARD BY
FOUR YEARS AND MAKES ADDITIONAL
TECHNICAL CHANGES WITH THE
AUTHOR'S AMENDMENTS OUT AS
OUTLINED IN THE ANALYSIS. THIS
BILL WILL MAKE ADDITIONAL
TECHNICAL CHANGES IN POLICY
REFORMS IN RESPONSE TO ISSUES
RAISED DURING THE BOARD'S SUNSET
REVIEW OVERSIGHT PROCESS. I HAVE
A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE BOARD
THE BOARD CHAIR, JOINING US TOO
TOUGH BY TELEPHONE TO TESTIFY.
AND PAUL SANCHEZ AND CHERIE'S.
IF I PRONOUNCE THAT CORRECTLY,
BURNS, THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR
THE BOARD. WHO APPARENTLY ARE
HERE TO TESTIFY AS WELL AND
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
RESPECTFULLY AS FOR AND I VOTE
AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. OKAY
THANK YOU. SO MUCH. SO THE LEAD
SUPPORT RU PAUL. PAUL YOU HAVE
LET'S SEE IF I'M IN THE
COMMUNITY RULES ARE THE SAME
HERE, BUT TWO MINUTES, I
BELIEVE, THREE MINUTES. THREE
MINUTES. ALRIGHT, THREE MINUTES.
GO THANK YOU, PAUL SANCHEZ AND
SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY BILL 26 86
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD. WE
APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK OF THE
COMMITTEE AND STAFF ON THIS
BILL. ALL THE AMENDMENTS AND THE
CHANGES THAT WE'RE MAKING TO OUR
PRACTICE ACT. WE'LL LOOK FORWARD
TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE
COMMITTEE AND STAFF AND WERE
AVAILABLE HERE AND ONLINE IF YOU
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR US. THANK
YOU. WONDERFUL THANK YOU SO MUCH
, PAUL AND IS SHER IS ALSO GOING
TO BE TESTIFYING IN SUPPORT OR
NO. NO I DON'T SEE HER. IS SHE
ON THE PHONE LINE? PERHAPS NÓ.
OKAY SO THEN THAT CONCLUDES LEAD
SUPPORT. DO WE HAVE ADMITTING
THE ROOM WHO WE SHOULD? BOARD
CHAIR. I'M SORRY. THE BOARD
CHAIR. OKAY SO I'M SORRY. WHAT
IS THAT PERSON'S NAME? MARCIA
RATE. MARCIA RADIO. I BELIEVE SO
WITH THE MODERATOR, PLEASE.
BRING MARCIA ONTO THE LINE SO
SHE CAN PROVIDE TESTIMONY.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI THIS IS
MARSHALL RADIO BOARD CHAIR FOR
THE SPEECH LINES, PARTY AND
IDEOLOGY AND HEARING AID
DISPENSER SPORT. UM I AM HERE TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ADDRESSING
CONCERNS THAT THE COMMITTEE MAY
HAVE OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MARSHALS, JUST STAYING BY IN
CASE ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS.
WE WILL MOVE NOW TO ANYONE HERE
IN THE ROOM WHO WISHES TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT. PLEASE COME
FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE. IF
YOU ARE INTERESTED IN DOING SO.
NOPE NO ONE. OKAY. WE WILL MOVE
TO THE PHONE LINES, THEN
MODERATOR. IF YOU COULD PLEASE
QUÊ THOSE ON THE PHONE LINES
WISHING TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
NAME ORGANIZATION AND POSITION
ONLY PLEASE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. IF YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OF A
B 26 86, PLEASE PRESS ONE
FOLLOWED BY A ZERO WE WILL GO TO
LINE 1 94, YOU ARE OPEN. EXCUSE
ME. THAT'S 1 97 MY FAULT. 1 91
94 TOOK THEMSELVES OUT. WE'LL GO
BACK TO 1 94 94. HELLO THAT ME?
YES OH, RECESS. COMEBACK RECESS
. COME BACK. YOU DON'T MAKE THIS
EASY FOR THE PEOPLE DO YOU? BUT
THE PEOPLE STILL MATTER IN A
MODERATE YOUR NEXT CALLER,
PLEASE PROCESS. OKAY WE'LL MOVE
ON FROM THAT ONE. WE'LL GO TO
LINE 1 70, YOU ARE OPEN FOR
ANYBODY ELSE. GO AND HIT 10 IF
YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OF A B 26 86
THAT'S 26 86 LINE. 1 70, YOU ARE
OPEN. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS, ANDREA BALL FROM THE
CALIFORNIA SPEECH, LANGUAGE
HEARING ASSOCIATION AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. NEXT CALLER.
ONE GET ONE MORE. THANK YOU,
MADAM. HERE WILL GET ONE MORE
REMINDER. HERE SEE IF ANYBODY
ELSE KEEPS YOU UP WHEN FOLLOWED
BY ZERO FOR SUPPORT ON A B 26
86. HAVE NOBODY ELSE DID QUÊ UP.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. M
MODERATE, WILL NOW MOVE TO
OPPOSITION. I DON'T BELIEVE
THERE'S ANY LEAD OPPOSITION THAT
I'M UNLESS I'M INCORRECT ON
THAT. I MEAN, NO, OKAY. SO IF
THERE IS ANYONE HERE IN THE ROOM
WISHING TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION
TO THIS BILL, PLEASE COME
FORWARD. SEEING NO ONE. WE WILL
GO TO THE PHONE LINES. MR
MODERATOR, IF YOU COULD OPEN
THAT UP FOR THOSE IN OPPOSITION
TO THE BILL NAME, ORGANIZATION
AND POSITION ONLY PLEASE. THANK
YOU IF YOU ARE IN OPPOSITION TO
A B 26 86 GORDON AT 10, WE'LL
START WITH LINE 1 97, YOU ARE
OPEN. THIS PROCESS IS STRANGE.
WHY WOULDN'T YOU TAKE AN
OPPOSING WITNESS? YOU TAKE
WITNESSES? OKAY NOBODY
PREREGISTER MODERATOR. CAN WE GO
TO THE NEXT CALLER, PLEASE?
OKAY. THANK YOU. AND WE'LL GIVE
ANOTHER REMINDER. 10 IF YOU ARE
AN OPPOSITION TO A B 26 86 WINE,
200, PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES MY
NAME CHESTER JOHN AND I'M,
CHAIRMAN OF THE CHINESE CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE AND SUPPORT THE A. M
T. C HE'S DOING THE QUICK JOB
AND I REALLY SUPPORT THEM. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT CALLER,
PLEASE. NOBODY NOBODY ELSE HAS
CUTE EXCEPT FOR LINE. 1 97
AGAIN. I'M ASSUMING YOU WANT TO
SKIP THAT ONE. YES. OKAY THANK
YOU SO MUCH, MR MODERATE. OKAY
WE'LL BRING IT BACK UP HERE TO
DIETS FOR DISCUSSION MEMBERS,
ANYTHING MOVE. THE BILL HAS BEEN
MOVED BY SENATOR LEYVA. NO
FURTHER DISCUSSION. MR CHERRY,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? JUST
REQUEST AND I VOTE. THANKS. UM,
WITH THE SECRETARY. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. MAYBE 26 86 MOTIONS DO
PASS AS A MINUTE AND REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
ROTH MELINDA LINDA'S AYE,
ARCHULETTA TÔI BATES. IT'S I.
BECKER. DODD. EDMUND. POTATO
JONES LABOR. LABOR I'M IN MEN. I
NEWMAN PHð BOGUE. TURBO GUY PAN
AND I. THAT THAT BILL HAS EIGHT
VOTES. WE WILL LEAVE IT OPEN FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS, AND WE WILL NOW
MOVE ON TO FILE ITEM. 28 B 26 87
MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. THE LAST SUNSET
BILL FOR TODAY REFERS TO THE
CALIFORNIA MASSAGE THERAPY
COUNSELING EXTENDS THE SUNSET
DATE. FOR THE MASSAGE THERAPY
COUNCIL BY FOUR YEARS UNTIL
JANUARY. 1 2027 EXEMPT
APPLICANTS EXEMPTS APPLICANTS
FOR CERTIFICATION FROM A
REQUIREMENT TO TAKE AND PASS AND
NATIONAL EXAMINATION UNTIL
JANUARY. 1 2027 PROVIDES THE
MASSAGE THERAPY COUNCIL WITH
DISCRETION TO GIVE CREDIT FOR
COMPARABLE CASEWORK. AS
SPECIFIED. RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. MR
CHAIRMAN, WE WILL NOW MOVE TO.
WE WILL NOW MOVE TO LEAD SUPPORT
. I DON'T SEE ANY LISTED. SO IF
THERE'S SOMEONE HERE AND I SEE
WE DO HAVE SOMEONE FEELING TO
COME FORWARD AND TESTIFY AND
SUPPORTED THIS BILL, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. UH GENERAL ROTH, MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. C M. T. C IS A
CREATION OF THE LEGISLATURE AND
SPECIFICALLY A CREATION OF THIS
PARTICULAR COMMITTEE. IT WAS
SAID BEST BUY DOCTOR ELY ERMAN
WHEN HE SAID PRIOR TO SEE MTC
MASSAGE WAS A WILD WEST RIFE
WITH PROSTITUTION, SEX
TRAFFICKING AND ILL PREPARED
PRACTITIONERS. FROM DIPLOMA
SCHOOLS. THE SUPPORT OF C MTC IS
BROAD AND IT IS DEEP. IN
PREVIOUS HEARINGS. WE'VE HEARD
THE D A S LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
ESPECIALLY FROM THE MOST
VULNERABLE THOSE WITH THE ANTI
SEXUAL TRAFFICKING GROUPS THAT
STRONGLY SUPPORT THE M T. C. THE
FOUR YEAR EXTENSION BEING
PROVIDED TODAY WILL ALLOW THIS
INDUSTRY THAT HAS BEEN DECIMATED
BY BY THE PANDEMIC TO BE ABLE TO
RECOVER AND IT WILL ALLOW THE C
M T. C TO DEAL WITH THE TESTING
AND ALSO WITH DEALING WITH
FOREIGN SCHOOLS. OUR COMMITMENT
. MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE IS THAT WE WILL USE
THESE FOUR YEARS TO SPEAK WITH
ANYONE WHO HAS CONCERNS AND SEE
MTC AND TO CONTINUE TO
STRENGTHEN THE PROGRAM AND TO
PROTECT OUR MOST VULNERABLE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
NEXT WITNESS. MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS, MICHAEL NEWTON ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
PROFESSIONAL MASSAGE THERAPY
COALITION IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
THE BILL. THIS IS THE
COMBINATION OF A LOT OF HARD
WORK AND APPROPRIATELY RESOLVED
IN A NUMBER OF THE ISSUES AND
PROVIDES TIME FOR WORKING ON THE
OTHER ISSUES. AND WE'RE VERY
MUCH IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANYONE ELSE
WISHING TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT?
SEEING NO ONE. COME FORWARD.
LET'S TAKE IT TO THE PHONE LINE.
MR MODERATOR, WOULD YOU QUÊ
THOSE WISHING TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF A B 26 87 PLEASE NAME
ORGANIZATION AND POSITION ONLY
PLEASE. NEXT MUCH IF YOU AREN'T
SUPPORTIVE A B 26 87 GO AHEAD
AND HIT ONE FOLLOWED BY ZERO AT
THIS TIME. 1091 95, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. FIVE TARANTINO AND THE
DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC
DEVELOPMENT FOR THE SOUTH, FIX
pCOALITION AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING
AND ARE FOLLOWING MEMBER
AGENCIES SUPPORT CALIFORNIA
RESEARCH, MASSAGE THERAPY
COUNCIL AND THEIR GREAT WORK,
INCLUDING COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS.
TYREE JUSTICE CENTER AKI.
DAUGHTERS OF CHARITY S AND J M
STEP COALITION. AND WHAT DID WE
SAY? SILICON VALLEY GOLDEN GATE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
50. LINE 55 YOU ARE OPEN. 0.55.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO TESTIFY? ARE
YOU MUTED 55? ON THE LINE 206.
YOU'RE OPEN. 55, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. THEY TOOK THEMSELVES OUT
TO 06. PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES
STILL SIX. MANCHESTER CHONG AND
CHAIRMAN OF THE CHINESE CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE REALLY SUPPORTED
CMPC DOING THE GREAT JOB. I WANT
TO SUPPORT THEM. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. SEVENTIES. 91 78, YOU
ARE OPEN. BY 1 78. YES. MY NAME
IS JUDY TALBERT. I'M THE
PRESIDENT OF THE HOUSE COMES
TREATED ASSOCIATION. I SUPPORT
THIS BILL. TÂM DOING HIS GREAT
JOB. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO
MUCH NEXT CALLER. PLANE TO 10,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. MY NAME IS TONY
PSYCHOLOGIST. I AM A NTC
CERTIFICATE HOLDER AND A MEMBER
OF THE ANTI A, UH, SEE NTC.
SINCE IT DID. INCEPTION HAS
PERFORMED ADMIRABLY AND
PROTECTING THE PUBLIC AND THE
LEGISLATIVE ENVIRONMENT. THAT
CONSISTENTLY MISUNDERSTAND AND
MISREPRESENT ITS MANDATE. AND
ATTEMPTS THIS YEAR TO ARGUE FOR
LICENSURE HAVE GREATLY
UNDERESTIMATED THE WORK
NECESSARY TO CREATE A REGULATORY
REGIME THAT WOULD DO A BETTER
JOB THAN CMG. HE DOES NOW AT
THIS POINT IN THE TEST 2687 AS
WRITTEN THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
NEXT CALLER, PLEASE. PUT A LINE
1 90, MADAM CHAIR, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI MY NAME IS KIM PITIES.
I'M CALLING IN SUPPORT OF THE
BILL AS A CANADIAN TRAIND
MASSAGE THERAPISTS LOOKING
FORWARD TO JOINING THE SEA MTC.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
COLOR. 9 211, YOU ARE OPEN.
OTHER THIS IS ERIC WATCH. I'VE
BEEN IN THE SPA INDUSTRY FOR
OVER 15 YEARS. WE ARE ALSO THE
OWNERS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY
SCHOOL OF MASSAGE. AND WANT TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
FIND 189. PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS DR
STEPHANIE POWELL AND THE VICE
PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT TRAINING AND
SURVIVORS SERVICES AT THE
NATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL
EXPLOITATION. WE FIGHT ALL FORMS
OF SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND WE
SUPPORT A B T 687. THANK YOU SO
MUCH. BY 209. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
YES THIS IS DION GENOVESE,
FRANCHISE OWNER IN SAN DIEGO,
CALIFORNIA OF MASSAGE ENVY
CLINICS IN SUPPORT OF THE C M.
T. C. AND IN SUPPORT OF THIS,
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. 9 63, YOU ARE OPEN. GOOD
AFTERNOON. THIS IS STACEY TO
GLARE. I'M A MASSAGE THERAPIST
FROM PETALUMA AND I AM IN
SUPPORT OF A B 26 87. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. AND WE'LL GO
TO 1 58, PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI.
THIS IS JENNIFER MATTHIAS WITH
BURKE WILLIAMS AND I'M IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. PLAYING 207, YOU ARE
OPEN. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS
SANTA CLARA COUNTY ASSISTANT
DISTRICT ATTORNEY TERRY HARMON,
CALLING ON BEHALF OF DISTRICT
ATTORNEY JEFF FROZEN, WHO JOINS
THE CALIFORNIA DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT
OF A B 26 87. WE'D LOVE THE C M
. T C. C M. T. C HAS BEEN A
WORTHWHILE PARTNER IN THE FIGHT
AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MA'AM. AND
MOVING ALONG. 1 90 91 99, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. 1 99 YEAR OLD. ONE
MORE SHOT 1 99. WOULD YOU LIKE
TO TESTIFY? I WILL GO TO LINE
32. PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO MY
NAME IS CRUZ. KIM. I'M WITH
BURKE WILLIAMS AND I'M IN FAVOR
OF THIS BILL. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. LINE 1 98, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. AFTERNOON STEPHEN CARSON,
PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA, SO
JIMMY FRANCHISE ASSOCIATION ARE
MORE THAN 100 MEMBER. CLINIC.
STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS WITH THE
LARGEST EMPLOYER MASSAGE
THERAPISTS IN CALIFORNIA. AND WE
COMPLETELY APPRECIATE THE JOB TO
SEE MTC IN THE LEGISLATURE HAVE
DONE SUPPORTING OUR INDUSTRY
WITH THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
PASSAGE. THANK YOU. WE'LL GIVE A
FINAL REMINDER, MADAM CHAIR 10
INSURANCE ARE IN SUPPORT OF A B
26 87 55, PLEASE GO AHEAD. MY
35. YOU ARE OPEN. THE FIVE OR,
UM, UNITED. I WILL MOVE TO LINE
1 96, PLEASE GO AHEAD. AM I ON?
HELLO. HELLO. HERE. YOU. YES CAN
YOU HEAR? CAN YOU HEAR ME? I CAN
HEAR YOU LOUD AND CLEAR. OKAY
THIS IS KEITH CALLED I'M, AN
ADVISOR TO THE NORTH TIE AND SPA
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA. WE HAVE
600 MEMBERSHIP STRONG AND WE ARE
STRONGLY SUPPORT. THE A B 26 87
AS AMENDED CM 80 C HAS BEEN
DOING A GREAT JOB WITH OUR
MISSION AND WORKING CLOSELY WITH
UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF UH, MOST
NATALIE. I WOULD SUPPORT
STRONGLY. THANK YOU. WONDERFUL.
THANK YOU, SIR. AND MADAM CHAIR.
WE HAVE EXHAUSTED THE KEEL. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR MODERATOR,
MODERATOR. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON
TO OPPOSITION TO A B 26 87 LEAD
OPPOSITION THAT IS REGISTERED IS
TISH RYLANDER FROM THE
ASSOCIATED BODY WORK AND MASSAGE
PROFESSIONALS. UM WHO IS ON THE
PHONE? I BELIEVE OR KNOW IN
PERSON ON THE PHONE. ON THE
PHONE ON THE PHONE. OKAY. MS
RYLANDER, PLEASE GO AHEAD. YOU
HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU
GOOD AFTERNOON SHARE OFF AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS FISH, WILANDER AND
SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF
ASSOCIATED BODY WORK AND MASSAGE
PROFESSIONALS AND NATIONAL
MEMBERSHIP ASSOCIATION. WITH
OVER 80,000 MEMBERS, INCLUDING
OVER 9200 MEMBERS IN CALIFORNIA.
FIRST I'D LIKE TO THANK
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BERMAN AND THE
COMMITTEE STOPS IN BOTH HOUSES
FOR THEIR CONTINUED WORK ON A B
26 87. UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED. WE HAVE
REQUESTED A LIMIT OF ONLY ONE
YEAR TO THE SUNSET EXTENSION OF
THE CURRENT CALIFORNIA MASSAGE
THERAPY ACT. AND URGED THE
LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER A NEW
STATUTORY LICENSING SCHEME IN
CALIFORNIA DURING THE 23 24
LEGISLATIVE SESSION. A B 26 87
WAS INITIALLY BEFORE TO EXTEND C
M C A. M P C FOR FOUR YEARS. IT
WAS RECENTLY AMENDED AFTER
PASSING OUT THE ASSEMBLY TO
CONTINUE TO SUSPEND THE M. BLIX
THROUGH JANUARY. 2027 WE ARE
RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING THE
REMOVAL OF THIS CONTINUED
SUSPENSION. THE AMBULANCE IS A
NATIONAL PSYCHOMETRIC
EXAMINATION THAT IS USED IN 43
STATES THAT REQUIRE THE
EXAMINATION FOR LICENSES. TO
LICENSE STATES HAD THEIR OWN
EXAMINATIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED
FOR LICENSES. ONE OTHER STATE
THAT HAS VOLUNTARY CERTIFICATION
AND IS MOVING TO LICENSURE IN
2022 HAS REQUIRED THE END FLEX
FOR YEARS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT
CALIFORNIA TENDS TO FORGE ITS
OWN PATH STANDARDS IN THIS IN
THE MASSAGE PROFESSION ARE
NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION
. THE EMULEX PROVIDES AN
OBJECTIVE NEUTRAL MEMBERSHIP
MEASUREMENT OF READINESS TO
PRACTICE SAFELY AND
KNOWLEDGEABLY. ALLOWING
INADEQUATELY TRAINED INDIVIDUALS
TO PRACTICE MASSAGE WHILE
HOLDING A VOLUNTARY PRUDENTIAL
IS DECEPTIVE AND POTENTIALLY
DANGEROUS FOR THE PUBLIC. FOR
THE REASONS STATED WE WERE
SPITEFULLY ASKED THAT HE BE 26
87 THE AMENDED TO REQUIRE THIS
NATIONALS PSYCHOMETRIC
EXAMINATION BY REMOVING THE
LANGUAGE FOR THE CONTINUED
SUSPENSION OF THE M BLACK. AND
LIMIT THE SENSE THAT EXTENSION
TO ONLY ONE YEAR. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR ISLANDER. UM THAT
IS THE ONLY REGISTERED
OPPOSITION SO NOW WE WILL MOVE
TO OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM. IF
YOU STEP FORWARD TO THE
MICROPHONE AND YOUR NAME
ORGANIZATION IN YOUR POSITION
ONLY PLEASE. YES MA'AM. PLEASE
GO AHEAD. MY NAME IS LAUREN
MCLAUGHLIN. I'M A SOLE
PROPRIETOR, MASSAGE THERAPIST.
CERTIFIED BY THE CALIFORNIA
MASSAGE THERAPY COUNCIL. I AM
OPPOSED. I'M IN FAVOR OF A
LICENSE AND I AGREE WITH A BMP
OF WHICH I'M A MEMBER. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MA'AM. IS THERE
ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM WISHING
TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS
BILL? NO OKAY, WE WILL MOVE TO
THE PHONE LINES AND MR MODERATOR
IF HE WOULD QUÊ THOSE WHO WISH
TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION NAME
ORGANIZATION AND POSITION ONLY
PLEASE.
MR MODERATOR, ARE YOU THERE?
THANK YOU, MADAM CHARITY MUTE.
MYSELF IF YOU ARE IN OPPOSITION
TO A B 26 87, PLEASE PRESS ONE,
FOLLOWED BY ZERO AT THIS TIME,
FOLLOWED BY ZERO. AND WE HAVE NO
PARTICIPANTS QUEUING UP AT THIS.
EXCUSE ME. WE DO HAVE A COUPLE
JUST NOW. OKAY? ANYBODY ELSE GO
AND HIT 10. WITH IT ANY SECOND.
AND WE'LL GO TO LINE 1 79,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI THIS IS
JESSICA CAUSTON AND THE
THERAPIST IN CALIFORNIA AND THEN
I'M IN FAVOR OF LICENSURE AND
STANDARDS. AND I'M GONNA PROPOSE
UNLESS COMMENDED POSITION. THANK
YOU, MA'AM. AND NEXT WILL BE
LINE 202, PLEASE GO AHEAD. YOU
ARE OPEN TO 02. ARE YOU MUTED?
MOVE ALONG. CAN YOU HEAR ME? NO,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. PERFECT MY NAME
IS MONICA WIECKOWSKI. I'M A
MASSAGE THERAPIST 20 AND
EDUCATOR OF 27 YEARS IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I AM CM TCO
CERTIFIED. I AM IN FAVOR OF
LICENSURE AND STANDARDS, AND MY
POSITION IS OPPOSED UNLESS
AMENDED. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
PLANE. 201, PLEASE GO AHEAD. 201
YOU ARE OPEN. COMMUTED. TO ONE
HELLO? MY NAME. HELLO. YOU
THERE? GO AHEAD. HELLO? YES, GO
AHEAD. CAN YOU HEAR ME? MY NAME
IS ELISSA LOZANO. I'M A MASSAGE
THERAPIST AND EDUCATOR IN
CALIFORNIA. I'VE BEEN A STAY MTC
MEMBERS SINCE ITS INCEPTION. UM
I AM IN FAVOR OF LICENSURE AND
STANDARDS AND I AM AN OPPOSITION
UNLESS THEM IN THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MA'AM. FIND 101, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI MY NAME IS CHRISTINE.
DO I AM A STRUCTURAL INTEGRATOR
HERE IN STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND
I AM A CERTIFIED UNDER THE M T.
C. I AM ALSO IN FAVOR OF
LICENSURE AND STANDARD AND AN
OPPOSITION UNLESS AMENDED. THANK
YOU, MA'AM. THE FINAL REMINDER,
10 IF YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION TO 26
87 LINE, 55, YOU ARE OPEN. MY
NAME IS BEN JOHNNY FROM THE
DIRECTOR OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
ASSOCIATIONS WITH 30 SCHOOLS AND
45 CAMPUSES. WE ARE ASKING TO
REMOVE THE M BLACKS PERMANENTLY
AND ANY OTHER EXAMPLES. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. AND THERE'S
NO OTHER PARTICIPANTS QUEUED UP
AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR MODERATOR WILL BRING IT
BACK UP HERE TO THE DÍAS FOR
DISCUSSION MEMBERS, ANYTHING IT
HAS BEEN MOVED BY SENATOR
ARCHULETTA AND SENATOR C BUG
HAS A COMMENT. I JUST HAVE A
QUESTION. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT
OF CONCERNS. I WAS JUST AND I
KNOW YOU'RE PRESENTING THE BILL,
SENATOR JUST GOING TO CURIOUSIF
YOU HAD ANY UM, COMMENTS OR
FEEDBACK THAT YOU'D LIKE TO
SHARE THAT YOU MAY BE AWARE OF
THAT MIGHT BE ADDRESSING THE
CONCERNS THAT THE OPPOSITION
WITNESSES HAPPENED. WELL, I'M
NOT SURE WHICH CONCERNS IF
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE
NATIONAL EXAM. IS THAT WHAT
YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT? I'M GOING
TO ASSUME THAT THAT'S THE CASE.
I'LL TRY TO HIT THEM ALL. I
REMEMBER THEM. FOUNDATION WITH
THE NATIONAL EXAM HAS CALIFORNIA
SCHOOLS IN THE PAST WERE NOT
APPROVED. IN THE TRADITIONAL WAY
. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE
NATIONAL EXAM IS IN ORDER TO
TAKE IT. YOU HAVE TO BE A
GRADUATE. OR HAVING MOVED
THROUGH AN A PREDATOR ON
APPROVED SCHOOL, SO WE HAVE THIS
ISSUE OF PEOPLE WHO ARE
PRACTICING MASSAGE THERAPY AND
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. YOU
HAVE NOT. DID NOT GRADUATE
GRADUATED FROM A SCHOOL, BUT WE
WERE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF
APPROVING SCHOOLS WHEN THEY
GRADUATED, AND SO WHAT NEEDS TO
HAPPEN WITH CALIFORNIA MASSAGE
THERAPY COUNCIL IS THEY'RE GOING
TO HAVE TO WORK THIS ISSUE AND
FIGURE OUT HOW TO DEAL WITH
THAT. IN ORDER TO UM TO DEAL
WITH THE ISSUE THAT THE PEOPLE
THAT RUN THE NATIONAL EXAM
REQUIRED AN APPROVED SCHOOL
GRADUATION. THAT'S THAT ISSUE.
AS THE LICENSOR. WE HAVE BEEN
STUDYING THIS AND TALKING TO
PEOPLE ABOUT THIS. FOR A LONG
TIME PRIOR TO MY TIME AS THE
CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE ONE OF
THE ISSUES IS THEY WANT THIS
BODY. AND THE LEGISLATURE TO
CREATE A NEW BOARD. STEP BY
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES.
AND ALL THE COSTS THAT THAT
ENTAILS. TO LICENSE THESE
MASSAGE THERAPISTS AND REGULATE
THEM AND ENFORCE THE INDUSTRY
WHEN RIGHT NOW THE CALIFORNIA
MASSAGE THERAPY COUNCIL IN THE
EYES OF THE PEOPLE THAT WORK
WITH IT MOST DIRECTLY THE
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OF THE STATE
, THE LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY.
IT'S WORKING JUST FINE. THE
PROBLEM, THE PRO FORMANCE HAVING
TO DO WITH THE LICENSE FEES THAT
THE MASSAGE THERAPIST WOULD HAVE
TO PAY. AS I RECALL. WERE
DESIGNED BASED ON THE WAGE AND
BENEFIT SCHEDULE IN NORTH
CAROLINA OR SOUTH CAROLINA OR
SOME STATE ON THE EAST COAST,
WHICH REALLY BEARS NO REASONABLE
RELATIONSHIP. TO THE STATE
GOVERNMENT WAGE AND BENEFIT
SCHEDULES IN CALIFORNIA, AND SO
AS A AS AN AS AN ADDITIONAL
FACTOR. I WAS CONCERNED WE WERE
CONCERNED ABOUT THE LEVEL OF
LICENSE FEES THAT SUCH A BOARD
WOULD HAVE TO PASS ON TO THE
LICENSES IN ORDER TO FUNCTION
AND AS YOU KNOW, FROM SITTING ON
THIS COMMITTEE, AND I KNOW MY
COLLEAGUES DO ONE OF THE
PROBLEMS WITH THE WAY WE'VE
STRUCTURED THIS OCCUPATIONAL
LICENSE SCHEME SCHEME IN
CALIFORNIA. IS WE HAVE PEOPLE
WHO ARE WORKING IN COMMUNITIES.
WE SUDDENLY DECIDE THAT THEY
NEED TO BE LICENSED FOR ONE
REASON OR ANOTHER OR NO REASON.
WE THEN REQUIRE THEM TO BE
LICENSED. WE ESTABLISH A BOARD
STRUCTURE THAT'S EXTRAORDINARILY
EXPENSIVE. BECAUSE THE LICENSES
HAVE TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING. THE
LICENSE, THE APPLICATION, THE
ENFORCEMENT AND ALL THE REST AND
FUN 100% OR NEARLY 100% OF THE
D. C. A. PERMANENT CONSUMER
AFFAIRS BUDGET. WHICH IS A
BURDEN THAT I'M NOT SURE MASSAGE
THERAPISTS REALLY KNOW ENOUGH
ABOUT AND WANT TO PAY, SO I'M I
HOPE THAT ADDRESSES SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED. IT'S
NOT TO SAY IT WON'T HAPPEN. IT'S
JUST SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO
CONTINUE TO NEED CONTINUED
DISCUSSION. AND, OF COURSE, THE
NATIONAL EXAM ISSUE NEEDS TO BE
ADDRESSED AT SOME POINT. OKAY
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS
? THE BILL HAS BEEN MOVED BY
SENATOR ARCHULETTA IF THERE ARE
NOT LET'S CALL THE ROLL ON
VIOLATING 28 26 87. MAYBE 26 87
MOTIONS DO PASS TO THE SENATE
FLOOR. ROTH MELINDA'S MELINDA'S
AYE ARCHULETTA DEBATES, BECKER.
DIED. THOUGHT I EGGMAN EGGMAN. I
HURTADO. JONES. JONES. I LEVER
FLAVOR. I'M IN NEWMAN. PHð VúI.
I LOVE I PAN AND I THANK YOU
COLLEAGUES. 11 OKAY, THAT BILL
HAS 11 VOTES. WE WILL HOLD IT
OPEN FOR ABSENT MEMBERS, AND OUR
CHAIRMAN IS MAKING HIS WAY. BACK
TO HIS SEAT, AND I THINK WE HAVE
SIMILAR WOMAN PETRIE-NORRIS HERE
FOR FILE ITEM SIX.
ASSEMBLY BILL 2019 REMEMBER,
PLEASE PROCEED. WHEN READY. GOOD
AFTERNOON. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. I AM HERE TO
PRESENT A B 2019, WHICH WOULD
CODIFY CALIFORNIA'S 25% SMALL
BUSINESS PROCUREMENT CALL IN
2006, THEN GOVERNOR ARNOLD
SCHWARZENEGGER SIGNED AN
EXECUTIVE ORDER DIRECTING ALL
STATE AGENCIES, DEPARTMENTS
BOARDS. AND COMMISSIONS TO
ACHIEVE A 25% GOAL FOR SMALL
BUSINESS PARTICIPATION IN STATE
PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTS. THIS
BILL WILL CODIFY THIS AS WELL AS
ESTABLISHED ACCOUNTABILITY
MEASURES TO ENSURE THAT ALL
DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES ARE
ACTUALLY ACHIEVING THIS SQUALL.
THE BILL WILL ALSO IMPLEMENT AN
ECONOMIC EQUITY FIRST PROVISIONS
TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION OF
DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS
ENTERPRISES AS PART OF THAT 25%
GOAL. I KNOW SO MANY OF YOU LIKE
ME TO RECOGNIZE THAT SMALL
BUSINESSES ARE THE HEART AND
SOUL OF CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMY.
AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS MEASURE
IS A REALLY IMPORTANT WAY FOR US
TO PUT OUR MONEY WHERE OUR MOUTH
IS AND USE THE POWER OF THE
STATE'S PROCUREMENT AND
CONTRACTING DOLLARS TO SUPPORT
AND UPLIFT SMALL BUSINESSES.
WITH THAT, I AM PLEASED TO
INTRODUCE OUR WITNESS TODAY.
DAVID NELSON, WHO IS JOINING US
FROM THE COLLISION CHAMBER. MR
NELSON, PLEASE PROCEED. THREE
MINUTES TOTAL. I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE. GOOD
AFTERNOON. DAVID NELSON,
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC POLICY FOR
THE CALIBRATION CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE, SO PROUD TO CO SPONSOR
THIS BILL WITH ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
PETRIE-NORRIS. ALONG WITH THE
CALIFORNIA HISPANIC CHAMBER IN
THE CALIFORNIA AFRICAN AMERICAN
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. WHAT WE'VE
ALL WITNESSED TODAY IS THE DAY
IN THE LIFE OF THE BUSINESS
OWNER STARTED OFF WHEN THERE
WITH AN AGENDA AND EVERYTHING
WENT DIFFERENT WAYS. BUT THEY
BUT WE STILL GET THE WORK DONE.
AND TODAY WE NEED THAT WORK TO
PUSH THIS BILL FORWARD ARE SMALL
BUSINESSES NEED THESE CONTRACTS
WERE VERY CLOSE TO MEETING THOSE
GOALS. BUT THIS HAS BEEN AROUND
AS A GOOD POLICY IN CONCEPT
SINCE 2000 AND SIX AND SO WITH
THAT I APPRECIATE THE CO
AUTHORSHIP OF SENATOR MEN AS
WELL AS SENATOR ARCHULETTA ON
THIS BILL AND SEEING THE WISDOM
OF WHAT WE CAN DO, WORKING
TOGETHER AS A SPORT, SMALL AND
MINORITY ON BUSINESSES, AND WITH
THAT, RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
VOTE. THANK YOU, MR NELSON. NOW
LET'S TURN TO OUR HEARING ROOM
AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER%
INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE. I
SEE MOVEMENT. MHM. RUN DUPONT'S
PRIVATE VOTING CITIZEN AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU ANY OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN THE HEARING
ROOM. LET'S TURN TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT ANY
INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT. ASSEMBLY BILL 2019,
WE WILL BEGIN WITH THEM. CHAIR
IF YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OF A B
2019 PLEASE PRESS ONE, POWERED
BY ZERO. TOLD MAJOR AT THIS TIME
WE'LL GO TO LINE 1 84, YOU ARE
OPEN. THANK YOU. VERONICA
VILLALOBOS ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA FORWARD ACTION FUND
IN SUPPORT THANK YOU. NEXT,
PLEASE TO 20. 9 TO 20. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS ALEX
TORRES WITH THE BARRY CAMPBELL
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU NEXT. 9 TO
17, YOU ARE OPEN. YOU LEFT THE
GOVERNOR KILL ALL THE SMALL
BUSINESSES BY CLOSING THEM.
NEXT, PLEASE. SMOKE AND MIRRORS
. THIS IS ALL SMOKE AND MIRRORS
A BUNCH OF NONSENSE MODERATOR
15. YES, MINE TOO. 15, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HELLO KHALIFA ESTÁ GUY,
MR. CHAIR MEMBERS, KHALIFA'S THE
GUY IN THE CALIFORNIA AFRICAN
AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CO
SPONSORS AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU
NEXT, PLEASE. PLANE. 205 YOU ARE
OPEN. MR CHAIRMAN. GOOD
AFTERNOON MANAGED YEARS.
REPRESENTATIVE CALIFORNIA
HISPANIC CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
ALSO CO SPONSORED THE BILL VERY
MUCH IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. 9 TO 22. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. YES GOOD AFTERNOON. MR
CHAIRMAN OF MY NAME IS JOHN TECH
ON THE CALIFORNIA STATE DIRECTOR
OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
INDEPENDENT BUSINESS REPRESENT
ABOUT 14,000 SMALL BUSINESSES IN
CALIFORNIA AND WE ARE HAPPY TO
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
NEXT, PLEASE. AS A FINAL
REMINDER, 10. IF YOU'RE IN
SUPPORT OF A B 2019, PLEASE GO
AHEAD LANE TO 19. YOU ARE OPEN.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR MEMBERS
SILVER MULAN, REPRESENTING THE
COALITION OF SMALL AND DISABLED
, VETERAN BUSINESSES. STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT,
PLEASE. MR CHAIR. THERE'S NO
OTHER PARTICIPANTS QUEUED UP.
OKAY LET'S NOT FOLLOW THE SAME
PROCESS AND HEAR FROM ANY
OPPOSITION WITNESSES. FIRST
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION TO THIS MEASURE.
SOMEBODY BUILT 2019. SEEING
NONE. LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE. BATTERY
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT ANY
INDIVIDUALS. WEDDING TESTIFYING.
OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY BUILD
2019. WE WILL BEGIN WITH THEM.
THANK YOU IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO
EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO A B 2019
101 53, YOU ARE OPEN. TOOK THEM
OUTSIDE OF QUÊ. ANYBODY ELSE GO
AND HIT 10 IF YOU ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 2019 53 IS
BACK. PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES I'M
SORRY. I AM IN SUPPORT. MY
NUMBER WAS 1 53. THIS IS LAURIE
CAMERA WITH THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN, BUSINESS
OWNERS, OWNERS, CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER AND SMALL BUSINESS,
CALIFORNIA. IN VERY, VERY STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE. I HAVE ONE
MORE REMINDER. 10 IF YOU'RE IN
OPPOSITION TO 2019. AND NOBODY
IS QUEUING UP. MR. CHAIR THANK
YOU, MR MODERATOR. NOW, LET'S
BRING THE MATTER BACK TO MY
COLLEAGUES ON THE DIOCESE
COLLEAGUES QUESTIONS, COMMENTS
OR CONCERNS. BEEN MOVED BY
SENATOR LEYVA. PLEASE. WELL, UH,
THIS IS A LONG DAY. FOR NOW, AND
SO I'M PROUD TO BE A PRINCIPAL
CO AUTHOR OF THIS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, SENATOR MAN. SEEING
NO OTHER HANDS UP. SOME REMEMBER
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK
YOU, SENATOR. MEN FOR CO
AUTHORING THIS MEASURE AND
SENATOR ARCHULETTA AS WELL.
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN I VOTE.
THANK YOU. THE BILL HAS BEEN
MOVED BY SENATOR LABOR. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS RE REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAYBE 2019 MOTION IS DUE
PASS AS A AND WE REFER TO THE
COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS.
EXCUSE ME. ROTH HIâU. MELINDA'S
MELINDA'S AYE, ARCHULETTA.
ARCHILA TÔI BATES. BECKER. DODD.
THOUGHT I ADMIN. EDMUND. I
HURTADO. JONES. LEVER. LABOR I'M
IN AND I NEWMAN MATOBO. PAN.
COOL HAS EIGHT VOTES WILL HOLD
THE ROLL OPEN FOR ABSENT
MEMBERS. AND REMEMBER, YOU HAVE
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ASSEMBLY BUILD
2314. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. GOOD
AFTERNOON AGAIN. I AM HERE TO
PRESENT A B 23-14. THIS BILL
WOULD CREATE A WORKING GROUP TO
EVALUATE THE TREASURER'S CAL CAP
AND I BANKS SMALL BUSINESS LOAN
GUARANTEE PROGRAM. THE TIMING OF
THIS IS REALLY CRITICAL.
CALIFORNIA IS POISED TO RECEIVE
SOME $1.6 BILLION IN S S B C. I
O FUNDING FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, CAL CAP OR THE
CALIFORNIA CAPITAL ACCESS
PROGRAM FOR SMALL BUSINESS AND
THE SMALL BUSINESS LOAN
GUARANTEE PROGRAM ARE LOAN LOSS
RESERVE PROGRAMS. THESE PROGRAMS
PROVIDE COVERAGE IN THE CASE OF
DEFAULT IN ORDER TO INCENTIVIZE
SMALL BUSINESSES. LINDA LENDING
TO SMALL BUSINESSES WHO CANNOT
OTHERWISE RECEIVE CAPITAL FROM
TRADITIONAL AVENUES.
HISTORICALLY THESE PROGRAMS HAVE
HAD STRICT DEADLINES TO DISPERSE
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. FROM THE
STATE SMALL BUSINESS CREDIT
INITIATIVE, BUT AT THE SAME
TIME, WE ARE BEGINNING TO SEE A
NEW ONLINE LENDING LANDSCAPE AND
SOME INNOVATIVE AND A NEW
PRACTICES APPEARING AND I
BELIEVE IT'S REALLY CRITICAL TO
ENSURE THAT THESE NEW LENDERS
ALSO ARE DEPLOYING PRACTICES
THAT ARE FAIR AND TRANSPARENT,
PARTICULARLY WHEN PUBLIC DOLLARS
ARE BEING UTILIZED. SO THIS BILL
WOULD CREATE A WORKING GROUP TO
EXAMINE THE STATUTES,
REGULATIONS, DIRECTIVES AND
REQUIREMENTS OF THESE PROGRAMS
IN ORDER TO DETERMINE IF THEY
ACHIEVE THE RIGHT BALANCE TO
ENSURE THAT LENDERS MAXIMIZE
THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE
, MAXIMIZE THE NUMBER OF
BUSINESSES THAT THEY CAN SUPPORT
A THE SAME TIME, ENSURING THAT
THEY ARE NOT ENGAGED IN ANY
PREDATORY PRACTICES. AS I SAID,
THE TIMING OF THIS IS CRITICAL
WITH $1.6 BILLION OF FEDERAL
FUNDING COMING TO THE STATE
SHORTLY. SO WITH THAT I DO NOT
HAVE A PRIMARY WITNESS WITH US
TODAY, SO JUST RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN I VOTE. THANK YOU. WE'LL
WE'LL CHECK TO SEE IF THERE ARE
ANY OUT THERE. LET'S TALK DURING
TWO WITNESSES AND SUPPORT IN THE
HEARING ROOM. ANY WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT? OF THIS MEASURE A B
2314 IN THE HEARING ROOM. SEEING
NONE. LET'S TURN TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE
MODERATOR, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPT ANY SUCH INDIVIDUALS
WAITING TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF
ASSEMBLY BILL 23-14, WE WILL
BEGIN WITH THEM. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. IF YOU AREN'T SUPPORTIVE
, 23-14, PLEASE TAKE THIS
OPPORTUNITY AND PRESS 1000 BY 01
53 YOU ARE OPEN. 11 53. YOU TOOK
YOURSELF OUT OF QUÊ. IF YOU ARE
IN SUPPORT OF ABBY 23-14 GOING
AT 10 AGAIN. NOBODY ELSE IS
QUEUING UP, MR. CHAIR THANK YOU.
LET'S FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS
AND HEAR FROM ANY WITNESSES AND
OPPOSITION FIRST OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM.
SAYING NO ONE STEPPING FORWARD,
LET'S NOW TURN TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
ONCE AGAIN IF YOU PROMPT ANY
WITNESSES WISHING TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION T ASSEMBLY BILL
23-14, WE WILL CONTINUE WITH
THEM.
BUYING 1 53. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
ANYBODY ELSE THAT SAID
OPPOSITION, PLEASE PRESS ONE
FOLLOWED BY ZERO. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. 1 53. AND. TAKING
THEMSELVES RIDICULE. ANYBODY
ELSE HIT 10? IF YOU ARE AN
OPPOSITION TO A B 23-14 NOBODY
ELSE IS QUEUING UP. THANK YOU,
MR MODERATOR. WE'RE GOING TO
BRING THE CONVERSATION BACK TO
MY COLLEAGUES ON THE DIETS FOR
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. OR CONCERNS
, BUT BEFORE I DO THAT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S I MAY HAVE
MISSED THIS, BUT I ASSUME YOU'RE
ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENTS. YES
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND THANK
YOU TO YOUR COMMITTEE FOR YOUR
WORK ON THIS ON THIS, WITH THE
BILL MOVED BY SENATOR EGGMAN.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR
CONCERNS? I SEE NONE. WHEN WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? I WILL JUST
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
OKAY SENATOR EDMUND MOVED THE
BILL. THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS
AMENDED AND RE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. 23-14 MOTION IS
DUE PASS AS AMENDED AND REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, RIGHT.
I. MELINDA'S. ARCHULETTA TÔI
BATES. BECKER. DIED. THOUGHT I
EGGMAN SEGMENT. I HURTADO.
JONES. JONES. I LEAVE TO FAVOR.
I'M IN. NEWMAN. JOB. OH, V
PAN. AYE. BILL HAS EIGHT VOTES
WILL HOLD THE ROAD OPEN FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS. THANK YOU,
MA'AM. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. AND
REMEMBER, MAN SHOT MAIENSCHEIN
ITEM NUMBER 11, 12 AND ITEM 13.
FIRST IS ITEM NUMBER 11 ASSEMBLY
BILL 21 96. THANK YOU SO MUCH,
MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. A B 21 96
IS CODE CLEANUP REQUESTED BY THE
BOARD OF BARBERING AND
COSMETOLOGY ON THE PHONE TO
TESTIFY AND SUPPORT AS CHRISTIE
UNDERWOOD, EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
THE CALIFORNIA BOARD OF
BARBERING AND COSMETOLOGY. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU, SIR. MISS UNDERWOOD,
THREE MINUTES. GOOD AFTERNOON
MEMBERS, CHRISTIE UNDERWOOD WITH
THE CALIFORNIA BORDER BARBERING
AND COSMETOLOGY AND BILL IS JUST
A CLEANUP. PERSON OF SDA DOES
THREE. WE WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE AS WELL AS THE AUTHOR
FOR HELPING US WITH THIS STILL,
AS FOR YOUR I DON'T THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. NOW, LET'S HEAR FROM
ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT IN THE HEARING ROOM.
NAME AFFILIATION POSITION ON THE
MEASURE, PLEASE ALLISON REMY, ON
BEHALF OF BELLIS ACADEMY AND
PAUL MITCHELL SCHOOLS HERE IN
SUPPORT. I WANT TO THANK THE
CHAIR AND THE AUTHOR AND LOOK
FORWARD TO FUTURE CONVERSATIONS
THAT ARE MORE BROAD ON THIS
ISSUE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MA'AM. ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT IN THE HEARING ROOM.
HMM. SEEING NONE. LET'S MOVE TO
THE TELECONFERENCE SERVICE
MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD ONCE
AGAIN PROMPT ANY INDIVIDUALS
WAITING TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT
OF ASSEMBLY BILL 21 96. WE WILL
BEGIN WITH THEM. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. IF YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OF
A B 21 96, PLEASE PRESS 10. ONE
FALL BY ZERO. AND WE HAVE NO
PARTICIPANTS QUEUING UP THIS
TIME. THANK YOU. LET'S FOLLOW
THE SAME PROCESS AND HEAR FROM
ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES.
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM. ARE THERE ANY
SEEING NONE. LET'S MOVE THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT ANY
INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO TESTIFY
IN OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY BILL
21 96. WE WILL CONTINUE. WITH
THEM. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. IF
YOU ARE IN OPPOSITION TO A B 21
96 PLEASE PRESS ONE, FOLLOWED BY
01 FOLLOWED BY ZERO. AND NOBODY
IS QUEUING OUT AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU, MR MODERATOR. LET'S
BRING THE CONVERSATION BACK TO
MY COLLEAGUES ON THE DÍAS
COLLEAGUES QUESTIONS, COMMENTS
OR CONCERNS. BEEN MOVED BY
SENATOR LEYVA HANDS UP. SAYING
NONE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE YOU VERY MUCH MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS AND
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE.
OKAY KELLY. IF THE MOTION IS TO
PASS, WE REFER THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. MAYBE 21 96 MOTIONS DO
PASS AND REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
ROUGH I MELINDA'S ARCHULETTA,
ARCHILA TÔI BATES. BECKER. DODD.
THOUGHT I EGGMAN AND I HEARD
TATO JONES. LABOR LEVER. AMEN.
NEWMAN. TRAIL BO I PAN AND I
BILL HAS SEVEN VOTES WILL HOLD
THE WORLD OPEN FOR ABSENT
MEMBERS. YOUR NEXT ITEM NUMBER
12. A B 23 80. THANKS SO MUCH,
MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I'M HERE
TO PRESENT A B 23 80, WHICH AIMS
TO PROTECT CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS
FROM PREDATORY PET LOANS. OVER
THE PAST FEW YEARS, THIS
LEGISLATURE HAS TAKEN HISTORIC
ACTION TO LIMIT THE SELL OF
ANIMALS FROM COMMERCIAL BREEDING
FACILITIES OR PUPPY MILLS. IN
ORDER TO EVADE THESE LAWS,
COMMERCIAL BREEDERS HAVE MOVED
THEIR OPERATIONS ONLINE BECAUSE
THE COST OF A COMMERCIALLY BRED
ANIMAL CAN RUN IN THE THOUSANDS
OF DOLLARS. MANY ONLINE
MERCHANTS HAVE ENTERED INTO
PARTNERSHIPS TO PROMOTE QUICK
AND EASY LENDING OPTIONS TO HELP
CONSUMERS TO COMPLETE THE
PURCHASE OF THEIR DESIRED PAT.
UNFORTUNATELY MANY OF THESE
LOANS ARE PREDATORY IN NATURE
WITH HIDDEN FEES AND
EXORBITANTLY HIGH INTEREST RATES
ABOVE 100% TO CUT DOWN ON THESE
PREDATORY LOANS. 23 80 PROHIBITS
AN ONLINE PET RETAILER FROM
OFFERING ALONE OR OTHER
FINANCING OPTIONS FOR THE
PURCHASE OF PET. WITH ME TODAY
ON THE PHONE AND SUPPORT IS
JENNIFER HAGUE WITH THE ANIMAL
LEGAL DEFENSE FUND. MS HAIG,
PLEASE PROCEED. THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS JENNIFER HAGUE WITH THE
ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND, AND
WE ARE PROUD TO BE THE SPONSOR
OF HB 23 80. I WANT TO FIRST
ACKNOWLEDGE THE CONSULTATION WE
IN THE AUTHOR'S OFFICE HAVE HAD
WITH NUMEROUS COMMITTEE MEMBER
AND AGENCY STAFF TO GET THIS
BILL TO WHERE IT IS TODAY.
YOU'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE AND
BELIEVE ALL THE CONVERSATIONS
THAT INPUT HAVE MADE IT AN EVEN
STRONGER BILL. SO OVER THE PAST
FOUR YEARS, WE'VE WORKED WITH
OUR COALITION PARTNERS AND THE
LEGISLATURE TO RESTRICT THE
RETAIL SALE OF DOGS AND CATS AND
BRICK AND MORTAR STORES ACROSS
THE STATE, CUTTING OFF THAT
CHANNEL OF THE PUPPY MILLS
PIPELINE. HOWEVER THESE EFFORTS
HAVE NOT YET ADDRESSED ONLINE
SALES WERE BAD ACTORS CAN STILL
OPERATE. SOME ONLINE RETAILERS
OFFER FINANCING FROM LENDERS
THAT SKIRT CALIFORNIA'S CONSUMER
PROTECTION LAWS AND OFFER LOANS
OF EXORBITANT INTEREST RATES AND
HIDDEN FEES. SUCH PREDATORY
LOANS PROVIDE OUTLETS FOR PUPPY
AND KITTEN MILLS TELL ANIMALS
FOR THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO
CONSUMERS WHO MIGHT NOT OTHERS
WHO MIGHT OTHERWISE NOT BE AWARE
OF THE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE LOAN. THESE
BONES ARE NOTED IN THE
COMMITTEE'S ANALYSIS HAS BEEN
DISCOVERED ACROSS THE COUNTRY
WITH INTEREST RATES AS HIGH AS
130% ANNUALLY. AS PART OF THE
ONGOING RESEARCH INTO THIS
ISSUE. LDF CONTRACTING WITH AN
INDEPENDENT LEGAL INVESTIGATOR
TO ATTEMPT TO PARTICIPATE HAPPY
THROUGH 11 ONLINE RETAILERS
SUSPECTED OF OFFERING THESE
PREDATORY FINANCING OPTIONS. AND
LOOK AT THE INVESTIGATING FIRM
WAS ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY SECURE
A CONTRACTOR FINANCING USING A
CALIFORNIA ADDRESS AND AS LITTLE
AS 10 MINUTES, ONE SUCH CONTRACT
CAME WITH A 73.7% INTEREST RATES
AND TURNED TO $2500 LOAN INTO
MORE THAN $6500 UNTIL COST. THE
OBSERVANT INTEREST RATES AND
FEES THAT THESE LOANS TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF CONSUMERS WHO ARE
SIMPLY LOOKING TO BRING A PET
INTO THEIR LIVES CAN RESULT IN
FINANCIAL INSTABILITY FOR THE
BUYERS AND BY EXTENSION CAN HAVE
NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES FOR THE
PETS BEING PURCHASED. 80 23 86
TO HELP PREVENT THIS FROM
HAPPENING BY PROHIBITING
RETAILERS FROM ENGAGING IN THESE
RELATIONSHIPS WITH LENDERS AND
FACILITATING ACCESS TO THESE
PROTESTS, PREDATORY LOANS. WE
ASKED FOR YOUR I VOTE AS WE SEEK
TO MAKE THIS STEP TOWARDS
GREATER PROTECTIONS FOR
CONSUMERS AND MORE FINANCIALLY
STABLE HOMES FOR PETS. THANK
YOU. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS. YOU MAY HAVE. THANK
YOU, MISS HAG. NOW LET'S TURN TO
ANY ADDITIONAL SUPPORT WITNESSES
IN THE HEARING ROOM ANY
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT WITNESSES?
NAME AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON
THE MEASURE, PLEASE. HELLO
SHERLOCK. PLASTER COUNTY IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS, BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MA'AM. ANY
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT WITNESSES IN
THE HEARING ROOM, SEEING NONE.
LET'S TURN TO THE TELECONFERENCE
SERVICE MODERATOR. THAT'S PROMPT
ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES WISHING
TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT OF THIS
MEASURE ASSEMBLY BILL 23 80, AND
WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THEM.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR IN SUPPORT OF
A B 23 80 YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND
THEN ZERO. IF YOU ARE IN SUPPORT
OF A B 23 80 WE WILL GO TO LINE
UP TO 35. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. THE
AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS CALLING
ON BEHALF OF THE HUMANE SOCIETY
OF THE UNITED STATES IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. THANK YOU, AND THEY ARE
WITH AN OPERATOR. ONE UP. THEY
JUST TOOK THEMSELVES OUT OF
CUTE. AND WE HAVE NO SUPPORTING
QUÊ. IT'S TIME. THANK YOU, MADAM
MODERATOR THAT'S MOVED TO ANY
OPPOSITION WITNESSES HERE IN THE
HEARING ROOM. OPPOSITION
WITNESSES SAYING NONE. LET'S
MOVE TO WITNESSES WAITING TO
TESTIFY AND VIA THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE MEASURE,
MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPT ANY SUCH INDIVIDUALS WILL
MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPOSITION OF A B 23 80 MY PRESS
ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS
ONE OF THEM. ZERO IF YOU'RE AN
OPPOSITION OF A B 23 80. AND MR
CHAIR. WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION QUÊ
. THANK YOU. NOW LET'S BRING THE
MATTER BACK TO MY COLLEAGUES ON
THE DAIS COLLEAGUES. QUESTIONS,
COMMENTS CONCERNS, SENATOR
LEBEAU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I
JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR
BRINGING THIS BILL FORWARD. I
ACTUALLY HAD NO IDEA THAT THIS
WAS A PRACTICE. MAYBE THAT'S
BECAUSE OF OUR DOGS HAVE BEEN
SHELTER DOGS. BUT I CAN'T THINK
OF SOMETHING MORE HORRIBLE THAN
TO CHARGE SOMEONE AND HAVE THEM
FINANCE THE DOG AND OUTRAGEOUS.
UH OUTRAGEOUS INTEREST RATES. SO
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT
FORWARD. I LOOK FORWARD TO
MOVING THE BILL. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS, COBO A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS JUST SO FROM. SO I'M
ABOUT NICE SUPPORT, FINANCIAL
LITERACY. FIRST AND FOREMOST, I
THINK ALL OF US SHOULD HAVE SOME
SORT OF BACKGROUND OR A LITTLE
BIT OF A CLASS WHEN IT COMES TO
FINANCIAL LITERACY, BUT IS
THERE. SO MY CONCERNS LIE IN
WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE OTHER
MEANS OR HAVE THERE BEEN ANY
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT CREATING MORE?
AH PERHAPS REQUIREMENTS IN
DISCLOSURES AND ASKING PEOPLE TO
DO A LITTLE MORE RESEARCH ABOUT
DIFFERENT, UM, LENDING. UM
POSSIBLY THESE ARE OPPORTUNITIES
FOR CONSUMERS. IN ORDER TO MAKE
THE BEST FINANCIAL DECISION FOR
THEM AND THEIR FAMILY AND THE
REASON I ASKED THAT IS I FEEL
FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY
DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO
FINANCE A SPECIFIC PET. NOW I'M
I SHARE. SENATOR LEAVE US. UM UM
, STATEMENT WITH REGARDS TO OUR
OUR PET WAS ADOPTED FROM A
SHELTER AS WELL. SO I CAN'T
IMAGINE SPENDING THAT TYPE OF
MONEY. BUT FOR THOSE WHO WANT A
PET, UM HAVE YOU AT ALL KIND OF
HAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT OTHER
POSSIBILITIES WE COULD DO TO
PROTECT THE CONSUMERS BUT STILL
HAVE THE OPTIONS IF IT BEST ONCE
EDUCATED AND AWARE OF UH,
PERHAPS PRODUCTS THAT ARE
AVAILABLE, UM, HAVE THEM BE ABLE
TO MAKE A DECISION. THIS BEST
FITS THEIR THEIR FAMILY. WE
HAVE, UM AND WHAT WE'VE DONE. I
MEAN, THIS BODY, UH, HAS DONE A
LOT OF WORK ON PREDATORY LENDING
. AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING
THAT'S CERTAINLY A MAJORITY OF
OUR COLLEAGUES HAVE TRIED TO
WORK ON TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE
AREN'T BURDENED WITH THESE.
REALLY UNDULY. YOU KNOW? SEVEN
YOU HEARD THE CALLER 70% WE'VE
SEEN IT AS HIGH AS 100% THE
ISSUE HERE, THOUGH IS THAT THIS
BUSINESS HAS IN LARGE PART MOVED
ONLINE. AND SO WHILE WE CAN
REGULATE CALIFORNIA LENDERS, WE
CAN'T REGULATE LENDERS WHO ARE
FROM OUT OF STATE AND MANY OF
THESE PUPPY MILLS ARE, YOU KNOW
IN THE MIDWEST AND IN THE SOUTH,
AND WE DON'T HAVE THE BUILDING
REGULATE THEM. SO WE'RE
REGULATING, SO WE'RE DOING THE
SAME WORK, BUT WE'RE AVING TO
DO IT. AT THIS END, AND THAT'S
WHY AGAIN AS YOU HEARD THE
CALLERS SAY WE'VE BEEN THIS
CERTAINLY HAS BEEN ONE WE SPENT
AND IN ORDER AMOUNT OF TIME ON
TO TRY TO TRY TO GET AT THAT
ISSUE, BUT THIS WAY WE CAN
ELIMINATE THE PREDATORY LENDING.
IN A WAY THAT WE COULDN'T BY
TRYING TO REGULATE. LET'S SAY A
PUPPY MILL OUT OF MISSOURI OR
ALABAMA OR SOMEWHERE ELSE. OKAY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SENATOR.
ONE IF I MAY ADD ONE ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS TO THAT. UM THIS
DOESN'T PREVENT A CONSUMER FROM
USING THEIR PERSONAL CREDIT CARD
OR GOING TO THEIR CREDIT UNION
OR THEIR BANKS FROM GETTING
ALONE ON THEIR OWN AS WELL. IT
JUST PREVENTS THE RETAILER FROM
FACILITATING OR BROKERING ALONE.
THROUGH THEIR ONLINE WEBSITE,
WHICH IS WHERE WE FIND THE
PREDATORY LENDING HAPPENS. THANK
YOU, MA'AM. I SEE NO OTHER
QUESTIONS. UM CENTER LEAVING?
MAY I TAKE THAT AS A MOTION FROM
YOU? BEEN MOVED BY SENATOR LEVIS
AND REMEMBER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
CLOSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS AND I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE.
THE MOTION IS DUE PAST WE REFER
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MAYBE 23
80 MOTION IS DO PASS AND WE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS ROCK HIGH.
MELINDA'S ARCHULETTA TÔI BATES.
BECKER. DODD EGGMAN EDMUND. I
HEARD TAITO JONES LABOR. AMEN
NEWMAN KOBO. CAN. BILL HAS FOUR
VOTES WILL HOLD THE ROPE IN
PREPS AND MEMBERS. AND SO YOU
HAVE ONE MORE FILE ITEM NUMBER
13 ASSEMBLY BUILD 2499 24 99
THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. A B 24 99 ESTABLISHES
THE ORGANIC TRANSITION PILOT
PROGRAM TO PROVIDE UNDERSERVED
FARMERS AND RANCHERS. TOOLS TO
STAY IN BUSINESS WHILE PURSUING
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY FARMING
PRACTICES. THE PROGRAM WILL
SUPPORT FARMERS AS THEY
TRANSITION TO ORGANIC FARMING BY
FOCUSING ON LIMITED RESOURCES,
SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED PRODUCERS
AND PROVIDING FINANCIAL AND
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO BECOME
CERTIFIED ORGANIC. UNDERSERVED
FARMERS FACE BARRIERS THAT LIMIT
THEIR ACCESS TO ORGANIC
CERTIFICATION AND MARKETS. THESE
PRODUCERS OFTEN MANAGE THEIR
BUSINESS ON THINNER MARGINS THAT
PREVENT THEM FROM ASSUMING
ADDITIONAL RISK. A B 24 99 6 TO
ADDRESS THESE CHALLENGES TO KEEP
FARMERS IN BUSINESS. I
APPRECIATE THE THOUGHTFUL
ENGAGEMENT FROM THE FARM BUREAU
ASSOCIATION AND LOOK FORWARD TO
CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS AS THIS
BILL MOVES FORWARD WITH ME TODAY
TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT. IS
REBECCA WEBER. MISS WEBBER.
THREE MINUTES. PLEASE PROCEED
LIKE TO THANK THE CHAIR. AND THE
AUTHOR, I'M REBECCA WEBER, THE
POLICY DIRECTOR AT CALIFORNIA
CERTIFIED ORGANIC FARMERS. WE
REPRESENT 3000 ORGANIC FARMS,
RANCHES AND BUSINESSES
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA. I ASKED
THE COMMITTEE TO SUPPORT THIS
BILL, WHICH IS AIMED AT
EXPANDING ACCESS TO ORGANIC
CERTIFICATION. AND PROVIDING
FARMERS AND RANCHERS, ESPECIALLY
UNDERSERVED FARMERS AND RANCHERS
. MORE TOOLS 24 99 REQUIRES A
STATEWIDE MARKET ANALYSIS. IN
ADDITION TO CREATING AN ORGANIC
TRANSITION PROGRAM. THIS MARKET
ANALYSIS OF THE ORGANIC SECTOR
WILL SUPPORT ALL FARMERS BY
HELPING TO IDENTIFY AND DEVELOP
NEW MARKET OPPORTUNITIES. WE
KNOW FARMERS REQUIRE A CLEAR
PICTURE OF MARKET NEEDS AND
OPPORTUNITIES TO INFORM THEIR
PRODUCTION PLANS. AND TO
DEMONSTRATE FEASIBILITY OF
BUSINESS PLANS AND EXPANSION
STRATEGY TO LENDERS. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. NOW. LET'S HEAR
FROM ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT IN THE HEARING ROOM.
NAME, AFFILIATION AND POSITION
ON THE BILL, PLEASE. GOOD
AFTERNOON. SHARON MEMBERS
REBECCA MARCUS, REPRESENTING
CARBON CYCLE INSTITUTE, AMERICAN
FARMLAND TRUST, THE COMMUNITY
ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY FARMERS
CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY AND THE
NATURAL RESOURCES, DEFENSE
COUNCIL AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ANY ADDITIONAL SUPPORT
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM.
I'M TERESA CONE. I'M A
PRACTICING PSYCHIATRIST IN
SACRAMENTO COUNTY. AND I SUPPORT
THIS BILL. THANK YOU, MA'AM. ANY
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT WITNESSES
COME ON DOWN. TRAINING LARGE
PLASTER COUNTY AND IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL, THANK YOU
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT WITNESSES
HERE IN THE HEARING ROOM. SEEING
NONE. LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT ANY
SUPPORT WITNESSES. WAITING TO
TESTIFY REGARDING ASSEMBLY BILL
24 99. THANK YOU. IF YOU'RE INTO
PART OF A B 24 99 YOU MAY PRESS
ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN.
THERE'S ONE AND THEN ZERO OF
URINE SUPPORT. WE WILL GO TO
LINE 2 30 FOR YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI THIS IS ANNA
LARSON WITH THE CALIFORNIA
CLIMATE AND AGRICULTURE NETWORK
SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. NEXT TO GO. WE'LL GO
TO LINE 95. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
LINE. 95 DO YOU HAVE A MUTE?
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HELLO YES,
THIS IS CARLA GARCIA FROM
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. AND I'M
SUPPORT OF THIS BILL DUE TO THE
HOUSE CONCERNS THAT CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
FURTHER SUPPORT AND QUÊ. THANK
YOU, MODERATOR. LET'S NOT FOLLOW
THE SAME PROCESS AND HEAR FROM
ANY OPPOSITION FIRST OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM.
SEEING NONE. LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
BACK TO YOU. WOULD YOU PLEASE
PROMPT ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES
WAITING TO TESTIFY REGARDING
ASSEMBLY BILL 24 99. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR AN OPPOSITION OF A B 24
99 YOU PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO
FOR AN OPPOSITION OF A B 24 99.
AND WE WILL GO ONLINE TO 16.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI THIS IS
HEATHER KELLER, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY RESIDENTS. AND I THINK
THE BETTER IDEA WOULD BE TO
EXPAND ACCESS TO WATER FOR OUR
FARMERS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
NEXT, PLEASE. THANK YOU. LINE 1
97. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. I TEND TO
AGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS CALLER.
I GET HER POINT. WHY DON'T YOU
JUST GIVE THE FARMERS WATER
RATHER THAN FUSSING AROUND WITH
ALL THIS KIND OF TAKE? UH I'LL
TAKE THAT AS AN OPPOSITION,
MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
AND ONE MOMENT THEY ARE WITH AN
OPERATOR GETTING THEIR LINE
NUMBER. IN THAT LINE WILL BE 2
39. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI I
OPPOSED THE BILL. AND I HOPE
THAT YOU GUYS CAN GIVE
CALIFORNIA MORE WATER AND CLEAN
WATER THAT'S REALLY GOING TO
SAVE EVERYBODY WITH DISEASES AND
OUR PLANS, NOT GETTING SICK AS
WELL. THANK YOU. NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
FURTHER OPPOSITION. THANK YOU.
OKAY? LET'S NOW BRING THE
CONVERSATION BACK TO MY
COLLEAGUES ON THE DAIS
COLLEAGUES. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY
SENATOR ARCHULETTA. I SEE NO
OTHER HANDS UP. WELL, YOU HAD.
I'M SORRY, SENATOR JOE BUG. IT'S
HARD TO SEE WHEN YOU'RE DONE,
RIGHT RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER,
UM THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
BRINGING THIS MEASURE FORWARD. I
THERE BEEN ANY CONSIDERATIONS ON
MAKING THESE GRANTS ARE THESE,
UM THIS PROGRAM PILOT PROGRAM
AVAILABLE TO MAYBE ECONOMICALLY
pWHO ARE FARMERS? I GUESS IT
WOULD BE FOR FARMERS, RIGHT?
FARMERS VERSUS UM I AM. WHAT DO
YOU CALL A SOCIALLY
DISADVANTAGED? UM. WE'VE WORKED
THROUGH THIS DEFINITION THROUGH
. WE STARTED CERTAINLY WITH THE
PRIMARY FOCUS, AND I THINK IT
CONTINUES TO BE THE PRIMARY
FOCUS ON THOSE WHO UM, FACE
PARTICULAR DIFFICULTIES IN THIS
AREA. ACTUALLY THE NUMBER OF THE
OTHER COMMITTEE MEANS WE BROUGHT
WITH US FARMERS WHO ARE TRYING
TO TRANSITION TO ORGANIC
FARMING. THEY WERE BOTH SOCIALLY
AND ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
OR ACTUALLY WAS A FEMALE OF
COLOR WHO WAS KIND OF LEADING
OUR CHARGE ON THIS WHO HAD? I
THINK I THINK SHE ALSO SPOKE
WITH SENATOR EDMUND T. AS WELL
. THAT'S WHO OUR PRIMARY FOCUS
HAS BEEN THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS
. HAVING SAID THAT, YOU KNOW,
IT'S GONE THROUGH A NUMBER OF
COMMITTEES, AND THIS DEFINITION
HAS GOTTEN REFINED A LITTLE BIT.
UM BUT THAT STILL IS WHO THE
FOCUS OF THE BILL IS AIMED AT
OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS? I SEE NO HANDS UP.
YOUR WINNER. SUDDENLY REMEMBER.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK
YOU SO MUCH, MR CHAIR, AND WE
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE.
THE BILL HAS BEEN MOVED BY
SENATOR ARCHILA TO THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS RIVER FOR THE COMMITTEE
ON APPRPRIATIONS. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. A B 24 99 MOTION IS DO
PASS AND REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
ROUGH. MELINDA'S STILETTO, TÔI
BATES. BATES? NO, BECKER. DODD.
EGGMAN EGGMAN. I HEARD TATO
JONES. LABOR. LIVER. AMEN.
NEWMAN. THE TURBO AGC. STAND.
THE VOTE IS 4 TO 1 WILL HOLD THE
ROLL OPEN FOREVER REMEMBERS.
THANK YOU, SIR. I SEE SOME
REMEMBER LOW IN THE CROWD.
SO YOU HAVE TWO ITEMS WITH US
TODAY. ITEMS FILE ITEMS NUMBER
EIGHT AND NINE ANY PREFERENCES
TO WHICH ONE YOU TAKE FIRST.
YOUR CALL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MR. CHAIR. PERHAPS WE CAN JUST
GO AND FILE ITEM ORDER. BILE
ITEM EIGHT. ASSEMBLY BILL 2098
PROCEED WHEN READY. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR CHAIR AND
COLLEAGUES. VERY PROUD TO
INTRODUCE ASSEMBLY BILL 2098,
WHICH HELPS TO ENSURE THAT WE
TACKLE THE ISSUE OF
MISINFORMATION AND
DISINFORMATION OF COVID 19 TO
THE PUBLIC AS UNPROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT WHEN THE DISSEMINATION
CAUSES GROSS NEGLIGENCE AND
HARMS A PATIENT. TODAY WITH ME
TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORTERS DR
NICK SAWYER AND DENNIS CUEVAS
ROMERO WITH THE CALIFORNIA
MEDICAL ASSOCIATION. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR I VOTE.
THANK YOU, SIR. GENTLEMEN PLEASE
PROCEED. NOTE THREE MINUTES
TOTAL. UM I'D LIKE TO THANK
EVERYBODY FOR HAVING ME HERE
TODAY. MY NAME IS NICK SAWYER.
I'M AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN HERE
IN SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA BEEN
ON THE FRONT LINES OF THE COVID
PANDEMIC FOR THE PAST. ALMOST
THREE YEARS AND TAKING CARE OF
PATIENTS. I'M ALSO A HEALTH
POLICY EXPERT AND EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF NO LICENSE FOR
DISINFORMATION. WE STARTED THIS
GROUP IN RESPONSE TO THE
DISINFORMATION THAT'S BEING
SPREAD BY LICENSED PHYSICIANS.
WHICH ACTUALLY LEADS TO
LEGITIMATE THE LEGITIMIZATION OF
DISINFORMATION, WHICH WE'RE
SEEING ACROSS THE COUNTRY IS NOW
BEING INSTITUTIONALIZED.
ASSEMBLY BILL 2098. THE PURPOSE
OF THIS BILL IS THAT THE
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL BOARD HAS
REQUESTED LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
FOR AN UNPRECEDENTED PROBLEM
THAT THEY HAVE NOT SEEN BEFORE.
WHICH IS HOW DO YOU ADDRESS THE
PROBLEM OF PHYSICIANS NOT
STANDING UP TO THEIR
PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS. THIS IS
A MATTER OF THEY WANT THE
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY IN ORDER
DISCIPLINE, DOCTORS. WHO ARE
STATING THAT THEY ARE PRACTICING
FREE SPEECH. WHEN REALLY THEY'RE
TELLING FALSEHOODS THAT ARE
MISLEADING PEOPLE TO THE POINT
WHERE THEY HAVE TO COME AND SEE
ME AND MY EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING I EVER
WANTED TO DO. I DIDN'T INTEND TO
COME AND START AT 501 C THREE.
WELL BEING A PRACTICING
EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN. BUT I'VE
SEEN PEOPLE DIE IN MY EMERGENCY
DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY WERE
MISLED. BY DISINFORMATION ABOUT
COVID 19. IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT
TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HEAR FROM
THE OPPOSITION, AND THERE'S A
LOT OF CONFUSION ABOUT IS THAT
THIS BILL IS THIS SUPPOSED TO
AND IS NOT SUPPOSED TO. UH,
CAUSE PROBLEMS WITH PHYSICIANS
FREE SPEECH AROUND ACADEMIC
DISCUSSION. THIS BILL WILL ALLOW
THE MEDICAL BOARD TO DISCIPLINE
DOCTORS WHO SAY THINGS LIKE THE
VACCINES CAUSE AIDS. OR THAT THE
VACCINES ARE KILLING MORE
PATIENTS THAN COVID USING
MANIPULATED DATA. OR THAT THE
VACCINES ARE IMPLANTING
MICROCHIPS SO THE GOVERNMENT CAN
TRACK YOU. I'M ALL. FOR ACADEMIC
DEBATE. IN FACT, WE WOULDN'T BE
WHERE WE ARE TODAY WITHOUT
ROBUST ACADEMIC DEBATE, BUT
THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
THE LAST THING I WANT TO SAY IS
CALIFORNIA LEADS AND WE NEED TO
CONTINUE TO LEAD. IN 31 STATES.
THERE ARE BILLS THAT ARE
LIMITING. THE MEDICAL BOARD'S
ABILITY. TO DISCIPLINE DOCTORS
WHO SPREAD COVID 19 VACCINE
DISINFORMATION. OR
MISINFORMATION. IT'S ALREADY
LAWS IN TENNESSEE AND SOUTH
DAKOTA. THERE ARE NO STATES THAT
HAVE A BILL LIKE THIS. IN IN
THEIR IN THEIR HOUSE LEGISLATURE
, SO AS CALIFORNIA IS THE
LEADER, WE CAN BE THE LEADER AND
THE FIRST TO SAY THAT WE WILL
PROTECT OUR PATIENTS AND THE
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE OF
MEDICINE. BY PASSING THIS LAW
AND DEFENDING PATIENTS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, DOCTOR. NEXT,
PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS DENNIS CUEVAS ROMERO
WITH THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION. PROUD SPONSORS OF
THE BILL A B 2098 AT ITS
SIMPLEST FORM, IS INTENDED TO
PROTECT PATIENTS AND ENSURE THE
PROFESSION THE INTEGRITY OF THE
MEDICAL PROFESSION. IT'S SIMPLY
TRIES TO PROVIDE THE MEDICAL
BOARD CLEARER AUTHORITY THAT
THEY CAN DISCIPLINE PHYSICIANS
FOR DISSEMINATED COVID
MISINFORMATION. DISINFORMATION.
WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. LET'S TURN
TO OTHER SUPPORT WITNESSES IN
THE HEARING ROOM NAME
AFFILIATION POSITION ON THE
BILL. ONLY PLEASE. BRIAN SPENCER
ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN
COLLEGE OF O B. G Y INS DISTRICT
NINE AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU
NEXT, PLEASE. REBECCA MARCUS,
REPRESENTING THE CONSUMER
PROTECTION POLICY CENTER AT U.
S. D S SCHOOL OF LAW AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU ANY OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN THE HEARING
ROOM? SEEING NONE. LET'S MOVE TO
THE TELECONFERENCE SERVICE
MODERATOR. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPT ANY INDIVIDUALS WAITING
TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORTIVE
ASSEMBLY BILL 2098. WE WILL
CONTINUE WITH THEM. THEY GIVE
YOU IN SUPPORT OF A B 2098? YOU
MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN HERE
IN SUPPORT OF A B 2098. WE WILL
GO TO LINE 1 63. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. KILLING BROOKS ON BEHALF
OF THE COUNTY HEALTH EXECUTIVES
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. WE WILL GO TO LINE 2
30. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. THANK YOU
. CHAIR AND MEMBERS, TIM MADDEN
, REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE
OF EMERGENCY PHYSICIANS IN THE
CALIFORNIA RHEUMATOLOGY ALLIANCE
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. THANKS. THANK YOU. NEXT,
WE'LL GO LINE OF TO 29. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. HI. CAN YOU HEAR
ME PERFECTLY, PLEASE PROCEED.
PAY MY NAME IS TIM MCMULLEN. I
AM 1/4 YEAR STUDENT IN THE MD
PHD PROGRAM IN IRVINE, SPEAKING
ON BEHALF OF MYSELF, I'M IN
STRONG SUPPORT THIS MEASURE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE 68 YEAR LINE IS
OPEN. ERIN BONE WITH THE MEDICAL
BOARD OF CALIFORNIA. THE BOARD
APPRECIATES THE MOST RECENT
AMENDMENT OF THE BILL AND HAS
THE SUPPORT OF HIM IN THE
POSITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 2 47. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. MEDIA BORN
REPRESENTING THE AMERICAN
ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS,
CALIFORNIA DIVISION, WE'RE IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. LINE 59. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO MY
NAME IS ANDREW WEIL. UM AND I'M
THE PRESIDENT OF PANDEMIC
PATIENTS, WHICH IS A FIVE OH ONE
C THREE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION
THAT WANTS TO RELIEVE THE HARM
CAUSED BY COVID 19 AND POST
COVID MUSICIANS. I REQUEST THAT
YOU VOTE IN FAVOR OF A B 2098.
THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. THANK
YOU, UM. AND WE HAVE NO FURTHER
SUPPORTING QUÊ AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU, MADAM MODERATOR. NOW,
LET'S FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS
AND HEAR FROM MANY OPPOSITION
WITNESSES. FIRST OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM.
WILL GIVE. WELL, WE'RE GOING TO
DO THREE MINUTES. SO WHAT'S
FIGURE OUT HOW WE DIVIDE IT UP?
UM PLEASE PROCEED. IDENTIFY
YOURSELF AND THEN MOVE FORWARD.
GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M LARA POWELL.
CALIFORNIANS FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE
OPPOSES 2098 BECAUSE IT CAN'T
ACHIEVE ITS STATED GOALS WITHOUT
VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION. THE
FIRST AMENDMENT DOES NOT ALLOW
BROAD CONTENT BASED RESTRICTIONS
ON SPEECH. EVEN IF THAT SPEECH
IS FALSE, EVEN IF THE INTENT OF
THE LAW IS COMPELLING. AMONG THE
CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEMS WITH
THIS BILL WOULD BE THE CHILLING
EFFECT IT WOULD HAVE ON SPEECH
IT WOULD CAUSE CONSCIENTIOUS
DOCTORS TO CENSOR THEMSELVES.
THE REMEDY FOR SPEECH THAT IS
FALSE IS SPEECH THAT IS TRUE.
THIS IS NOT AN ABSTRACT IDEAL.
WE ASPIRE TO THIS IS THE ONLY
WAY YOU SORT FACT FROM FICTION
IN A FREE SOCIETY. WE DON'T NEED
THIS BILL BECAUSE THERE'S NO
MISINFORMATION CRISIS. THERE'S A
CRISIS OF INSTITUTIONAL
CREDIBILITY. THE PUBLIC HAS LOST
FAITH IN THE MEDICAL
ESTABLISHMENT AND CENSORSHIP
WILL NOT REBUILD THAT TRUST. IN
FACT, IT'S THE SUREST WAY TO
FURTHER ERODE THAT TRUST. THANK
YOU. AND I'D LIKE TO GIVE THE
REST OF THE TIME THAT DR CAREY
PLEASE PROCEED. DR. AARON
CURIOSITY. I'M A LICENSED
PHYSICIAN IN CALIFORNIA SERVE AS
THE CHIEF OF ETHICS FOR THE
UNITY PROJECT. AH I DID MY
MEDICAL TRAINING AT GEORGETOWN
RESIDENCY TRAINING AT UC IRVINE
, WHERE I WAS PROFESSOR IN THE
SCHOOL OF MEDICINE FOR 15 YEARS,
I DIRECTED THE MEDICAL ETHICS
PROGRAM AT UC IRVINE. I DIRECTED
FOR SEVERAL YEARS, THE MEDICAL
ETHICS COMMITTEE AT THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF STATE
HOSPITALS ALSO SERVED ON THE
ORANGE COUNTY VACCINE TASK FORCE
AND WAS DEEPLY INVOLVED IN COVID
POLICIES AT THE STATE AND LOCAL
LEVEL. MAYBE 2098 WILL HARM
PATIENTS. IT WILL STAR
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS, HAMSTRING
OR PANDEMIC RESPONSE. UNDERMINE
THE TRUST NECESSARY FOR THE
DOCTOR PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND
WORSEN THE PHYSICIAN SHORTAGE IN
CALIFORNIA. A PHYSICIAN WITH A
GAG ORDER IS NOT A PHYSICIAN YOU
CAN TRUST. PATIENTS WANT TO KNOW
THAT IF THEY ASK THEIR DOCTOR
QUESTION, INCLUDING THE QUESTION
ABOUT COVID, THEY'LL GET AN
HONEST OPINION FROM THE
PHYSICIAN, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER
THEY GO SEEK A SECOND OPINION OR
FOLLOW THEIR DOCTOR'S ADVICE.
THE TEXT OF A B 2098 MAKES THREE
STATEMENTS ABOUT COVID THAT ARE
ALREADY OUTDATED BECAUSE SCIENCE
CONSTANTLY EVOLVES AS CDC
DIRECTOR ROCHELLE WOLINSKI
RECENTLY EXPLAINED. LAST WEEK,
FOR EXAMPLE, A STUDY PUBLISHED
IN THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF
MEDICINE SHOWED NEGATIVE VACCINE
EFFICACY AGAINST THE NEW OMICRON
VARIANT. ANOTHER PEER REVIEWED
STUDY, PUBLISHED TWO WEEKS AGO
FOUND REDUCED SPERM COUNTS IN
MEN AFTER VACCINATION. NEITHER
OF THESE EFFICACY OR SAFETY
FINDINGS WAS AVAILABLE WHEN THIS
BILL WAS DRAFTED ONLY VERY
RECENTLY. ADVANCES IN SCIENCE
AND MEDICINE OCCUR WHEN DOCTORS
AND SCIENTISTS CHALLENGE
CONVENTIONAL THINKING OR SETTLED
OPINION. GOOD SCIENCE IS ALWAYS
CHARACTERIZED BY CONJECTURE AND
REPUTATION BY DELIBERATION,
FIERCE DEBATE AND ALWAYS
OPENNESS TO NEW DATA. SO TRYING
TO FIXATE. ANY CONCERN CONSENSUS
AS UNASSAILABLE IS GOING TO
STIFLE MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC
PROGRESS. FRONT LINE PHYSICIANS
CHALLENGING CONVENTIONAL
THINKING PLAYED A KEY ROLE
DURING THE PANDEMIC. IN
ADVANCING KNOWLEDGE OF COVID
TREATMENT, FOR EXAMPLE,
VENTILATING PATIENTS AT THE
THREE MINUTE POINT I'M GOING TO
LET YOU WIND YOUR WAY TO THE END
AND NOT TERMINATE THIS ABRUPTLY
. I'M HAPPY TO GIVE SEVERAL
EXAMPLES OF WHAT I JUST
MENTIONED BUT ADVANTAGE OF MY
PATIENT. IF THIS BILL BECOMES
LAW, DOCTORS WILL BE PUNISHED
FOR PRACTICING MEDICINE
ACCORDING TO THEIR BEST JUDGMENT
, INFORMED CONSENT, WHICH IS THE
FOUNDATION OF MEDICAL ETHICS
WILL BE COMPROMISED FORWARD
THINKING PHYSICIANS WILL SIMPLY
LEAVE THE STATE RATHER THAN
PRACTICE. I DO THESE CONDITIONS
AND MOST CONCERNING LEE, ALL
THAT WILL RESULT IN HARM TO OUR
PATIENTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SIR. AND THANKS FOR YOUR
COOPERATION. ANY OTHER
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM. NAME AFFILIATION
AND POSITION ON THE BILL ONLY.
GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS DR
SHIRA MILLER. I'M THE FOUNDER
AND PRESIDENT OF PHYSICIANS FOR
INFORMED CONSENT. A VOLUNTEER
POSITION SINCE 2015 AND I'M HERE
REPRESENTING ALL OF OUR MEMBERS.
WE OPPOSE A B 2098. THANK YOU,
DOCTOR. NEXT PLEASE. MY NAME IS
DR TERESA CONE. I'M A PRACTICING
PSYCHIATRIST. AND I WOULD REMIND
YOU THAT THERE IS A NATIONAL
SHORTAGE OF PSYCHIATRISTS IN THE
MIDST OF A ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH
CATASTROPHE. AND IF THIS BILL
PASSES WILL EITHER LEAVE THE
STATE NATION AND POSITION ON THE
BILL WILL STOP PRACTICING
MEDICINE CALIFORNIA THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND CHAIR
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SHAUNA
WATCH. UM PLASTER COUNTY MOTHER
OF THREE. I AM A MEMBER OF PERK
ORGANIZATION. I'M ALSO. SPEAKING
ON BEHALF OF LABORATORY
PROFESSIONALS ALL OVER
CALIFORNIA. AND WE ARE IN STRONG
OPPOSITION IS BILL AND WE WERE
ASKING FOR A NO VOTE NEXT,
PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME
IS KASHA WILLIAMS. I'M SPEAKING
ON BEHALF OF TWO ORGANIZATIONS.
THE FIRST ONE IS PROTECTION OF
THE EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF KIDS,
WHICH REPRESENTS OVER 20,000
FAMILIES IN CALIFORNIA, ASKING
FOR A NO OR ABSTAIN ON A B. 2098
THE SECOND ORGANIZATION IS
MULTIPLE LIBERTY, PLUS A COUNTY
CHAPTER. WHICH REPRESENTS OVER
2000, PARENTS, GRANDPARENTS AND
CONCERNED CITIZENS, ALSO ASKING
FOR A AND NOW OUR ABSTAINED ON A
B 2098 AND PERSONALLY AS A
PATIENT, I'M ASKING FOR A NO OR
ABSTAIN ON A B 2098. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE.
MY NAME IS DEBORAH RITTENHOUSE.
I'M HERE AS A CITIZEN MYSELF.
AND I AM TOTALLY AGAINST THIS
EVEN AS A PATIENT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE.
MY NAME IS DENISE AGUILAR, CO
FOUNDER FREEDOM ANGELS,
PRESIDENT OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
LIBERTY COALITION AND
REPRESENTATIVE OF LEX IT IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. TARA THORNTON CO FOUNDER
FREEDOM ANGELS IN STRONG
OPPOSITION. NEXT, PLEASE. ELGA
SHALLOW PHONE MOTHER OF THREE IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 2098. NEXT,
PLEASE. MY NAME'S ALYSSA SONORA
. I'M A MOTHER AND FOUNDER OF
LOS ANGELES EDUCATORS AND
PARENTS UNITED AND WE STRONGLY
STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS BILL.
SENATOR LOW HEALTH IS NOT
UNIVERSAL. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE. HELLO EVERYONE. MY
NAME IS JACQUELINE MCCARROLL.
I'M A REGISTERED NURSE IN SAN
DIEGO, CALIFORNIA CERTIFIED
PEDIATRIC NURSE. I STRONGLY
OPPOSE THIS BILL, AND I ASKED
FOR A NO OR ABSTAIN VOTE. THANK
YOU. NEXT, PLEASE. MY NAME IS
MELISSA GRACE. I'M THE FOUNDER
OF AN ORGANIZATION CALLED SAN
DIEGO. RISE UP. I SPEAK ON
BEHALF OF 15,000 CONSTITUENTS IN
SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND ASK YOU
RESPECTFULLY NO VOTE ON A B TWO.
OH, 98. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
NAME IS LAURA SEX DRIVE, THE CEO
OF THE UNITY PROJECT, AND WE
REPRESENT OVER 170 STRATEGIC
PARTNERS, WHICH ARE GRASSROOTS
ORGANIZATIONS FROM SHASTA COUNTY
ALL THE WAY DOWN THROUGH SAN
DIEGO COUNTY. I'M EXPRESSING AN
EXTREME OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL.
WE BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL BE THE
FIRST STEP IN THE TOTAL
DESTRUCTION OF THE DOCTOR,
PATIENT RELATIONSHIP AND HEALTH
CARE IN THIS STATE AND
POTENTIALLY THE REST OF THE
COUNTRY. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M JULIUS GILES
, AN IMMEDIATE LIVE STREAMER ON
YOUTUBE TODAY WITH JULIUS
DRAWING OPPOSITION OF A B 2098.
ALTHOUGH I'M NOT A DOCTOR, BUT
THEN THE RESEARCH TO KNOW THAT
THE REAL MISINFORMATION AND
TELLING FOLKS TO VACCINES ARE
SAFE AND EFFECTIVE. SO STRONG.
NO, THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT,
PLEASE. MY NAME IS LYNN. I'M
WITH THE UNITY PROJECT AND WE
STRONGLY OPPOSED NEXT, PLEASE.
UNDERPANTS PRIVATE VOTING
CITIZEN AND AS A FRONTLINE
HEALTHCARE WORKER. I OBJECT TO
THIS, UM GET A FEW FRIENDS ARE
ALSO INTERNATIONAL PHYSICIANS
HAVE COME HERE TO BE ABLE TO
DEBATE MEDICALLY IN A FREE
COUNTRY. SO EVEN THOUGH THEY HAD
WORK TODAY, HOPEFULLY THIS GETS
OUT FOR THEM TO THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MA'AM. ANY OTHER OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM?
SINGING AND LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE
MODERATOR. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPT ANY INDIVIDUAL IS WAITING
ON THE TELECONFERENCE LINE.
NGUYEN TESTIFYING OPPOSITION TO
ASSEMBLY BILL 2098. WE WILL
CONTINUE WITH THEM. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR IN OPPOSITION OF A B 2
2098. YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE OF THEM
ZERO FOR OPPOSITION OF A B 29
98. WE HAVE ABOUT 30 AND QUÊ. WE
WILL GO TO LINE 96. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI MY NAME IS KATHERINE
MCBRIDE. PLASTIC COUNTY FREEDOM
COALITION. MAYBE 2098 IS A WITCH
HUNT AND A GAG ON TRUTH TELLING
AND BLOWING POSITION. I'M WRONG
OPPOSITION AND I RESPECTFULLY
ASKING FOR YOUR NO VOTE. THANK
YOU. MODERATOR JUST A WORD TO
THOSE WHO ARE WAITING ON THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE. ITS NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
BILL, AND YOU CAN MAKE THAT
CLEAR. BUT NO MORE. THANK YOU.
NEXT, PLEASE. THANK YOU. LINE TO
18. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. YES MY
NAME IS ALAN SEE A CONSTITUENT
AND SENATOR JOHN LAIRD'S
DISTRICT. AH SUPPORT COVID PRE
THERAPIES BUT STRONGLY OPPOSED A
B 2098. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. PLANE 1 65.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. YES MY NAME
IS KAREN DUNCAN PARA. UM,
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE AREA
FREEDOM ALLIANCE STRONGLY
OPPOSED TO THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. NEXT, PLEASE. LINE
TWO. OH, THREE. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. THIS IS CHRISTY SEPULVEDA
BIRCH IT WITH EDUCATE ADVOCATE.
WE SERVE FAMILIES WHO HAVE
EXCEPTIONAL NEEDS CHILDREN AND
WERE OPPOSED. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE TO 50. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI. THIS IS GABRIELLE
INGRAM, FOUNDER OF STAND UP
SACRAMENTO COUNTY IN SENATOR
PANTS DISTRICT. WE ASK THAT YOU
VOTE NO STRONGLY OPPOSED. THANK
YOU. NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 2 42.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI CHRISTINA
HILDEBRAND ON BEHALF OF SCHOOL
CHOICE ADVOCACY AND STRONG
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE. THANK
YOU. LINE 1 97. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI I'M CALLING TO
REPRESENT THE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE
WHO HAVE ALREADY FLED CALIFORNIA
DUE TO MEDICAL FASCISM. THAT'S
WHAT THIS IS. IT'S A MEDICAL
FACT. IS THE REMINDER NAMED TO A
REMINDER MODERATOR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
BILL. NEXT, PLEASE. LIKE LINE TO
50 TO YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI. MY
NAME IS JONI. GREAT I'M A
REGISTERED NURSE AND I AM WITH
TAKE A STAND STANISLAUS AND
STRONG OPPOSITION OF THIS BILL
AND ASKING FOR YOUR NO VOTE.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE.
FLYING TO 17. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
YOU LOVE TO CUT THE PHONE LINES,
BUT YOU WILL NEVER SILENCE THE
PEOPLE WERE NOT TAKING YOUR SHOT
WERE SAYING TAKE THAT AS AN
OPPOSITION NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 2
16. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI MY
NAME IS HEATHER KELLER. I'M A
MEMBER OF PERK. A VOICE FOR
CHOICE. THE UNITY PROJECT,
CALIFORNIA FREEDOM KEEPERS AND
MANY OTHERS. AND I'M ASKING FOR
A NO 1 2098. IT IS GOVERNMENT
OVERREACH. AT A MINIMUM. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MA'AM. EXT,
PLEASE. LINE 2 63. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. YES HELLO. CAN YOU HEAR ME
PERFECTLY. PLEASE PROCEED.
PLEASE PROCEED. YES HELLO. MY
NAME IS SANDRA MARQUEZ AND I'M A
PASTOR COUNTY RESIDENT MOTHER OF
TWO AND ALSO AFFILIATED WITH THE
POSTURE COUNTY FREEDOM COALITION
STRONGLY OPPOSED THIS BILL AND
HUMBLY ASK YOU TO OPPOSE IT AS
WELL. IT IS GOVERNMENT
OVERREACH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE. 9 TO 64
YEAR LINES OPEN. HELLO MY NAME
IS HEATHER HUMANISM APPEAR IN AN
EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATOR. UM WE
KNOW THAT THE SCIENCE CHANGES SO
PLEASE OPPOSE THIS BILL. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE 1 86. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI MY NAME IS DESIREE
HEREDIA FROM FRESNO COUNTY. AND
I'M A VOLUNTEER WITH CALIFORNIA
FREEDOM KEEPERS AND OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. 1 91.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI. MY NAME
IS MONIQUE COLGIN. AND I'M
CALLING WITH WITH YOUR PARENTS
FOR CHOICE AND SENATOR ARCHIE
LETTUCE DISTRICT, AND WE
STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS BILL. THANK
YOU NEXT, PLEASE. THANK YOU. I'M
TOO 14. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
HELLO. YOU HEAR ME? YOU'RE ON
PERFECTLY. PLEASE PROCEED.
EXCELLENT ALRIGHT, EXCELLENT. MY
NAME IS MICHAEL JOSEPH. I'M WITH
WHO OWNS YOUR BODY? DOESN'T WHO
OWN YOUR BODY WHO OWN YOUR BODY?
AND THAT MAKES YOU A SLAVE
ORGANIZATION. AND DOWN. GO EVAN
LOW. HE'S DOWN THERE JUST LIKE A
HOE SUCKING ON THAT BIG PHARMA
DOUGH, PLEASE. LINE 1 67. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. SLIDE 1 67. HI MY
NAME IS MCKENNA HARROP ST JOHN
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
HEALTH, COALITION. ADVOCACY AND
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. THANK YOU TO 38. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. SALLY MOUTHFUL IN
LOS ANGELES COUNTY VERY MUCH IN
OPPOSITION AND SICKENED BY THE
GOVERNMENT OVERREACH OF THIS
THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE.
2 48 YEAR LINE IS OPEN. AND MY
NAME IS COURTNEY. PETER TAKE A
STANCE TENNIS SOFTLY STRONGLY
OPPOSE THIS BILL AND ASKED FOR
YOUR NOTE BOAT. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. FIND 2 49. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. YES MY NAME IS NICOLE
YOUNG CHAPTER CHAIR OF PLASTER
COUNTY MOMS FOR LIBERTY AND
STRONG OPPOSITION. I REPRESENT
OVER 2000 FAMILIES. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 81.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. MY NAME IS
SARAH ROSE. I'M IN PLASTER
COUNTY. I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO
A V 2098. ANY TYPE OF CENSORSHIP
GOES AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTION OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IT
GOVERNMENT DOES NOT THINK FOR
US. IT IS OUR THANK YOU, MA'AM.
TÌM ALL TAKE THAT AS OPPOSITION
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 1 51. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. UH WHEN I STARTED
ANTONIO NANDO I DON'T KNOW. NO.
YOU CAN SPEAK IN SPANISH. WE
DON'T HAVE AN INTERPRETER. GIVE
ME. BECAUSE ACTUALLY, I MUST
SAY, I DON'T KNOW. TESTIMONIAL
ORGANIZATION. PRESENTE E SISTER
IN, YOU KNOW ANTONIO. PRESIDENT
PARK THIS THAT YOU NOT RUBIO
RUBIO. THE HUMAN BUT HAVE YOU
LOOKED ABOUT LOOK AT THE
INTEREST AWARD NÓI. HE WAS JUST
PLEADING THAT YOU OPPOSED THE
BILL. OPPOSITION. GRACIAS. NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE 2 61. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HELLO THIS IS DEENA MARTIN
FROM ABC UNIFIED PARENTS FOR
CHOICE. WE STRONGLY OPPOSED A B
2098. THANK YOU. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. PLAY 95. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. THE NEWS. NATALIE GARCIA,
FIRST TIME EXPECTING MOTHER
REPRESENTING THOUSANDS OF
ADVOCATE OF MONASTERY, LEARNING
AND ADVOCATE OF INFORMED CONSENT
, AND I STRONGLY OPPOSED STILL
ALONG WITH MY UNBORN CHILD.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE.
LINE 2 60, YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
HI. MY NAME'S AARON, HIPS,
MANAMA, CONSTITUENT AND SENATOR
ARCHULETTA DISTRICT AND I'M IN
STRONG OPPOSITION OF BABY 2098.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
NEXT, PLEASE. FINE TO 62. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. CAN YOU HEAR ME?
PERFECTLY PLEASE PROCEED. CAN
YOU HEAR ME PERFECTLY. PLEASE
PROCEED, KAREN. MY NAME IS KAREN
VOGUE. I'M A CONSTITUENT OF
SENATOR BRIAN JONES. AND I
OPPOSE THIS BILL BECAUSE IT WILL
STOP INNOVATIONS AND TREATMENTS
FROM BEING HEARD. AND ALSO
SAFETY SINGLES FROM BEING HEARD
OF DOCTORS ARE PREVENTED FROM
SPEAKING THEIR PROFESSIONAL. I
ASK YOU ALL TO PLEASE DON'T KNOW
. AND LIKE DOCTORS BE DOCTORS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE TO 59. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. HELLO MY NAME IS
KAREN WITH LOCAL FOUNDER TAKE A
STAND, STANISLAS AND WE STRONGLY
OPPOSED THIS BILL. THANK YOU
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE TO 50 FOR
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. MY NAME IS
ROBIN PAUL. I'M A LIFELONG
RESIDENTS OF CALIFORNIA AND I'M
CALLING AN OPPOSITION OF 2098.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE.
TO 66. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. THIS
SANDY LYNCH I'M A MOTHER OF
THREE GRANDMOTHER OF SIX AND I
TOTALLY OPPOSED 2098. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT, PLEASE.
PLANE TO 68. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
HI. THERE THIS IS DR KATHY
ALLARD AND I STRONGLY OPPOSED TO
THIS DOING COMES TO NOMA COUNTY
. WE AMERICANS NEED OUR DOCTORS
AND SCIENTISTS TO ENGAGE IN
SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY. DEBATE. AND
EDUCATE OUR PATIENTS. GOOD
SCIENCE DOES NOT HAPPEN BY THE
EDICT OF GOVERNMENTAL
BUREAUCRATS THAT HAPPENS BY
DILIGENT AND HONEST INQUIRY AND
DISCOVERY. WE HOPE YOU WILL TAKE
THAT AS AN OPPOSITION. NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE 2 70. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HELLO GOT ME IT IS I TAKE
IT YOU'RE OPPOSED. IF YOU NEED
TO STAY TILL MIDNIGHT AND LISTEN
TO THE PEOPLE, THE PEOPLE STILL
MATTER. AND THE PEOPLE PAY YOUR
SALARY. THANK YOU, MA'AM. WE'RE
NOT GOING TO STAND FOR THIS
MEDICAL RECORDED YOUR OPPOSITION
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 1 97. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN.LIKE I SAID, YOU
CAN CUT THE PHONES, BUT YOU WILL
NEVER SILENT. WE WILL BE HERE
UNTIL MIDNIGHT. IF WE NEED TO BE
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 2 76. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. HI MY NAME IS LISA
AULTMAN. I'M AN ORANGE COUNTY
RESIDENT AND ATTORNEY HERE IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I
STRONGLY OPPOSED THIS BILL. WE
NEED TO LET THE DOCTORS, THE
DOCTORS AND DEBATE AND
INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION ABOUT
WHAT'S BEST FOR THEIR PATIENTS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 2 72. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. 2 72. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI MY NAME IS STEPHANIE
GREEDO. I AM A CONSTITUENT OF
BOB ARCHULETA IN LAKELAND,
CALIFORNIA AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSED THIS SELF. THANK YOU.
NEXT, PLEASE. 2 73. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI MY NAME IS KRISTA DANCY
. I AM A LICENSED MENTAL HEALTH
PROVIDER AND A GROUP PRACTICE
OWNER AND I STRONGLY OPPOSE A B
2098. THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT,
PLEASE. 2 71 YEAR LINE IS OPEN.
HI GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
NOEMI ABREGO. I'M HERE FROM SAN
DIEGO AND THE CHULA VISTA CITY.
UM, I AM WITH TV PARENTS UNITED
AND I AM ALSO IT'S LIKE HUNDREDS
OF. YOUR CONSTITUENTS HERE
OPPOSING THIS, UM A B 2098.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THANKS
FOR CALLING IN NEXT, PLEASE.
LIKE TO 77. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
HI. MY NAME IS DAISY AND I'M A
CURRENT COUNTY RESIDENT AND
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MY NAME,
MY CHILD, MY FAMILY, AND I WANT
TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY OPPOSE A
B 2098 THAT NATURAL ALWAYS WINS.
THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. PLANE TO
69. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. TO 69.
YOUR LINE IS OPEN. HI. THIS IS
NORMA AND I OPPOSE THANK YOU,
NORMA. NEXT, PLEASE. THANK YOU
TO 80 TO YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
HELLO. THIS IS KATHY WIGHTMAN.
I'M FROM WINDSOR, CALIFORNIA AND
MIKE MCGUIRE'S DISTRICT AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSED SILENCING OUR
DOCTORS AND HOPE THAT YOU WILL
ALL VOTE NO. THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE 2 86 YEAR LINE IS
OPEN. HI. MY NAME IS YADIRA
DELEON. I AM AN AMBASSADOR OF
LEX IT REPRESENTING THOUSANDS OF
LATINOS IN OUR NATION AND A
MEMBER OF NOW APPARENT ADVOCACY
GROUP, AND I STRONGLY OPPOSE A B
2098. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU TO 89. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. LOW. HELLO AHEAD. HI MY
NAME IS MELANIE LAST TIME FROM
THE CENTRAL VALLEY, AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSED A B 2098. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE 2 92. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. ANY HARRINGTON FROM
SENATOR BATES DISTRICT STRONGLY
OPPOSED. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU. LINE TO 95 AIRLINE IS
OPEN. LINE 2 95. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI. THIS IS JENNY RALPH
FROM LONG BEACH. PARENTS UNITED
AND WE ARE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO
THIS BILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. THANK
YOU. LINE 2 97. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HI I'M CALLING FROM
SONOMA, CALIFORNIA RESIDENTS AND
CITIZENS FOR WELL, WE'RE CALLED
SAVE OUR SONOMA AND WE'RE
CALLING ON BILLS LIKE THESE TO
URGE AND NO VOTE OR ABSTAIN,
PLEASE, SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE
TO CHOOSE. TO LISTEN TO DOCTORS
THAT LOOK OUT FOR US AS
INDIVIDUALS, NOT THAT ARE TOLD
WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT SAY. WE
APPRECIATE THAT. THANKS, PLEASE.
LINE 2 80. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
YES MY NAME IS MATT LEONARD. I'M
THE FATHER OF FIVE, REPRESENTING
THE AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY IN
CALIFORNIA, STRONGLY OPPOSED TO
2080 OR 2 2098. I HOPE THAT
COMMON SENSE WHEN'S THE DAY AND
DOCTORS CAN BE DOCTORS. ONCE
AGAIN. I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS HAS
TO BE SAID, BUT AH, YOU KNOW,
COMMON SENSE SHOULD WIN THE DAY.
THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
FURTHER OPPOSITION IN QUÊ. OKAY?
LET'S NOW BRING THE CONVERSATION
BACK TO MY COLLEAGUES ON THE
DIET. FOR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS
AND CONCERNS. I KNOW MY
COLLEAGUE JUST STEPPED OUT, AND
SHE HAS SOME COMMENTS. UM
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S. MAYBE I COULD
JUST KICK IT OFF AND ASK ABOUT
THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA
AND I THOUGHT I HEARD SUPPORT IF
AMENDED. THERE WERE SOME
CONCERNS EXPRESSED IN THE
ANALYSIS ABOUT I'M HAVING TO
PROVE VIOLATIONS AND THE INTENT
OF THE LICENSEE. HAVE THOSE
ISSUES BEEN RESOLVED? I
UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE STILL
WORKING WITH THE MEDICAL BOARD
TO HELP ADDRESS ANY OF THE
OUTSTANDING CONCERNS, BUT AS A
AS IT'S THE BILL IS BEFORE YOU.
CURRENTLY THOSE ISSUES ARE STILL
UM, OUTSTANDING. DO YOU? I MEAN,
GIVEN THE FACT IS THERE. GIVEN
THE FACT THAT THIS IS HEADING TO
APPROPRIATIONS NEXT TO YOU. HOW
CLOSE ARE YOU TO RESOLVING?
THOSE ISSUES. I MEAN, IT OCCURS
TO ME THAT THAT COULD BE A
SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM IN TERMS OF
PROOF. HAVING TO PROVE ONE'S
INTENT CAN BE SOMEWHAT
PROBLEMATIC. REGARDLESS OF THE
SETTING. INCLUDING THIS ONE. I'M
JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD COME
AND THAT SURE. YES I MEAN, S
SPECIFICALLY STATED, THE BOARD
SPECIFICALLY HOPES TO ADDRESS TO
GET THAT OF THE RECORDS, BUT I
UNDERSTAND JUST AS LEGISLATIVE
HISTORY THAT THE BILL DID NOT
PASS IN THIS HOUSE IN THE
SENATE. BUT CERTAINLY HAVE GOOD
FAITH NEGOTIATIONS AND TRYING TO
IRON OUT ANY OUTSTANDING ISSUES.
BUT I BELIEVE MY COLLEAGUE,
SENATOR MELINDA'S HAS SOME
QUESTIONS, SO LET'S LET THE VICE
CHAIR TICKET I DO. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIRMAN. UM SO THERE WERE A LOT
OF CONCERNS RAISED HERE TODAY.
UM AND THERE ARE CLEARLY A LOT
OF PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT AND LOST A
LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS. IT IS ALWAYS
DISAPPOINTING NOW WHEN
LEGISLATURE WHEN LEGISLATORS UM
, DISMISSED THE OPINIONS OF
THOSE WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION. I'M
NOT SUGGESTING THAT YOU HAVE
DONE THAT. I'M SUGGESTING THAT,
UM, WE HAVE HAD SOME MEMBERS WHO
DON'T SEEM TO TAKE SERIOUSLY
THOSE WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION AND
THAT IS ALWAYS DISAPPOINTING.
EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO THEIR
POINT OF VIEW. MY QUESTIONS FOR
YOU ARE RELATING TO THE
DEFINITION OF MISINFORMATION. UM
I KNOW THAT THIS THE MEDICAL
BOARD HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT
THAT. AND I SEE YOU'VE MADE SOME
CHANGES TO THE BUILDING. YOU
TRIED TO NARROW THAT, BUT I
DON'T KNOW THAT IT EVEN DEFINES
MISINFORMATION YET I THINK IT'S
IT CLARIFIES THAT IT'S GROSSLY
NEGLIGENT. BUT WHAT EXACTLY IS
IT? CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE?
SURE AND IF I MEANT TO THE CHAIR
ANSWER, SPECIFICALLY WITH
RESPECT TO THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS AS WELL. AND THEN
PERHAPS DR SOHRAB MIGHT BE ABLE
TO EXPRESS ADDITIONAL
OBSERVATIONS TO THROUGH THE
CHAIR THAT'S ACCEPTABLE TO
SENATOR BUT AS OUTLINED ON PAGE
TWO, SPECIFICALLY, THE
DEFINITION OF THIS INFORMATION
MEANS THE MISINFORMATION THAT A
LICENSEE DID THIS DELIBERATELY
DISSEMINATED WITH MALICIOUS
INTENT SPECIFICALLY OR AN INTENT
TO MISLEAD. AND THEN SECONDLY,
SENATOR DISSEMINATION MEANS THE
CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION FROM
THE LICENSEE TO A PATIENT UNDER
THE LICENSES CARE SO MARK MY
UNDERSTANDING WITH RESPECT TO
ADDRESSING AND NARROWING IT IN
THE SCOPE. IS OUTLINED CLEARLY
AND AS SOLIDLY DEFINED, SO, UM,
HOW DO YOU THEN PROVE THAT
SOMEBODY DID SO WITH MALICIOUS
INTENT? HOW WOULD ONE DO THAT?
BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THE
MEDICAL BOARD, WHICH IS
COMPRISED OF HALF OF THEM ARE
DOCTORS AN HALF OF THEM ARE
ATTORNEYS AND ATTORNEYS ARE NO
MORE QUALIFIED THAN I AM, TOO.
UM YOU KNOW, DECIDE WHAT IS
MEDICALLY ACCURATE. AND WHAT IS
NOT. SO HOW? HOW HOW DO YOU
DECIDE THE INTENT? SURE MARY
DOCTOR SO YOU CAN HELP ADDRESS?
UM THAT SPECIFIC ISSUE AS YOU'VE
BEEN WORKING WITH THE BOARD
SPECIFICALLY HAPPY, TOO. SO THE
FIRST ONE TO SAY MILITIA IS
INTENT IS, UM, RECKLESS
DISREGARD FOR THE TRUTH. UM OR,
UM INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING
OTHERS. OKAY SO LET ME ASK YOU
THIS BEFORE YOU CONTINUE? SURE
SO OVER THE COURSE OF TIME IN
THIS PANDEMIC, THINGS HAVE
CHANGED, RIGHT? WE KNOW THINGS
NOW. WE CERTAINLY DIDN'T KNOW.
IN THE BEGINNING, NEW TREATMENTS
HAVE COME OUT. SO. I AM
ENVISIONING A SITUATION WHERE WE
HAVE. THE CITY. YOU KNOW, WE
HAVE TREATMENTS TODAY. BUT THEN
TWO MONTHS FROM NOW, THERE'S
SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DISCOVERED.
YOU KNOW WHAT THIS ACTUALLY
WORKS. THIS IS ACTUALLY A PROVEN
METHOD TO HELP EASE SYMPTOMS.
YOU KNOW THAT SO BUT AS A
PHYSICIAN, YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN,
UM, REPRIMANDED AND PUNISHED,
PERHAPS BECAUSE YOU GAVE YOUR
PATIENT'S INFORMATION THAT BY
THAT YESTERDAY'S STANDARDS WERE
DEEMED TO BE MALICIOUS, AND
JUST, YOU KNOW, NOT GOOD MEDICAL
SCIENCE. YES SENATOR. SO UM, I
WOULD HOPE THAT THAT WOULD NEVER
HAPPEN EITHER. UM, WELL, HOPES
AND STRATEGY. OKAY, SO WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE'S CAREERS,
SO THAT THAT IS THE SO LET ME
EXPLAIN. LET ME BE MORE CLEAR.
THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE DEALING
WITH RIGHT NOW IS PATIENTS WHO
ARE BEING TOLD THAT THE VACCINES
HAVE NANOPARTICLES IN THEM THAT
ARE INTENDED TO TRACK TRACE AND
CONTROL THEIR MIND THAT IT
CAUSES AIDS. THAT IT IS KILLING
MORE PEOPLE THAN COVID. AND SO
THAT IS THE INFORMATION THAT I
WOULD EXPECT THE MEDICAL BOARD
TO HERE AND TAKE SERIOUSLY
SPECIFIC, GIVEN THE FACT THAT
THEY HAVE UP TO EIGHT MEMBERS
THAT ARE PHYSICIANS ON THE BOARD
WHO CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN ACADEMIC DEBATE. AND
THINGS THAT ARE JUST PATENTLY
AND VERIFIABLY FALSE. THAT'S THE
DANGER HERE, AND THE REASON WHY
IT'S SO DANGEROUS IS BECAUSE
PEOPLE BELIEVE IT BELIEVE IT
AFTER ONE OF THE DOCTORS SAID
THAT THE VACCINES MAGNETIZED
PEOPLE I WAS WORKING IN THE
CHILDREN'S EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT
AND A MOM ASKED ME DO VACCINES
REALLY MAGNETIZED PEOPLE AND I
HAVE OVER AND OVER AGAIN, IS
JUST, YOU KNOW, I DON'T BLAME
THE PATIENTS BECAUSE THEY'RE
MISINFORMED, AND I JUST TRY AND
REASSURE THEM AND TELL THEM AS
MUCH AS I KNOW TO HELP THEM GET
TO THE POINT WHERE THEY'RE
WILLING TO GET VACCINATED. OKAY.
AND I APPRECIATE THAT, UM%
HOWEVER, UM. YOU KNOW, I STILL
GO BACK TO THE FACT THAT WE HAVE
A BOARD THAT IS HALF ATTORNEYS.
NO OFFENSE, MR CHAIRMAN AND HALF
PHYSICIANS. UM WHO'S. IDEA OF
WHAT IS MALICIOUS MIGHT BE
DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOURS MIGHT
BE. AND SOMEBODY'S CAREER IS ON
THE LINE HERE CERTAIN INSTANCES
WHERE IT SEEMS PRETTY OBVIOUS.
BUT IN OTHER INSTANCES, IT MAY
NOT BE THAT OBVIOUS. AND I HAVE
GREAT CONCERN ABOUT THAT. AND
MAY I POSE A QUESTION? SURE
THERE WAS A THERE WAS A PATIENT
IN SOUTH CAROLINA. WHO, UM
CALLED THE MEDICAL BOARD AND
TOLD THEM THAT HIS DOCTOR TOLD
HIM NOT TO GET A BOOSTER BECAUSE
IT WOULD KILL HIM. AND HE FILED
A COMPLAINT WITH THE MEDICAL
BOARD. WE KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT
TRUE. UM, AND THE MEDICAL BOARD.
JUST KIND OF BRUSHED TO THE SIDE
AND HE CALLED. HE ENDED UP
CALLING THE REPORTER. THIS GUY
HAD NO IDEA WHAT TO DO. AND HE
SAID, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IF
THOSE IF THIS IS TRUE IF THE
VACCINES ARE KILLING PEOPLE IN
THE MEDICAL BOARDS NEED TO TAKE
A STANCE. OKAY BUT IN YOUR
SPECIFIC EXAMPLE IF YOU'RE
SAYING THAT THIS HAPPENED AND
THE MEDICAL BOARD DID NOTHING.
YES THIS BILL ISN'T GOING TO
CHANGE THAT THE MEDICAL BOARD
WORLD STILL DO NOTHING. SO THIS
SO THE MEDICAL BOARD HAS ASKED
FOR LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
BECAUSE THEY DON'T FEEL THAT
THEY HAVE IT TO DISCIPLINE
DOCTORS WHO ARE SPREADING
MISINFORMATION AND
DISINFORMATION. YOU LOST ME WHEN
YOU SAID THE MEDICAL BOARD ONCE
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY. I HAVE
THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE HAVE
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY. OKAY
MEDICAL BOARD DOES NOT AND I
WILL NOTE UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES
SEED OUR AUTHORITY TO THE
MEDICAL WHAT I INTENDED TO SAY,
AND I APOLOGIZE. I CAN'T HEAR
HIM WHEN YOU'RE SPEAKING OFF TO
THE SIDE. THAT IS NOT WHAT I
THAT'S NOT WHAT I INTENDED.
THEY'RE ASKING YOU TO AMEND THE
MEDICAL PRACTICE ACT. THAT DOES
NOT WHAT I CAN DO. ALL RIGHT?
THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU FOR
CLARIFYING. OKAY THANK YOU,
DOCTOR. I APPRECIATE YOU TRYING
TO HELP ME UNDERSTAND THIS HERE,
SO ASSEMBLYMAN. AGAIN, I THINK
THE DEFINITION. ISN'T QUITE
CLEARER AND I AND I STILL HOLD
MY RESERVATIONS ABOUT WHO IS THE
ULTIMATE ARBITER OF WHAT IS
MALICIOUS AND WHAT IS NOT.
THAT'S WHERE WE SEE MEMBER
PROBLEM NOW THE MEDICAL BOARD
CAN ALREADY IMPOSED DISCIPLINARY
ACTION. CORRECT. CORRECT THIS
BILL, RIGHT? OKAY SO THEN YOUR
BILL IS SEEKING TO ALLOW THE
MEDICAL BOARD TO IMPOSE EVEN
STRICTER PENALTIES. IS THAT AM I
UNDERSTANDING, CLARIFY SENATOR
AND AS I'M TRYING TO BEST
UNDERSTAND THE SPECIFICS OF
HELPING TO FURTHER DEFINE IF YOU
HAVE SOME SUGGESTIONS, WHICH YOU
WOULD BE IN SUPPORT VERY MUCH
HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN SUCH
ACCOMMODATIONS. I KNOW YOU'RE
EQUALLY COMMITTED TO THE
PROTECTION OF ALL CALIFORNIANS.
OKAY WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT.
BUT LET'S GO BACK TO WHAT YOUR
BILL IS INTENDING TO DO, BECAUSE
THE MEDICAL BOARD CAN ALREADY
DISCIPLINED POSITIONS. RIGHT? SO
YOUR BILL LOOKS TOO. IMPOSE EVEN
HARSHER PENALTIES. HELP CLARIFY
SENATOR AS AS CLEARLY DEFINED ON
THE MISINFORMATION THAT IS BEING
EXACERBATED IN THE IN THIS
CLIMATE. AND SO IF THE
QUESTIONING WITH RESPECT TO
HELPING TO UNDERSTAND THE
LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY VERSUS THE
AUTHORITY THAT HAS BEEN INVESTED
IN THE MEDICAL BOARD BY US IN
THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR
HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN SOME SPECIFIC
LANGUAGE THAT YOU MIGHT PROPOSE
HERE IN THIS COMMITTEE TO
GETTING YOUR SUPPORT TO HELP
BRING PROTECT ALL CALIFORNIANS.
OKAY WELL, ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FOR
I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU HAVE
PROVIDED ANY MORE CLARITY FOR
ME. BUT I DO. THANK YOU FOR
TRYING. UM I STILL HAVE THE SAME
CONCERNS. THIS BILL GOES TO THE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE NEXT,
SO THERE'S CERTAINLY NOT A LOT
OF OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ANY
CHANGES. I DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY
WILL MADE IN THIS COMMITTEE. BUT
I WILL SAY THAT AH! YOU KNOW,
PHYSICIANS HAVE. A GREAT
RESPONSIBILITY TO THEIR PATIENTS
. I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT
AND WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT
PHYSICIANS OR MEDICAL PERSONNEL
OUT THERE, SAYING THINGS TO
PEOPLE THAT COULD DO THEM HARM.
ALTHOUGH I SUSPECT THAT THAT'S
ALREADY TAKING PLACE TODAY
HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH COVID
RIGHT BECAUSE IT'S PHYSICIANS
GET DISCIPLINED ALL THE TIME,
DON'T THEY? SURE THEY DO SO THE
BOARD ALREADY HAS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DISCIPLINE
PHYSICIANS WHO ARE OPERATING
OUTSIDE. OF THEIR BOUNDARIES.
NOW THIS ONE CONCERNS ME BECAUSE
IT SEEMS TO BE, UM THIS YOU
KNOW, COVID. SCHEDULE THAT IS
ATTEMPTING TO BE USED. TO
INTIMIDATE PHYSICIANS, UM, FROM
SHARING INFORMATION THAT MAY
VERY WELL BE VALUABLE TO THEIR
PATIENTS. AND AGAIN. I GO BACK
TO THERE WERE SOME THINGS WE
DIDN'T KNOW. IN THE BEGINNING.
THERE WAS CERTAINLY TREATMENTS
THAT DIDN'T EXIST IN THE
BEGINNING. THAT NOW ARE IN
EXISTENCE AND ARE WIDELY USED,
BUT PERHAPS PRIOR TO THEIR
INTRODUCTION. PEOPLE MIGHT
THINK. WELL, THAT'S CRAZY. THAT
COULD NEVER WORK, YOU KNOW, OR
OR HAD THEIR HESITATIONS ABOUT
ITS EFFICACY, SO THAT'S MY
CONCERN. I APPRECIATE YOUR.
DESIRE TO PROTECT THE PATIENT. I
REALLY DO, BUT I WILL NOT BE
ABLE TO SUPPORT THE BILL IN ITS
CURRENT FORM TODAY, BUT THANK
YOU, MR CHAIRMAN FOR THE
INDULGENCE. THANK YOU, SENATOR
PAN. THANKS VERY MUCH AND
SIMILAR LOW. APPRECIATE YOU
BRINGING THIS FORWARD. UM FEW
QUESTIONS. SO FIRST OF ALL, UM
THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT
THIS INFORMATION AND COVID AND
SO FORTH. UM AND MAYBE YOU CAN
HELP ME HERE SO FROM I
UNDERSTAND THIS IS SIMPLY NOT
SOMETHING THAT YOU OR I OR
INDIVIDUALS, SAID THIS IS THE
PROBLEM WE'VE HAD. THE WORLD
HEALTH ORGANIZATION. DECLARED
THAT WE HAD A. A ADDITION TO A
PANDEMIC. WE HAD A INFO DEM IQ.
THE U. S SURGEON GENERAL PUT OUT
A WHOLE REPORT. ON.
MISINFORMATION DISINFORMATION AS
A PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS. UM THE
FEDERATION OF STATE MEDICAL
BOARDS. THE UMBRELLA
ORGANIZATION THAT BRINGS
TOGETHER ALL MEDICAL BOARDS
ACROSS THE UNITED STATES HAS
SAID. POSITIONS HAD A PARTICULAR
DUTY TO PATIENTS, AND THAT, UH,
SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE. THEY
SPREAD MISINFORMATION. SO CAN
CAN. CAN YOU CAN YOU PERHAPS
SPEAK TO THE NATURE OF THIS
CRISIS THAT THIS IS NOT
SOMETHING THAT YOU YOURSELF CAME
UP WITH? OR MAYBE JUST A HANDFUL
OF US, BUT THIS WAS ACTUALLY A
NATIONALS, A NATIONAL CALL AN
INTERNATIONAL CALL BUT ALSO
NATIONAL CALL TO ACTION TO
ADDRESS THIS. IS CAN YOU SPEAK
TO THE DIRECTIONAL FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD? YEAH DOCTOR
PEN. THANK YOU, SPECIFICALLY, UM
, NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE
LEGISLATURE. WE ARE ATTEMPTING
TO BE AS RESPONSIVE AS POSSIBLE
FOR THE PROTECTION OF ALL OF
CALIFORNIANS AS OUTLINED HERE.
AND JUST TO BE THAT MUCH MORE
DIRECT AND FRANK. I'M ACTUALLY
SURPRISED THAT THERE IS
OPPOSITION TO WHAT WE KNOW THAT
THIS IS A VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD
PIECE OF LEGISLATION TO HELP
EMPOWER THE MEDICAL BOARD TO DO
ITS JOB. IT'S NOT OFTEN TIMES
ALSO DOCTOR PEN THAT YOU WOULD
SEE THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT OF A
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL THAT COULD
FURTHER EMPOWER THE BOARD TO
REPRIMAND ITS OWN MEMBERS. BUT
IN DOING SO, HELPING TO ENSURE
THE INTEGRITY AND THE STANDARDS
OF CARE AND PROTECTING ALL OF
CALIFORNIANS. THANK YOU. AND I
APPRECIATE THAT, AND ACTUALLY
NOT ONLY THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION, BUT MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION TESTIFIED AND
SUPPORTED THIS BILL. SO IN OTHER
WORDS, THE DOCTORS OF CALIFORNIA
ARE SAYING THE MEDICAL BOARD
NEEDS TO HAVE THIS AUTHORITY A PROBLEM WHERE
UNFORTUNATELY, MINORITY SMALL
MINORITY, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THAT
MINORITY IS ENDANGERING THE
PATIENTS OF CALIFORNIA AND
CALLING ON THE MEDICAL BOARD AND
CALLING ON US AS LEGISLATORS TO
GIVE THE MEDICAL BOARD THAT
AUTHORITY. UM I ALSO MAKE NOTE
THAT, UM YEAH, THERE'S AND SOME
OF THE PREVIOUS GUSHING ABOUT
THE MEDICAL WORD. JUST JUST MAKE
NOTE THAT IT IS THE MISSION OF
THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA
TO PROTECT HEALTH CONSUMERS.
THROUGH PROPER LICENSING AND
REGULATION OF PHYSICIANS AND
SURGEONS. UM AND CERTAINLY IS
THE LICENSEE MYSELF. I KNOW THAT
A LICENSE IS A PRIVILEGE. IT'S
RIGHT. IT'S SOMETHING. THAT
STATE GRANTS THAT ALLOWS ME TO
DO CERTAIN THINGS. AS A MEDICAL
PRACTITIONER THAT OR NEW PEOPLE
OFF THE STREET. WE'RE NOT BE
ALLOWED WITH THE CONSIDER
ALLOWED TO DO. UH AND THAT I'M
EXPECTED TO WELL THAT LICENSE
RESPONSIBLY. AND THAT INCLUDES
CONVEYING ACCURATE INFORMATION
IN THE STANDARD OF CARE TO
PATIENTS. IN FACT, I BELIEVE,
AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE
CHAIR. YOU KNOW, RAISING THE
ISSUE WITH, BUT I MEAN, I THINK
THERE IS ABOUT YOU KNOW, WE
WON'T NEED TO BE SURE THAT
PHYSICIANS ARE PRACTICING THE
STANDARD OF CARE. AND IN FACT,
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE MEDICAL
BOARD ACTUALLY, UM SANCTIONING
PHYSICIANS, WHETHER IT'S WITH
PROBATION OR LOSS OF LICENSE.
WELL, ULTIMATELY, YES, THE
MEDICAL BOARD ITSELF VOTES AND
WE CAN TALK ABOUT HOW MANY
PHYSICIANS AND SO FORTH ON THE
MEDICAL BOARD. IN FACT, SOME OF
THE CONSUMER ADVOCATES THINKS
THERE'S TOO MANY PHYSICIANS ON
THE MEDICAL BOARD. THAT ACTUALLY
, THERE IS AN INVESTIGATIVE
PROCESS THAT INVOLVES ACTUALLY
GETTING AN EXPERT TO REVIEW. THE
DOCUMENTS. TO BE SURE TO SAY, IS
THE PHYSICIAN PRACTICING THE
STANDARD OF CARE OR THEY, YOU
KNOW. POTENTIALLY CAUSING HARM
BY THROUGH NEGLIGENCE OR
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS INFORMATION
EVEN INTENTIONALLY. WRITING
CAUSING HARM IT. IS THAT YOUR
UNDERSTANDING? I KNOW YOU USED
TO BE CHAIR OF THE BUSINESS,
PROFESSIONAL COMMITTEE AND
ASSEMBLY. SO YOU HAVE SOME
EXPERTISE THIS AREA THAT THAT'S
NOT JUST SIMPLY A VOTE OF THE
MEDICAL BOARD. THERE'S ACTUALLY
INVESTIGATOR TO PROCESS THAT
TAKES PLACE BEFORE SANCTIONING
PHYSICIAN YES, THAT THAT THAT'S
CORRECT IN EVERY INVESTIGATION,
THERE'S A MEDICAL EXPERT THAT
REVIEWS THE ACTION SPECIFICALLY
TO BEST DETERMINE WHAT HAS
TRANSPIRED, SO THERE IS A DUE
PROCESS TO COLLECT AS MUCH
INFORMATION. TO ASSIST THE
VIOLATION. CORRECT THANK YOU.
AND I THINK I JUST AGAIN
ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT YOU POINTED
OUT, AND CERTAINLY I AS A AS A
MEMBER OF THE MEDICAL
ASSOCIATIONS, WE USUALLY ARE ON
THE END FIGHTING TOO. NOT SO
MUCH LIMIT THE MEDICAL BOARD'S
AUTHORITY BUT BEING SURE THAT
WERE TREATED FAIRLY. SO THE FACT
THAT ALL THE MEN THE ALL SO MANY
MEDICAL ASSOCIATIONS, IN FACT, I
HAVEN'T HEARD A. YOU KNOW,
SIGNIFICANT MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
. ACTUALLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS
BILL, RIGHT? THERE MAY BE SOME
SOME GROUPS THAT BUT IT'S NOT.
YOU KNOW, THE MEDICAL
ASSOCIATIONS ARE HERE BEFORE US
ADVOCATING FOR THE MEDICAL
COMMUNITY ADVOCATING FOR
PATIENTS, NOT ONLY THIS ISSUE,
BUT SO MANY OTHER ISSUES. ARE
HERE TO SAY THAT THEY WANT TO
SUPPORT THE SPILL. IS THAT
CORRECT? CORRECT? OKAY, THANK
YOU. SO, UM SO I THINK SO AGAIN,
UM YOU KNOW THIS? THE I THINK
ONE OF THE CHALLENGES FOR THE
MEDICAL BOARD, OF COURSE, IS
THAT BEING SURE THAT THEY CAN
CARRY OUT ITS MISSION THAT
MISSIONS DEFINED BY THE
PARAMETERS. WE GIVE IT AS IN THE
CODE CORRECT. AND I THINK IT'S
AGAIN. IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE,
UM, WE'VE HAD TOO MANY PEOPLE
DIE OF COVID. UM WE ALSO UM AND
UNFORTUNATELY AND IT WAS
MENTIONED THAT WELL, MAYBE IT IS
A TREATMENT THAT COME UP. BUT I
HAVEN'T YOU KNOW, I DON'T SEE
ANY PHYSICIAN BEING PUNISHED FOR
BRINGING UP A TREATMENT WHERE
THERE'S ACTUALLY A, YOU KNOW,
REASONABLE THERE'S ACTUALLY GOOD
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT
IT'S EITHER WORKS OR EVEN
POTENTIALLY COULD WORK. I THINK
THE ISSUE IS THAT THEY'RE
ACTUALLY SOME. I DON'T KNOW. I
CALL THEM TREATMENTS ANYMORE.
BUT THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE STILL
SELLING AND ACTUALLY PERSONALLY
PROFITING FROM UM, THAT ACTUALLY
, WE KNOW THE EVIDENCE IS
ACTUALLY COMING. THAT DOESN'T
WORK. OR COULD BE POTENTIALLY
HARMFUL. AS WELL. SO UM, YOU
KNOW, THESE ARE THE EXTREME
CIRCUMSTANCES AND THAT WE IN
WHICH THE MEDICAL BOARD IN ORDER
TO FULFILL ITS MISSION TO POP UP
PROTECT THE PUBLIC. THAT'S WHY
WE HAVE LICENSING UM NEEDS TO
HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BE ABLE TO
EXAMINE WHETHER SOMEONE HAS BEEN
ENTRUSTED WITH A LICENSE. SHOULD
STILL RETAIN THAT LICENSE AND
THAT POSITION OF TRUST WITH THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND I
APPRECIATE THAT. YOU KNOW, MY
COLLEAGUES IN THE MEDICAL
COMMUNITY CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND
THAT AND THAT'S WHY I SEE THEM
HERE TESTIFYING AND EXPRESSING
THEIR SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL, SO
CERTAINLY LV SUPPORTING YOUR
BILL TODAY. AND I'LL BE MOVED TO
BUILD AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
THANK YOU. SENATOR OF COBURG.
OKAY? HELLO SOMEONE IN MARLOW.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY
AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
MEASURE OF FORWARD. LET ME JUST
BEGIN BY STATING THAT I TRULY
APPRECIATE THE INTENT OF THE
BILL OF PROTECTING PATIENTS AND
CALIFORNIA'S AS A WHOLE. SO LET
ME JUST BEGIN WITH THAT BECAUSE
I DO TRULY TRULY RESPECT THAT
INTENT. UM HOWEVER, I DO HAVE
RESERVATIONS AND I'LL AND I'LL
EXPLAIN WHY. ESPECIALLY WHEN IT
COMES TO THE REALM OF SCIENCE
AND DEALING WITH A NEW A NEW
VIRUS IN THIS CASE PER SE. AND
IN THE SENSE OF, ESPECIALLY WHEN
IT COMES TO SCIENCE, YOU KNOW, I
REMEMBER IN 2019 AND ACTUALLY 20
STARTING 20 IN 2020 AND 21.
THERE WOULD BE CERTAIN THINGS
THAT WE KNEW THAT WERE STATED.
YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THIS IS WHAT
WE KNOW. THESE ARE THE FACTS IN,
YOU KNOW, WE WOULD WOULD HEAR IT
IN THE NEWS, YOU KNOW STATEMENTS
MADE BY DOCTORS AND REPORTERS,
REPEATING IT AND THEN A COUPLE
OF MONTHS LATER OR EVEN A YEAR
LATER. UM WE HEAR SOMETHING
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WHEN IT
CAME TO WHAT WE NEED ARE FACTS
AT THAT TIME. UM, THERE IS, UM
THERE'S A SENTENCE IN SCIENCE
THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S
IT'S ALWAYS EVOLVING AND
SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO
CONSIDER, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE
DEALING WITH SOMETHING BRAND
SPANKING NEW. UM THERE'S GOING
TO BE ONGOING RESEARCH, ONGOING
DISCUSSIONS AND COMMENTARIES
THAT ARE GOING TO PROVE TRUE
TODAY, BUT MAY MAY OR MAY NOT
PROVE SO, UM, IN THE FUTURE. AND
I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF
TRYING TO PROTECT, UM PATIENTS
OR CALIFORNIANS FROM PEOPLE
MAKING STATEMENTS THAT MAY NOT
BE TRUTH. BUT. I THINK THE
CONCERNS THAT I HAVE ARE IN
PRINCIPLE WITH REGARDS TO WELL,
WHAT EXACTLY IS TRUTH? BUT WE
KNOW THAT SCIENCE IS ALWAYS
EVOLVING AND RESEARCHES
CONTINUOUSLY ONGOING, ESPECIALLY
WITH SOMETHING COMPLETELY NEW,
SUCH AS COVID 19. SO THAT IN
ITSELF MAKES ME A LITTLE NERVOUS
WITH REGARDS TO, UM, PROVIDING
THE SPACE FOR, UM FOR DOCTORS
AND SCIENTISTS TO DO CONTINUOUS
RESEARCH. IN THIS SPACE AND
PROVE SOMETHING THAT MAY BE
WORKING. MAYBE IN THE
EXPERIMENTAL SPACE OF RESEARCH,
TRYING NEW MEDICATIONS AND NEW
NEW THINGS. THAT ARE GOING TO
TAKE TIME IN ORDER FOR HIM TO BE
, YOU KNOW, APPROVED BY THE FDA
OR BY THE MEDICAL BOARDS AS AS
SOMETHING THAT'S TRUE. SO IN THE
IN THE PROCESS OF OUR IN TERM OF
THAT THERE, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO
ARE WILLING TO TRY NEW THINGS
AND ARE WILLING TO SAY YOU KNOW
WHAT? I'M WILLING TO TRY THAT
EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT FDA
APPROVED, OR, YOU KNOW, I HEARD
THAT THIS MAY BE, UM POSSIBILITY
TO ADDRESS OR TO CURE SOMETHING
, YOU KNOW COVID 19 SYMPTOMS
THAT ONGOING RESEARCH RIGHT NOW.
TO STATE. TO PENALIZE SOMEONE
FOR SORT OF DOING? YOU KNOW,
EXPERIMENTS OR DOING RESEARCH
MAKES ME A LITTLE NERVOUS.
ESPECIALLY IN IN IN IN IN
SCIENCE. YOU KNOW, IN IN PUBLIC
SAFETY,WE HAD A BILL AND I WAS
TRYING TO FIND WHAT THE WHAT?
THE BILL, WASN'T IT? SO I
APOLOGIZE. I DON'T HAVE IT IN
THERE. BUT WE HAD A BILL THAT
STATED THAT EXPERT WITNESSES IN
SCIENCE, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE
CONSIDERED, UM YOU KNOW, IF
ANYTHING WERE TO QUESTION TO
CONSIDER IT AS YOU KNOW, AS WE
CONSIDERATION FOR SENTENCING,
AND, UM AND. THINK IT WAS
SENTENCING IS SOMETHING ELSE. I
DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS. I
WISH I COULD. NO, BUT THE BOTTOM
LINE OR THE UNDERLYING THEME ON
THAT WAS THE FACT THAT SCIENCE
WAS ONGOING AND THINGS COULD
CHANGE. AND SO WITH THAT IN MIND
TO NARROW THIS THIS BILL AND
JUST ARE TO PASS A BILL SUCH AS
THIS IN NARROW THE SCOPE OF WHAT
CAN BE SAID AND CANNOT BE SAID
MAKES ME A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS.
YOU KNOW. BESIDES THE FIRST
AMENDMENT, I THINK MORE IN THE
FACT THAT BECAUSE IT IS SCIENCE,
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT ANY
PATIENT OR ANY CALIFORNIAN,
WHICH WOULD HAVE A TRUSTING
RELATIONSHIP WITH THEIR MEDICAL
DOCTOR FACILITATOR AND KNOW WHAT
THEIR TRAINING WAS IN ORDER TO
ASSESS WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING
WOULD WORK FOR THEM OR TAKE
SOMETHING IS TRUE. AND IF YOU DO
QUESTION WHAT YOUR DOCTOR MAY OR
MAY NOT SAY WITH REGARDS TO THE
SPACE THAT THEY ALWAYS HAVE AN
OPTION TO GO AND HAVE A 2ND 3RD
4TH, OR EVEN MORE OPINIONS ON
THAT END, SO TAKING
CONSIDERATION, YOU KNOW WHAT THE
MEDICAL BOARD AND WHAT DID THE
FDA OR THE PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY
STATE AS FACTS IN COMPARE THAT
WITH WHAT IS BEING SAID SO UM,
ON THAT NOTION. UM I'M HESITANT
TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS BILL
AT THIS TIME, BUT I DO. UM AND
JUST IN THE SENSE OF. KNOWING
THAT SCIENCE IS ONGOING, AND
RESEARCH SHOULD BE ONGOING AND
NO DOCTOR. NO SCIENTISTS SHOULD
FEEL CONSTRICTED BY, YOU KNOW,
UM EXPLORING OR DOING RESEARCH
OR MAKE STATEMENTS AND I'M
HOPING THAT CONSUMERS AND
PATIENTS WILL HAVE THE, UM THE.
THE KNOWLEDGE OR THE INTUITIVE.
UM WHAT'S PUT IT? DIRECTION TO
SEEK DIFFERENT OPINIONS. SO I'M
NOT ON THOSE REASONS I HAVE. I
CAN'T SUPPORT THE BILL TODAY,
BUT I APPRECIATE THE INTENT OF
WANTING TO PROTECT. UM YOU KNOW,
ARE. PATIENTS AND ARE IN
CALIFORNIA AS A WHOLE. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. YOU
KNOW, SOME OF THEM ARE? AYE.
THIS RE VACCINE MAN MANDATES.
YOU KNOW, I'M GENERALLY NOT
SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE ACCEPTING
VERY LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES. BUT
IN LOOKING AT THIS BILL SEEMS TO
ME THAT IN ORDER TO HAVE IN
ORDER TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S
ACTIONABLE. IN ORDER TO BE ABLE
TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE
DOCTOR. THE PHYSICIANS THE
INFORMATION THAT THE PHYSICIAN
IS DISSEMINATED. USING THIS
LANGUAGE. HAS TO BE
CONTRADICTED. SO ITS OPPOSITE.
CONTEMPORARY SCIENTIFIC
CONSENSUS. CONTEMPORARY
SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS. IN OTHER
WORDS, CONTEMPORARY SCIENTIFIC
AGREEMENT. IS THERE AGREEMENT
WITH RESPECT TO COVID 19
VACCINES? WITH RESPECT TO THE
MEDICAL COMMUNITY, THE
SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS, SO I GUESS
IT WOULD EXTEND BEYOND THE
NECESSARILY THE PHYSICIAN
COMMUNITY IT WOULD EXTEND TO THE
PHARMACEUTICAL COMMITTEE
COMMUNITY WOULD EXTEND TO THE
PUBLIC HEALTH COMMUNITY WOULD
EXTEND BROADLY, RIGHT? SURE AND
MR CHAIR MIGHT I AM NOT A DOCTOR
. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE DOCTORS
ON THIS COMMITTEE WHO CAN SPEAK
TO IT SPECIFICALLY. BUT IN
ADDRESSING ANY KNOWLEDGE NG THE
COMMENTS THAT YOU'VE MADE AS
WELL AS, UM THE PREVIOUS
SENATOR. WERE VERY SPECIFIC IN
THIS BILL. WITH THIS BACK TO THE
DEFINITION OF DISSEMINATION
DISSEMINATION. OF INFORMATION
WITH MALICIOUS INTENT. SO THE
OUTLINE THAT YOU PROVIDED
SENATOR DOES NOT QUALIFY BECAUSE
IT WOULD SPECIFICALLY OUTLINED
HERE WITH MALICIOUS INTENT. AN
INTENT TO MISLEAD. SPECIFIC SO
IN THIS CASE OF THE DOCTOR
WISHING TO FOCUS ON HELPING TO
ACKNOWLEDGE AND ADDRESS
SPECIFICALLY TO HELP A PATIENT
THAT THAT'S NOT LISTED IN THE
BILL, SPECIFICALLY WITH RESPECT
TO MS INFORMATION. THAT OF
DISINFORMATION AND DISSEMINATES
DISSEMINATION OF MISINFORMATION
WOULD CONSTITUTE THAT OF GROSS
NEGLIGENCE SO AGAIN ATTEMPTING
TO BE A SPECIFIC AS POSSIBLE.
AND ADDRESSING THAT SPECIFIC
HARM. UH AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE
HELPING TO ADDRESS AND EMPOWER
THE MEDICAL BOARD TO ADDRESS
WELL, AND MY POINT WAS THAT I
TRIED TO MAKE WAS, IT SEEMS TO
BE A PRETTY HIGH STANDARD. IN
OTHER WORDS, YOU HAVE TO PROVE
THAT THE INFORMATION BEING
DISSEMINATED IS CONTRADICTED.
SPIKE CONTEMPORARY SCIENTIFIC
CONSENSUS AGREEMENT IN THE
SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY. RIGHT?
YES, OVERWHELMING CONSENSUS.
OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL,
THAT'S GOOD TO SENATOR BATES
FIRST. AND THEN I'LL GO BACK
AROUND. THANK YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S LOW AND FOR OUR
LONG DISCUSSION VERY IMPORTANT.
I'M HAVING REAL DIFFICULTY WITH
IT BECAUSE I SEE A PATIENT
GETTING INFORMATION FROM THEIR
DOCTOR. THAT MAYBE LET'S TAKE
THE EXAMPLE OF THE INDIVIDUAL
WHO REPORTED THAT THE DOCTOR
SAID. IF YOU TAKE THE VACCINE,
YOU'LL DIE. WE DON'T KNOW THE
UNDERLYING CONDITIONS THAT MIGHT
HAVE BEEN THERE THAT GAVE THE
PHYSICIAN THAT RESPONSIBILITY.
LET HIS PATIENT KNOW. PERHAPS HE
WAS IN CANCER TREATMENT A COUPLE
OF YEARS AGO. I HAPPEN TO HAVE A
FRIEND WHO HAD THAT SEEM SORT OF
PROBLEM. SO IT SEEMS TO BE
SOMETHING WHERE YOU REALLY NEED
TO MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN
HEARSAY. AND I CONSIDER THAT
FROM THE PATIENT DOCTOR
RELATIONSHIP WITH PATIENTS
ENDING IN A COMPLAINT. COMPARED
TO A DOCTOR WHO'S ACTUALLY
PUBLISHING. MASE INFORMATION
THAT IS VERY DANGEROUS AND
DAMAGING LIKE YOU'RE GOING TO
GET A CHIP IN YOUR BRAIN. THOSE
THAT'S THAT'S QUITE A DIFFERENT
THING THAN A PATIENT. DOCTOR
RELATIONSHIP WENT IN THE PRIVACY
OF THAT THE DOCTOR SAYS. I DON'T
THINK YOU SHOULD DO THIS. I
DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS
AND ALL THE REASONS WHY SO
BECAUSE OF THAT, AND CONSIDERING
THE DEPTH THAT WE'D HAVE TO GO
INTO AND DISCUSSING HOW THE
MEDICAL BOARD MIGHT WEIGH IN ON
SOMETHING THAT'S THAT
COMPLICATED. I'M GONNA NOT BE
ABLE TO SUPPORT IT TODAY, RIGHT?
I UNDERSTAND THE MOTIVATION. THE
PASSION ON A PART OF OUR
PHYSICIANS. I ALSO UNDERSTAND
THE CONCERN OF THE OPPOSITION.
BECAUSE THIS IS A REACH INTO
FREE SPEECH. NO QUESTION IF THE
CONSTITUTIONAL UM CLOUDY AREA
FOR ME, BECAUSE ONCE YOU START
WITH COVID, WHAT'S THE NEXT
THING? AND WE HAVE TO ALWAYS
THINK OF THE CAMEL'S NOSE UNDER
THE TENT AND ALL THAT, BECAUSE
THAT'S HOW THINGS LIKE THIS
START WHEN WE START TO RESTRICT
THE ABILITY OF A PROFESSIONAL
PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP. TO BE
TALKING TO THEIR PATIENT,
ESPECIALLY IN THE WORLD. I
BELIEVE IN THE ARENA OF HEALTH
AND PRIVACY. UH WE HAVE A NATION
ON FIRE ABOUT THAT RIGHT NOW. SO
I'M GONNA NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT
IT TODAY, BUT I WANT YOU TO KNOW
I UNDERSTAND AND I FEEL THE
CONCERN THAT YOU HAVE BASED ON.
YOU KNOW, FRIENDS I'VE HAD WHO
HAD WHAT? I DIDN'T CONSIDER THE
BEST INFORMATION, BUT WE DO KNOW
THAT PEOPLE ARE GETTING COVID
THAT ARE VACCINATED AND BOOSTED
THREE TIMES. SO THERE ARE AREAS
THERE THAT ARE VERY, VERY GRAY
AND REALLY NEED A LITTLE MORE
DEPTH. OF I THINK SPECIFICITY
BEFORE YOU CAN BRING SOMETHING
LIKE THIS TO THE MEDICAL BOARD
AND AFFECT SOMEONE'S CAREER. SO
WITHOUT I WON'T BE ABLE TO
SUPPORT IT TODAY. THANK YOU,
SENATOR BATES. YOU KNOW, JUST TO
COMMENT, AND THEN I'LL GO BACK
AROUND THE ROOM HERE. IT SEEMS
TO ME THAT IN THE DIRECT PATIENT
DOCTOR CONVERSATION IF THE
DOCTOR SAYS YOU KNOW YOU
SHOULDN'T TAKE THE VACCINE. IT
MAY KILL YOU. EVALUATION OF
PATIENT CONDITION. OTHER FACTORS
IN ORDER FOR THAT TO BE
ACTIONABLE. IT'S AS I READ YOUR
BILL AGAINST THE INDIVIDUAL
PHYSICIAN. THE CONTEMPORARY
MEDICAL OR SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.
MUST BE IN AGREEMENT THAT THAT
COMMENT. THAT THE VACCINE WILL
KILL YOU. IS FALSE. AND SO, TO
THE EXTENT THAT YOU'RE
CONSIDERING THE CONDITION OF THE
PATIENT AND YOU HAVE TO IN ORDER
TO EVALUATE THAT I SUSPECT THAT
YOU CAN. THE MEDICAL BAR WOULD
HAVE A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT
TIME. FINDING CONTEMPORARY
AGREEMENT. AMONG PHYSICIANS IN
THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY. MORE
GENERAL STATEMENTS THAT ARE NOT
RELATED TO PATIENTS. I THINK%
MAYBE A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT. A
CENTERPIECE CENTER PIN STILL
HAVE A COMMENT QUESTION. MAYBE
SINCE THE RESEARCH CAME UP,
PROBABLY JUST ASK QUESTIONS.
MANY RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS
NATIONALLY AMERICAN ASSOCIATION
OF SCIENCE IN CALIFORNIA, THE
UNIVERSITY, CALIFORNIA ETCETERA
ANY OF THOSE OPPOSED TO THIS
BILL OR CONSIDER EXPRESSING
CONCERNS. THANK YOU. ANYONE
ELSE? HETEROSEXUAL ETA ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
DISSEMINATING, UH PUBLICLY. AH
SHOUTING OUT PUBLICLY.
NEWSPAPERS WHATEVER VOICING IN
SUCH A WAY VERSUS THE ONE ON ONE
PATIENT. DOCTOR RELATIONSHIP
WHERE ALL OF US LOOK TO OUR OWN
POSITIONS. ONE ON ONE PRIVATELY
, UM, BUT I THINK THIS IS ABOUT
DISSEMINATING PUBLICLY. AH
INFORMATION THAT IS MISLEADING
OR INTERPRETED AS MISLEADING AND
I THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE. THAT
SO ARE WE TRYING TO STIFLE THE
SIGN ME, THE DOCTOR FROM
PUBLICLY SAYING SOMETHING AND
PUNISHING HIM OR HER BECAUSE HE
DID SAY SOMETHING WITHOUT DATA.
OR IS THAT UPTO THE BOARD TO
DECIDE? YOU MADE THIS STATEMENT
? WITHOUT ENOUGH DATA? I MEAN,
AT WHAT POINT DOES IT MAKE SENSE
FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL TO BE RIGHT
OR TO BE WRONG? CERTAINLY
SENATOR, I'LL MENTION IT AGAIN
FOR THE THIRD FOR THE CHURCH
THROUGH THE TIME ON PAGE TWO, AS
IT RELATED TO THE SPECIFIC
NATURE OF THE DISSEMINATION
INFORMATION TO CAUSE HARM TO A
PATIENT. THAT IS IN
INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING TO AN
INDIVIDUAL, SO THE SPECIFIC
LANGUAGE IS VERY TIGHT IN THE
DEFINITION OF THIS INFORMATION,
SPECIFICALLY AGAIN DISSEMINATED
WITH MALICIOUS INTENT OR AN
INTENT TO MISLEAD AND NUMBER TWO
DISSEMINATION. IS DEFINED AS THE
CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION FROM A
LICENSEE TO A PATIENT IN THE
FORM OF TREATMENT OR DEVICE, BUT
WOULD CONSTITUTE GROSS
NEGLIGENCE IF CONTRADICTED BY
CONTEMPORARY SCIENTIFIC
CONSENSUS. SO VERY NARROW IN
THAT SCOPE. COLLEAGUES. ANYTHING
ELSE THINK. MR CHOE BUG, PLEASE
. SORRY I KNOW WE ALL WANT TO
FINISH REALLY QUICK, BUT I JUST
WANT TO MAKE SURE SO. BACK IN.
YOU SAID WITHIN THE SCOPE OF
TRUTH. RIGHT WITHIN THE. WITH
MALICIOUS INTENT. UM. HOW DOES
THAT RELATE TO, UM, THAT THE
BOARD ACCORDING TO THIS BILL
WILL BE ACTING WITHIN WITHIN THE
SCOPE OF TRUTH. AND ANYONE THAT
GOES AGAINST THAT TRUTH WILL BE
ACTING IN MALICIOUS INTENT.
WORD. DO THE. DOCTORS
EXPERIMENTING OR DOING RESEARCH
IN OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE NOT
BEEN ACCEPTED WITHIN THAT SCOPE
OF TRUTH OR ACCEPT THE TRUTH BY
THAT BOARD. FIT IN. AND TURNING
OUT QUITE ASSURED THAT THE
QUESTION YOU. YOU. YOU'RE IN
YOUR BILL. YOU SAID YOU HAVE
VERY SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT ONLY
ADDRESSES DOCTORS WHO
DISSEMINATE INFORMATION WITH
MALICIOUS INTENT. THAT MALICIOUS
INTENT. IN YOUR DEFINITION IS
WITHIN ANYTHING THAT GOES
AGAINST THE SCOPE OF TRUTH. OR
WHAT IS CONSIDERED SCIENTIFIC
TRUTH. UM, ACCEPTED AS
SCIENTIFIC TRUTH. WHERE DO
DOCTORS OR RESEARCHERS. OR MORE
, OBVIOUSLY MORE DOCTORS BECAUSE
IT'S SPECIFIC TO DOCTORS THAT
ARE DOING, UM. RESEARCH AND
GUESS RESEARCH AND EXPERIMENTS.
UM, OUTSIDE OF THAT ACCEPTED
SCIENTIFIC TRUTH FALL. WHEN
MAKING STATEMENTS. UM. I THINK
WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS, WOULD
YOU CONSIDER ANYBODY THAT IS NOT
WITHIN THAT SCOPE OF TRUTH
THERE. SCIENTIFIC TRUTH BE
CONSIDERED. OR LABELED AS
MALICIOUS INTENT. AYE. I'M NOT
QUITE SURE WHAT THE QUESTION IS,
BUT SPECIFICALLY AS WE'VE STATED
THE LICENSES THE LICENSING
HOLDERS COME WITH CERTAIN
OBLIGATIONS. THAT HAS SUBSCRIBED
TO THAT OF THE MEDICAL BOARD BY
THE LEGISLATURE. AND SO IF THE
QUESTION IS, ARE THERE
INDIVIDUALS TO CONTINUE TO HAVE
FREE THINKING AND EXPLORE OTHER
METHODS, CERTAINLY, BUT WHAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS
WITHIN THE SCOPE AND WHAT IS
DEFINED THAT OF THE STANDARDS OF
CARE THAT COMES WITH THAT OF THE
LICENSE ITSELF. IN THE STANDARDS
OF CARE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ITS
WHETHER OR NOT THEY BELIEVE THAT
THEY HAVE OTHER MEANS OF
TREATING SOMETHING OR MAKING
STATEMENTS THAT ARE NOT THAT
HAVE NOT BEEN ACCEPTED A
SCIENTIFIC TRUTH. BUT IN THE
PROCESS OF DOING THAT RESEARCH
UM BUT IN YOUR WITHIN THIS BILL
WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIS BILL
THEY WOULD BE CONSIDERED, OR
ACTUALLY, MY QUESTION WOULD BE
ACTUALLY STAYING WITH WHAT YOUR
INTENT IS, BUT WOULD THEY BE
CONSIDERED? UM UNDER THIS
MALICIOUS INTENT BY
DISSEMINATING WHAT THEY'RE
DOING, AND RESEARCH AND
EXPRESSING WHAT THEY'RE DOING,
OR WHAT THEY'VE SEEN BEFORE.
IT'S CONSIDERED SCIENTIFIC TRUTH
BY THE BOARD. THERE'S UNLESS
THERE IS HARM SPECIFICALLY. AND
THIS IS HARD SPECIFICALLY. AND
AS A MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE
AND SITTING ON A NUMBER OF
SUNSETS, AS YOU KNOW, THE
HISTORY OF HEALTHCARE WHEN WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE OTHER
MEDICINES AND PRACTICES, WHETHER
IT BE ACUPUNCTURE CHIROPRACTOR
AS WE CONTINUALLY EVOLVE AND
THINKING ABOUT HOW WE HAVE A
FULL ADOPTION. OF OTHER MEDICAL
PROCEDURES AND PRACTICES. THAT
IS PART OF THE CONVERSATION THAT
WE'RE HAVING HERE SPECIFICALLY.
BUT AGAIN, THE GROSS NEGLIGENCE
AND THE MISLEADING WITH THE
INTENT IS WHERE WE'RE VERY
NARROW AND THAT SCOPE TO
ACTUALLY HARM A PATIENT. ALEX.
ANYTHING ELSE? IS THERE A MOTION
ON THIS BILL? YOU DID. I MISSED
IT, DOCTOR PEN, BUT I HAVE YOU
NOW. SENATOR PAN HAS MADE THE
MOTION. AND REMEMBER IF YOU'RE
NOT TOO EXHAUSTED. WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? SENATORS. THIS IS
REALLY STRAIGHTFORWARD. VERY
STRAIGHTFORWARD. THAT A MEDICAL
PROFESSIONAL WHO IS LICENSED IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. SHALL
BE REPRIMANDED IF THEY SPREADING
INFORMATION WITH THE INTENT TO
MISLEAD VERY SPECIFIC. AND AS I
UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF THE
OTHER SENATORS ON THIS COMMITTEE
ARE ALSO FORMER LICENSES
THEMSELVES THAT ALSO COMES WITH
SPECIFIC OBLIGATIONS. THAT IS
WHAT'S PROVIDED IN WHICH YOU
OBTAIN A LICENSE. AND SO THAT'S
WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE TODAY TO
HELPING PROTECT ALL OF
CALIFORNIANS AND ALLOWING A DUE
PROCESS TO OCCUR. AND PROTECTING
EVERYONE FROM WHAT IS TRUTH AND
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A VOTE.
THANK YOU, SIR. THE MOTION HAS
BEEN MADE BY SENATOR PAN. THE
MOTION IS DUE PASS RE REFER TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MAYBE 2098
MOTION IS DO PASS AND WE REFER
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. ROTH ROTH I.
MELINDA'S LINDA'S NOW.
ARCHULETTA TÔI BATES. BATES? NO
BECKER DODD. GOD, I EGGMAN.
SEGMENT. I HURTADO. JONES.
JONES, NO LABOR. ONLY THAT I MEN
MEN. I NEWMAN. NEWMAN I ATO BUG
BUG. NO PAN PAN. AYE. THE VOTE
IS 8 TO 4 WILL HOLD THE ROLL
OPEN FOR ABSENT MEMBERS. MR LO,
A B 2 TO 36 WILL NOW MOVE NO.
TWO OPTOMETRISTS. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. MR CHAIRMAN COULD
REMEMBERS. I HOPE TO BE MORE
EXPEDITIOUS IN THIS PRESENTATION
. I'D LIKE TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
STAFF FOR HELPING TO ASSIST ON
THE LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU AND
TAKING THE AMENDMENTS, AS NOTED
IN THE ANALYSIS OVER THE PAST
DECADE, OPTOMETRIST AND
OPHTHALMOLOGIST HAVE BEEN IN
NEGOTIATIONS. ON ADDRESSING THE
ISSUE OF MINOR SURGICAL
PROCEDURES, INCLUDING THAT OF
LASERS. MEANWHILE 10 OTHER
STATES HAVE PASSED LAWS TO ALLOW
OPTOMETRIST TO PERFORM MANY OF
THESE PROCEDURES WITH LITTLE TO
NO OVERSIGHT IN THEIR TRAINING.
THE BILL BEFORE YOU IS A PRODUCT
OF MANY HOURS SPENT WITH MAJOR
STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED. AND
PROVIDES THE FRAMEWORK FOR OTHER
STATES TO FOLLOW AS WELL. BUT
YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A MINIMUM
STEP SET OF STANDARDS. THAT OUR
CURRENT FOR OPTOMETRIST TO TAKE
UPON AN ENDEAVOR AND WERE,
ADDITIONALLY ARE COMMITTED TO
WORKING ON THE LEGISLATION AS IT
MOVES FORWARD WITH AN ADDITIONAL
STAKE. HOLDERS AND OPPOSITION
TODAY TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT IS
DR DAVE REDMON FROM THE
CALIFORNIA OPTOMETRIC
ASSOCIATION AND TEREK MCHALE.
GENTLEMEN STEP FORWARD BY
YOURSELVES TOTAL OF THREE
MINUTES. MR CHAIRMAN, TERRY
MCHALE, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA OPTIMA TRICK
ASSOCIATION. WE HAVE SPENT
HUNDREDS OF HOURS WORKING WITH
THE ACADEMY AND IT HAS BEEN
FRUITFUL OVER THE YEARS.
OPTOMETRIST CAN TREAT GLAUCOMA.
OPTOMETRIST CONTAINED, UH,
PRESCRIBE ANTIBIOTICS,
SUBSTANCES LIKE CODEINE AND
TRAMADOL. THE. THIS BILL CALLS
FOR THREE LASERS, AND IT CALLS
FOR THE USE OF A SCALPEL. IN 10,
OTHER STATES THEY ARE ALLOWED TO
DO THIS AFTER TAKING A 32 HOUR
COURSE IN 17 OTHER STATES THEY
CAN USE THE SCALPEL WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT THE SCALPEL. WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT A LESION NO LONGER THAN
FIVE MILLIMETERS NO DEEPER THAN
THE U PICULA ARIS MUSCLE, WHICH
MEANS THEY WOULD HIT THE MOST
REQUIRE SUTURE TO CURE. IN THEIR
OPPOSITION. THE ACADEMY SAYS
THAT THE OPTOMETRIST CAN DO
THIS, IF PROPERLY TRAINED. SO
THAT IS THE QUESTION IN THESE
OTHER STATES GENERAL THEY DO NOT
HAVE TO TREAT LIVE PATIENTS. WE
UNDERSTAND THAT THAT DOES NOT
WORK WITH OUR OPPOSITION. SO WE
TALKED WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY TO SEE WHAT
WE COULD DO TO MAKE SURE LIFE
PATIENTS COULD BE TREATED. THIS
IS WHAT THEY CAME UP WITH ALL
OPTIMISTIC COLLEGES IN
CALIFORNIA WILL SUBMIT A LEGAL
AFFIDAVIT DEMONSTRATING THAT
THEIR CURRICULUM ALREADY
TEACHES. THESE LASERS AND THIS
SCALPEL IS PROCEDURE SO THAT
THEY CAN DO IT. IN OTHER STATES.
WE WILL TAKE A 32 HOUR COURSE
WITH A SPECIFIED AMOUNT OF
PRACTICE, PERFORMING THE
SUPREMES PROCEDURE AND SIMULATED
EYES. WE'LL TAKE A PASSAGE OF
THE NATIONAL BOARDS, LASER AND
SURGICAL EXAMINATION AND WE WILL
TREAT 29 PATIENTS DEALING WITH
THESE PROCEDURES, AND WHEN WE
TALK ABOUT THAT, IT'S NOT UNTIL
ONE TIME SHOT. THESE ARE
COMPLETE TREATMENTS, WHICH MEANS
WE FOLLOW THESE 29 PATIENTS
AROUND. FOR 6 TO 8 WEEKS. 25
TIMES MORE THAN THAT OTHER
STATES ARE DOING FINALLY, I'LL
CLOSE IN THEIR LETTER THEY HAD
MENTIONED THAT ONE OF THE STATES
LOUISIANA HAD 502 OPTOMETRIST,
BUT ONLY 20. THEY WERE DOING
THIS TREATMENT. SO I CALLED THE
, UH, THE OPTIMA TRICK BOARD IN
LOUISIANA, AND THIS IS WHAT THEY
SENT BACK. THEY SAID OF THE
FIGHT THAT EVERY ONE OF THESE
TREATMENTS, THE OPTIMUM
OPTOMETRIST HAS TO REPORT IT TO
THE BOARD. TO ALLOW WITH THE
OUTCOME WAS OF THE 502
OPTOMETRIST 305. TREAT UH. THE
PATIENTS AND THEY HAVE DONE
14,311 SUCCESSFUL LASERS AND
SCALPEL SURGERIES SINCE THEY
WERE ALLOWED TO DO THIS. THIS
WILL WORK. WE ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. DAVE REDMON IS WITH ME
TO ANSWER TECHNICAL TO INTRODUCE
HIMSELF AND ANSWER TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS THAT ARISE. I AM DR
DAVID REDMON. I'M THE ADVOCACY
TEAM CHAIR FOR CALIFORNIA,
CALIFORNIA OPTOMETRIC
ASSOCIATION. HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF PATIENTS HAVE BEEN
TREATED THIS WAY IN CALIFORNIA
PATIENTS DESERVE THAT AS WELL.
WE HAVE NO BAD PROCEDURES THAT
HAVE TAKEN PLACE AND WE THINK
THAT CALIFORNIA UP CAMERAS CAN
DO THESE PROCEDURES WITHOUT ANY
INCIDENT. THANK YOU, DOCTOR.
OKAY LET'S HEAR FROM ANY OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN THE HEARING
ROOM SUPPORT WITNESSES. NAME
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
BILL. ONLY PLEASE I'M DR FRED DO
BIC. I'M AN OPTOMETRIST IN THE
SAN FERNANDO VALLEY AND I AM
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. NEXT,
PLEASE. SORRY. HI I'M DORA PATEL
. I'M A STUDENT AT SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA COLLEGE OF OPTOMETRY
. AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT,
PLEASE. HELLO I'M DR TAMAMI.
CANDY KIMURA. I WAS RAISED. I
WAS RAISED IN THE SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY. I DID MY UNDERGRAD AT U.
C SANTA BARBARA AND I DID MY
OPTOMETRY DEGREE. MY DOCTORATE
DEGREE FROM THE ILLINOIS COLLEGE
OF OPTOMETRY. CURRENTLY I AM THE
CALIFORNIA OPTOMETRIC
ASSOCIATION'S PRESIDENT ELECT. I
AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
THANK YOU, DOCTOR. NEXT, PLEASE.
HELLO, MR CHAIRMAN CHRISTOPHER G
FROM DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA. I AM IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT,
PLEASE. HELLO MY NAME IS
MICHELLE CHRISTIE, OPTOMETRY
STUDENT AT WESTERN UNIVERSITY.
COLLEGE OF OPTOMETRY. AND I
SUPPORT THIS BILL. THANK YOU.
NEXT, PLEASE. HELLO. MY NAME IS
VANESSA MORALES AND I'M A
STUDENT AT UC BERKELEY SCHOOL OF
ATOMIC AND I SUPPORT THIS BILL.
YOU NEXT, PLEASE. I'M DR RICHARD
HOFFMAN. I PRACTICE IN WEST L A
AND I'M OPTOMETRIST AND I
SUPPORT THE SPILL. THANK YOU,
SIR. NEXT, PLEASE. MY NAME IS DR
TOMMY LIMB. I'M A RETIRED
OPTOMETRIST FROM SAN JOSE,
CALIFORNIA AND I'M THE STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE SPILL. THANK YOU,
SIR. ANY OTHER SUPPORT WITNESSES
HERE IN THE HEARING ROOM, SEEING
NONE. LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
IF YOU'RE STILL THERE PLEASE
PROMPT ANY INDIVIDUALS WAITING
TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF
ASSEMBLY BILL 20 TO 36. WE WILL
PROCEED WITH THEM. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR SUPPORT OF A B 20 TO 36.
YOU MAY PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
IF YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF A B 20
TO 36. IN ONE MOMENT, WE DO HAVE
A FEW CURE NOW. AND AGAIN WE ARE
IN SUPPORT OF A B 20 TO 36. AND
WE WILL GO TO LINE. 2 57. YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. HELLO THIS IS AMY
TAN, CO PRESIDENT OF THE U. C.
BERKELEY SCHOOL OF OPTOMETRY
SURROGATE ACROSS OF 2024. I'M
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AD
MY CLASSMATES AND OUR
COMPREHENSIVE FOR YOUR PROGRAM.
WITH THESE PROCEDURES GO INTO
OUR CORRECT ROOM AND OUR BOARDS
, PART THREE EXAMS THAT WILL
GREATLY INCREASE ACCESS AND
CARE. CLEAR AND STRONG SUPPORT
OF MAYBE 20 TO 36. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE. THANK
YOU. WE HAVE NO FURTHER
SUPPORTING QUÊ AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU, MODERATOR. NOW, LET'S
FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS AND HEAR
FROM ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES,
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM. THREE MINUTES
TOTAL, GENTLEMEN.
MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS, JOE LANG,
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
ACADEMY OF PHYSICIANS AND
SURGEONS AND THE 2000 LICENSE
OPHTHALMOLOGISTS IN THIS STATE.
OPHTHALMOLOGISTS WHO'S THREE
YEARS OF RESIDENCY AFTER FOUR
YEARS OF MEDICAL SCHOOL AT A
MINIMUM IS ALL ABOUT PERFORMING
SURGERY. WHAT THIS BILL DOES IS
ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF SURGERY.
THE SUPPORTERS AND SPONSORS OF
THE BILL THERE. CORRECT WE HAVE
OVER THE LAST PROBABLY 10 YEARS.
ANNUALLY HAD GOOD FAITH
NEGOTIATIONS THAT RESULTED IN
THE EXPANSION OF THE SCOPE FOR
OCTOBER TO US, INCLUDING LAST
YEAR WE DID A MAJOR BILL THAT
STREAMLINE THE PRACTICE ACTIVE
ACT ON TREE. INCREASE THE NUMBER
OF TYPES OF CONDITIONS THAT
OPTOMETRIST COULD TWEET AND THE
DRUGS THAT THEY COULD USE TO
TREAT THEM. WE ARE NOW
DISCUSSING WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY
THE HARDEST SUBJECT, WHICH IS.
THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO ALLOW
OPTOMETRISTS. IF IT'S A
DECISION, THIS COMMITTEE TO
PERFORM SURGICAL PROCEDURES WHAT
THEY'RE ASKING FOR, AND IT MAY
SOUND SIMPLE, THE WAY THEY MIGHT
DESCRIBE IT IS TO DO THREE LASER
SURGERIES THAT ARE INVOLVED IN
SURGERY. AND SCALPEL SURGERIES
AND SEVERAL CATEGORIES OF
SCALPEL SURGERIES. WE HAVE NOT
SAID THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DO
, BUT THERE ARE THREE MAIN
THINGS THAT GO INTO THE
PERFORMANCE OF SURGERY. ONE IS
TO KNOW WHAT TO DO. YES IN THE
32 HOUR COURSE PRESENTED IN THIS
BILL AND WITH THE TRAINING THAT
OPTOMETRISTS RECEIVED AN
OPTOMETRY SCHOOL, IT IS POSSIBLE
, IN FACT, TO LEARN WHAT TO DO.
IN TERMS OF A SURGICAL
PROCEDURE. THE OTHER TWO
ELEMENTS OF SURGERY ARE KNOWING
HOW TO DO THAT. AND MOST
IMPORTANTLY, HOW TO DEAL WITH
THE INEVITABLE COMPLICATIONS OF
THESE SURGERIES. MR CHAIRMAN. IF
I CAN INDULGE, I HAVE ASKED THE
SERGEANTS TO DISTRIBUTE JUST TO
GIVE YOU A SENSE, MR CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS OF THE TYPES OF
PROCEDURES WE'RE LOOKING AT
HERE. THESE ARE NOT SIMPLE
PROCEDURES. ONE OF THE
PROCEDURES, IN FACT, IS CALLED
AN INJECTION. A SUB CONJURE YOU
VICTOR INJECTION. THAT INJECTION
INVOLVES INJECTING EITHER A
STEROID OR NOT ANTIBIOTIC
THROUGH THE FIN LAYER THAT
PROTECTS THE EYE WITH THE IDEA
THAT IT WILL THEN DISTRIBUTE TO
THE EYEBALL. VERY COMPLICATED
PROCEDURE, AND YOU CAN IMAGINE
WHAT IT'S LIKE. YOU NEED TO MAKE
SURE THAT YOU DO THAT PROPERLY.
THIS BILL BEFORE YOU REQUIRES AN
OPTOMETRIST TO PERFORM JUST ONE
OF THOSE PROCEDURES ON THE HUMAN
BEING. JUST ONE. THE QUESTION, I
GUESS IS WOOD, WHO AMONG US
WOULD WANT TO BE PATIENT NUMBER
TWO WITH SOMEONE WHO IS
CERTIFIED TO PERFORM JUST ONE OF
THESE PROCEDURES. TRAINING IS
WHAT IT'S ABOUT. WE HAVE A
DISAGREEMENT STILL WITH THE
AUTHOR AND THE SPONSORS ABOUT
HOW MUCH TRAINING HOW MUCH
CLINICAL TRAINING SHOULD BE
INVOLVED. WE ARE SIGNIFICANTLY
APART. UM. THAT DIFFERENCE IS
VERY IMPORTANT. WHETHER YOU DO
ONE OR TWO HUMAN PATIENTS AS
PART OF YOUR TRAINING. PROBABLY
LIKELY DOESN'T ALLOW FOR THE
LIKELIHOOD THAT THERE WILL BE A
COMPLICATION. TREATING AND
MANAGING COMPLICATIONS IS A VERY
IMPORTANT PART OF LEARNING AND
MANAGING SURGERY. UNFORTUNATELY
THIS BILL JUST DOESN'T HAVE A
SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF REQUIRED
HUMAN PATIENTS AS PART OF THE
CLINICAL TRAINING TO GET THE
EXPERIENCE TO KNOW. NOT JUST
WHAT TO DO. BUT HOW TO DO IT?
BOOKS. I'M SORRY. THAT THAT
REALLY BECOMES A KEY. WHAT TO DO
HOW TO DO IT, AND THEN WHAT TO
DO AND HOW TO MANAGE
COMPLICATIONS. THE BILL JUST
DOESN'T GET THERE. UM WE'RE FAR
APART IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF
TRAINING PROCEDURES REQUIRED AND
YOU KNOW, I WOULD JUST LEAVE YOU
WITH THIS RIGHT? THESE
COMPLICATIONS THAT CAN HAPPEN IN
ANY ONE OF THESE SURGERIES.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VISION HERE.
THE LOSS OF VISION. I THINK. ALL
OF US WOULD WANT TO KNOW THAT A
PROFESSIONAL BEING CERTIFIED TO
PERFORM THESE SURGERIES IN THEIR
OFFICE WITHOUT SUPERVISION HAS
PERFORMED MORE THAN JUST ONE OR
TWO OR THREE. THAT'S THE
QUESTION. HOW MUCH TRAINING IS
REQUIRED. WE'RE NOT THERE WERE
HAVING THOSE GOOD FAITH
DISCUSSIONS. I JUST DON'T KNOW
THAT WE CAN GET THERE. BUT RIGHT
NOW THE BILL BEFORE YOU DOES NOT
GET TO THAT POINT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR CHAIRMAN AND HERE
TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT
WELL, THANK YOU, SIR. DON'T GO
VERY FAR. WE MAY HAVE SOME
QUESTIONS IN A BIT. YES, SIR
BRIAN SPENCER ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.
I'LL BE BRIEF FIRST. LET ME
START OFF BY SAYING HOW MUCH WE
APPRECIATE ALL THE TIME AND
HOURS THAT WE SPENT WITH THE
AUTHOR IN THE SPONSORS WORKING
THROUGH THIS LANGUAGE, BUT LIKE
THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER JUST SAID.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE CONCERNS WITH
THE LANGUAGE THAT IS IMPRINT NOW
THAT WHEN THE PRINT LAST WEEK,
UM GARDEN PROCEDURES AND LEVEL
TRAINING AND STATED BY, UM
STATED BY MR LANG. BUT WE DO
LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUE THESE
DISCUSSIONS. SHOULD THIS BILL
MOVE FORWARD TO TRY TO WORK OUT
THE REMAINING ISSUES? SO THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH ANY
OTHER OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN
THE HEARING ROOM? SEEING NONE.
LET'S MOVE TO THE TELECONFERENCE
SERVICE MODERATOR. IF YOU PLEASE
PROMPT ANY INDIVIDUALS WAITING
TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION TO
ASSEMBLY BILL 20 TO 36 WILL
CONTINUE WITH THEM. THANK YOU
FOR AN OPPOSITION OF A B 20 TO
36. YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN
ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE AND THEN
THERE ARE IN OPPOSITION OF A B
20 TO 36. WE WILL GO TO LINE 1
65. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. YES, MY
NAME IS KAREN .COM PARA AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU NEXT, PLEASE.
LINE 1 97. YOUR LINE IS OPEN.
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 2 14 YEAR
LINE IS OPEN. 2 14. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. DO YOU HAVE A MUTE? NEXT
PLEASE, MR. CHAIR. WE HAVE NO
OPPOSITION IN QUÊ. OKAY? SO
LET'S BRING THE CONVERSATION
BACK TO MY COLLEAGUES. AT THE
DIESS. UM LET ME JUST LEAD OFF
JUST QUICKLY. SOME REMEMBER MY
READ OF THE BILL AND YOUR I
GUESS PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
INDICATE THE TRAINING WOULD
CONSIST OF 27 PROCEDURES. IS
THAT CORRECT? LET'S HEAR MY
NOTES HERE HAVE 29 PROCEDURES.
BUT LET ME HELP PUBLIC MASS.
I'LL GIVE YOU 29. YES. YOU HEARD
EARLIER FROM THE TESTAMENT THAT
WAS JUST SIMPLY ONE. BUT THAT IS
NOT THE CASE. BUT I HAVE HERE IN
MY NOTES 29 PROCEDURES. I'M JUST
CURIOUS. WHAT'S THE SPREAD
BETWEEN WHAT THE OPPOSITION IS
REQUESTED IN WHAT YOU HAVE
PROPOSED MOST RECENTLY IN THESE
AMENDMENTS? THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
. UM AS YOU CAN APPRECIATE AS
LEGISLATORS. UM, I HAVE
PERSONALLY GONE AH OUT OF THIS
REGION TO MEET WITH THE
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE
OPHTHALMOLOGIST TO HELP PUT IN
GOOD FAITH EFFORTS AND
NEGOTIATIONS. UNDERSTAND THAT
THEY WERE AT 40. THE
OPHTHALMOLOGISTS WERE AT 40. THE
OPTOMETRISTS WERE AT ONE AND SO
THIS IS MORE THAN HALF UH, AND
THAT'S WHERE IT CAME TO THIS
NUMBER. AS YOU KNOW. ALSO IN THE
ANALYSIS, THERE ARE MANY OTHER
STATES HAVE WHERE THE
REQUIREMENT OF 0 TO 1 LIVE
PATIENTS WITH NO FORESEEABLE
HARM THAT I AM AWARE OF NOW, THE
AMENDMENT ALSO TO TALKS ABOUT A
PRECEPT, ER SHIP, WHICH I ASSUME
IS WITH AN OPHTHALMOLOGIST. SORT
OF SUPERVISING THESE PROCEDURES
IS THAT IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING,
CORRECT, CORRECT. AND WITH
RESPECT TO THIS PRECEPT ER SHIP
PRIOR TO THE CERTIFICATION OR
QUALIFIED QUALIFICATION OF THE
OPHTHALMOLOGIST TO ENGAGE IN
THESE PROCEDURES ON. PATIENTS
INDEPENDENTLY IS THE
OPHTHALMOLOGIST. REQUIRED TO
SIGN OFF AS THE PRECEPT ER. OH,
GOOD QUESTION. LET ME GET TO SEE
IF I GET CLARIFICATION. IF YOU
DON'T MIND MR CHAIR CHAIRMAN
TERRY MCHALE WITH AARON REID AND
ASSOCIATES. YES, THEY ARE. AND
THEN AND THAT'S IN WRITING. YES
SIR. SO THE PERCEPTION SHIP HAS
TO WORK THROUGH THE UNIVERSITY.
SO NOT ONLY DOES THE PERCEPTIVE
HAVE TO SIGN OFF THE UNIVERSITY
HAS TO SIGN OFF. I DIDN'T IF YOU
STILL HERE I DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT
YOU OUT OF THE DIDN'T MEAN TO
CUT YOU OUT OF THE TRAFFIC
PATTERN. WOULD YOU LIKE TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE CONVERSATION
BEFORE I LET BEFORE I CEASED TO
BE RUDE, AND I LET MY COLLEAGUES
ASK QUESTIONS. MR CHAIRMAN, I
APOLOGIZE. I WAS ENGAGED IN A
QUICK DISCUSSION TO CONFIRM THE
27 VERSES 29 SO YOU MIND
REPEATING THE QUESTION REAL
QUICK. I BEHAVE WITH RESPECT AND
WE HAD IT CONFIRMED THAT THESE
27 OR 29, WHICHEVER IT IS.
TRAINING PROCEDURES ARE
SUPERVISED AND MONITORED BY A
PRECEPT ER, WHO IS AN
OPHTHALMOLOGIST, LICENSED
OPHTHALMOLOGIST. AND THEN MY
QUESTION WAS AT THE CONCLUSION
OF THE PRE PRECEPT OR SHIP. AND
TRAINING PROGRAM IS THE
OPHTHALMOLOGIST REQUIRED TO SIGN
OFF ON THE COMPETENCY OF THE
OPTOMETRIST BEFORE THE
OPTOMETRIST GOES AND PRACTICES
ON PATIENTS AND THE ANSWER THAT
WE WERE PROVIDED. WAS YES IN
WRITING. IS THAT YOUR
UNDERSTANDING? SO, MR CHAIRMAN,
WE HAD DISCUSSIONS ON THIS VERY
ISSUE FRIDAY. I DO BELIEVE THAT
WE CAME TO AN AGREEMENT THAT
THAT THEY WOULD ACTUALLY BE TWO
FORMS OF SIGN OFF. ONE WOULD BE
BY THE PRECEPT ER, THE
OPHTHALMOLOGIST WHO WAS
SUPERVISING THESE PATIENTS
PROCEDURES AND THE SECOND WOULD
BE BY THE SCHOOL WHO WILL BE
PUTTING THE ENTIRE PROGRAM
TOGETHER. THANK YOU. I JUST
WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD A
CONCRETE UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT?
THE CURRENT STATE OF AFFAIRS. I
THINK, MR CHAIRMAN. I THINK
THAT'S ACCURATE. I THINK THE
IMPORTANT POINT IS WHETHER IT'S
27 OR 29 PROCEDURES. THAT'S A
TOTAL AGGREGATE NUMBER OF
PROCEDURES OVER AT LEAST FIVE IF
NOT SIX INDIVIDUAL TYPES OF
PROCEDURES. SO IF YOU LOOK AT
THE BILL, SOME MAY REQUIRE ONLY
ONE. SOME MAY REQUIRE THREE.
SOME MAY REQUIRE FIVE, RIGHT
ACCUMULATE. THE NUMBER IS 27 OR
29. BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT
EACH PROCEDURE HAVING EXPERIENCE
AND ONLY ONE OR TWO IS WHERE IT
BECOMES QUITE FRANKLY, WE THINK
JUST NOT ENOUGH TRAINING, BUT I
JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THAT
NUMBER IS ACCUMULATIVE NUMBER
WITH ALL OF THE ISSUES. IT'S NOT
29 OR 27 FOR EACH PROCEDURE.
YOUR BUT YOUR PROPOSAL IS ONLY
13 MORE, SO THAT COULD BE A
DRAMATIC INCREASE IN THE NUMBER
OF YES. YOU KNOW, I THINK THE
THING WITH OUR PROPOSAL IS THAT
WE LOOKED AT EACH INDIVIDUAL
PROCEDURE AND SAID, WHAT NUMBER
COULD YOU GET TO WHERE THE
LIKELIHOOD OF EXPERIENCING
COMPLICATION AND KNOWING AND
LEARNING HOW TO MANAGE THAT
WOULD OCCUR. AND SO WE CAME UP
WITH THE NUMBERS FOR THE LASERS
, ONE OF THEM SEVEN FOR THE
SCALPEL. SURGERIES OF THE THREE
DIFFERENT TYPES FIVE EACH, AS
OPPOSED TO THE HOPE IS THAT IN
THAT EXPERIENCE, THEY'LL
ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED
COMPLICATIONS AND LEARN HOW TO
DEAL WITH IT, SO THAT'S REALLY
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO
APPROACHES. I'M SURE YOU CAN
IMAGINE FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE
NOT HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS. IT'S
DIFFICULT TO EVALUATE. 27 OR 29
VERSUS 40. BUT IT IS SEEMS TO ME
THAT IT IS SIGNIFICANT THAT
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A
CALIFORNIA LICENSED
OPHTHALMOLOGIST AND A SCHOOL
SIGN OFF ON WHATEVER NUMBER YOU
WILL AGREE TO 40. OR 29 PRIOR TO
AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGING IN
PRACTICE. CORRECT MR CHAIRMAN.
THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. PART OF
IT IS TO MAKE SURE AT THE END
WHAT ALL OF US WANT IS THAT
ANYBODY CERTIFIED TO PERFORM THE
SURGERIES THESE PROCEDURES? IS
ACTUALLY COMPETENT TO DO IT IN
OUR RESIDENCY PROGRAM, WHERE WE
TRAINED THREE OR FOUR RESIDENTS
A YEAR AT EACH MEDICAL SCHOOL TO
BE OPHTHALMOLOGISTS. IT'S ALL
ABOUT COMPETENCY, RIGHT? WE DO
1000 PROCEDURES SO WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT MANY LESS. BUT YES, MR
CHAIRMAN. COMPETENCY IS AT THE
HEART OF IT AND MAKING SURE YOU
KNOW NOT EVERY OPHTHALMOLOGIST
JUST LIKE EVERY PROFESSIONAL
BASKETBALL PLAYER ISN'T MEANT TO
BE A COACH, RIGHT? NOT MEANT TO
BE A TEACHER. SO SOMEHOW THERE'S
GOTTA BE A WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE PERSON YOU KNOW, SUPERVISING
BEING THE PRECEPT ER HAS THE
COMPETENCIES ACTUALLY TEACH
SOMEONE HOW TO DO WHAT THEY DO
WHAT THEY LEARNED IN THEIR
RESIDENCY. VERY INTERESTING
COLLEAGUES QUESTIONS. I PUT YOU
TO SLEEP CENTER NEWMAN. JUST
ONCE YOU FEEL BETTER NOW THAT
I'M NOT. I'M NOT ASLEEP.
QUESTION FOR MR LOHAN IN THE IN
THE RELIGIOUSLY. IT'S THE AUTHOR
STATEMENT. IT MAKES THE
ASSERTION THAT THESE PROCEDURES
PRESENT NO INCREASED RISK. TWO
PATIENTS. IT SOUNDS LIKE MR LANG
MIGHT DISAGREE WITH THAT. BUT
THE ANALYSIS ALSO NOTES THAT
THERE ARE UP TO 10, OTHER STATES
THAT CURRENTLY ALLOW OPTOMETRIST
TO UTILIZE LASERS FOR TREATMENT
. UM TO VARYING DEGREES, IS
THEIR DATA FROM THOSE STATES
THAT WOULD SUPPORT. UH GIVE US
THE ASSURANCE THAT THESE
PROCEDURES ARE SAFE. YES WELL,
THANK YOU, SANTA WE'VE ACTUALLY
CHECKED AND NO INFORMATION THAT
I AM AWARE OF OUR OFFICERS AWARE
OF IS THAT THERE IS ANY
ADDITIONAL HARM THE BILL BEFORE
US PROVIDES ADDITIONAL
INCREASED. REQUIREMENTS THAN
THAT OF SOME OF THESE OTHER
STATES AND WITH THAT, WITH THESE
OTHER STATES NOTES FORESEEABLE
HARM, BUT SENATOR LOOKS LIKE MR
MR MCHALE IS MR NEWMAN. THAT'S A
GREAT QUESTION. I ANSWERED IT
FIRST ON LOUISIANA, WHICH THEY
HAD BROUGHT UP SPECIFICALLY.
EVERY OPTOMETRIST WHO DOES ANY
OF THESE LASERS OR ANY OF THESE
SCALP, ALS MUST REPORT TO THEIR
BOARD OF OPTOMETRY WHAT THEY ARE
DOING AND WHAT IS THE OUTCOME?
AND IN LOUISIANA, THEY HAVE
TREATED MORE THAN 14,000
PATIENTS WITH ZERO NEGATIVE
EFFECTS. THERE HAS NOT BEEN A
SINGLE COMPLAINT. THERE HAS NOT
BEEN ANY RISE IN MALPRACTICE
INSURANCE. IT HAS BEEN
COLLABORATIVE AND COOPERATIVE
BETWEEN THE PROFESSIONS AND WE
WOULD SUPPORT THE IDEA TO BE
THAT KIND OF REPORTING IN
CALIFORNIA. I WOULD EMPHASIZE
AGAIN AS THE GENERAL BROUGHT UP
WHERE WE ARE IN A DIFFERENCE IS
THAT THEY'RE AT 40. WE'RE AT 29
. IT'S NOT AS IF THERE'S THIS
VAST GOLF AND I THINK THAT WE
CAN GET THERE AND THEY CLEARLY
SAY THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO
IT. THE REASON THAT WE'RE
FIGHTING BACK AND WE'RE LIMITING
IT IS BECAUSE C BERKELEY SAYS
THAT WE'RE DOING TOO MANY. EVEN
AT 29. THEY WERE FORGETTING THAT
EVERY STUDENT WHO GOES THROUGH
OPTOMETRY SCHOOL SEES 25,000.
LIVE PATIENTS DURING THE TIME
THAT THEY'RE AN OPTOMETRIST
SCHOOL IN THE FIRST COUPLE YEARS
THEY TAKE THE SAME EDUCATION IS
MEDICAL SCHOOL. THEY HAVE AN
UNDERSTANDING OF SYSTEMIC
CONCERNS AND PROBLEMS. MR LANGE
BROUGHT UP THAT THERE COULD BE
PROBLEMS IN 2000 AND EIGHT THIS
LEGISLATURE ALLOWED OPTOMETRIST
TO TREAT GLAUCOMA AND THE
CONCERN THE OPPOSITION HAD WAS
THAT SOMEBODY WOULD BE HURT IN
THE OPTOMETRIST WOULD NOT KNOW
WHAT TO DO. WELL THEY DO KNOW
WHAT TO DO. WHAT THEY DO IS THEY
STABILIZE THE PATIENTS AND THEY
REFER AND WHEN IT COMES TO
OPHTHALMIC WHEN IT COMES TO
GLAUCOMA, NO PROBLEMS HAVE
EXISTED. THESE PROCEDURES ARE A
NATURAL EXTENSION OF WHERE
OPTOMETRY SHOULD BE GOING AND
WHAT WE ARE DOING IN CALIFORNIA
SO FAR GOES BEYOND WHAT ANY
OTHER STATE ASKED THEIR
OPTOMETRIST TO DO. I THINK, AND
I'VE SAID THIS TO MR LANG, WHO
HAS BECOME A VERY CLOSE FRIEND
AND SOMEONE I REALLY RESPECT
OVER THE YEARS OF DOING THIS,
THAT I THINK THAT WHAT WE ARE
DOING HERE IN CALIFORNIA IS A
NATIONAL MODEL, AND THAT'S WHAT
WE SHOULD EMBRACE. APPRECIATE
THAT. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS? COLLEAGUES,
SENATOR BECKER. THANK YOU. I
WANT TO THANK YOU. ARTHUR AND
I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS ISSUE
FOR A LONG TIME. AND YOU KNOW IT
WILL BE SUPPORTING THE BILL.
TODAY I AM GLAD THAT
CONVERSATIONS ARE ONGOING ABOUT
HOURS. I HAVE RELATED, UM HAVE
HAD HEARD SOME CONCERN ABOUT
OURS. AND I, UM IN A PREVIOUS
LIFE, WE DID INVESTMENTS IN
MEDICAL DEVICES, AND I SAW KIND
OF THE PREVIOUS, YOU KNOW,
GENERATION OF THE LASER EYE
SURGERY. IT WAS SCARY ENOUGH
THAT I OPTED NOT TO GET IT TO
THIS POINT. UM BUT I KNOW THINGS
HAVE HAVE COME ALONG A LONG WAY.
BUT THAT DID MAKE ME SENSITIVE
SOME OF THE CONCERNS AROUND
HOURS THAT WERE RAISED, BUT I'M
GLAD TO HEAR YOU'RE CONTINUING
TO WORK ON THAT AND AGAIN. I'LL
BE SUPPORTING BILL TODAY. THANK
YOU. CENTER PAN. YOU LOOK LIKE
YOU'RE ABOUT TO LAUNCH, UM
PROCEEDING. SO AND I APOLOGIZE.
I DUCK OUT FOR A MOMENT. UM SO I
UNDERSTAND THAT RIGHT NOW THE
PHYSICIANS ARE OPPOSED AND
CONCERNED ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF
TRAINING AND THAT DOES RAISE
SOME CONCERNS FOR ME. UH THERE'S
A PHYSICIAN EDUCATOR, SO I WAS
RAN A RESIDENCY PROGRAM. YOU
KNOW, WHEN THE MOST IMPORTANT
THINGS TO ME WAS, IS THAT THE
BEST WAY YOU CAN TEACH SOMEONE
TO DO A PROCEDURE RIGHT? AND IN
FACT, I HAD TO ICAO
ACCREDITATION BODIES WHERE WE
HAD ESTABLISHED STANDARDS FOR
PROCEDURES ND SO FORTH. UM. THE
PROCEDURE ITSELF COULD BE FAIRLY
STRAIGHTFORWARD. BUT DO YOU
REALLY NEED THE TRAINING FOR
ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE TREATING
A PATIENT DOING PROCEDURE ON A
PATIENT. IS TO RECOGNIZE WHEN
THINGS ARE, YOU KNOW, NOT
EXPECTED COMPLICATIONS OCCUR.
AND THAT REQUIRES, YOU KNOW,
IT'S NOT JUST ENOUGH TO DO A
COUPLE OF PROCEDURE AND SAY,
HEY, LOOK, I CAN I CAN DO ALL
THE STEPS AND SO FORTH. IT'S
HAVING TO RUN INTO SOMETHING IN
THE MIDDLE OF DOING. YOU KNOW,
THROUGH ONE OF THE STEPS THAT
SOMETHING IS DIFFERENT. IT'S NOT
WHAT YOU EXPECTED. THERE WAS A
NEW FINDING OR SOMETHING YOU
FOUND OUT IN THE PROCESS AND
THEN BEING ABLE TO HANDLE THAT,
APPROPRIATELY WITHOUT ACTUALLY
MAKING IT WORSE FOR THE PATIENT.
AND THAT'S THAT'S WHY WE SPEND
SO MUCH TIME IN RESIDENCY
TRAINING RIGHT. SO AN
OPHTHALMOLOGIST HAS SPENT FOUR
YEARS OF RESIDENCY AFTER
FINISHING FOUR YEARS OF MEDICAL
SCHOOL IS BEING SURE THAT YOU SO
I CERTAINLY HOPE YOU'RE GOING TO
WORK. YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND
YOU'RE STILL HAVING
CONVERSATIONS AND YOU'RE GOING
TO BE CONTINUING TO WORK. UM
WITH WITH THE AND CERTAINLY HOPE
THAT SOME PLACE YOU CAN COME TO
AGREEMENT. BUT UNFORTUNATELY,
UNTIL THAT HAPPENS, I AM NOT
ABLE TO SUPPORT THE BILL. BUT I
HOPE THAT IF YOU CAN COME TO
AGREEMENT, I LOOKFORWARD TO
POTENTIALLY SUPPORTING IT IN
THIS, YOU KNOW, IN THE FUTURE
TOWARD THE FLOOR OF IT, IF THAT
OCCURS, THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, DOCTOR PEN. IS THERE
A MOTION MOTION BY SENATOR
EDMUND. GENTLEMEN THANK YOU FOR
CONTINUING TO WORK ON THIS
ISSUE. 10 YEARS IS A LONG TIME.
LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE PRETTY CLOSE
TO GOOD NEWS FOR YOU IS YOU'VE
GOT ONE MORE COMMITTEE.
APPROPRIATIONS TO WORK THIS
THING OUT. BEEN MOVED BY SENATOR
EGGMAN OR SOME REMEMBER, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR
YOUR STRONG CONSIDERATION. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR A VOTE.
OKAY THE MOTION IS DUE PASS AS
AMENDED AND RE REFER TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS. AND
I BELIEVE YOU. IF YOU ACCEPT
AMENDMENTS YOU DID. CORRECT OKAY
. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MAYBE 20
TO 36 MISSION IS DO PASS AS
AMENDED AND RE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS.
ROTH. I MELINDA'S ARCHULETTA
DEBATES. BECKER. I DODD.
FEYNMAN. PIGMENT, HURTADO JONES.
LEVER LEVER. I MEN NEWMAN.
NEWMAN IOTA BUG. JOBURG I PAN
AND NO THE VOTE IS 7 TO 1. WILL
HOLD THE ROLL OPEN FOR ABSENT
MEMBERS. OKAY? THANK YOU SO MANY
MEMBER. WE'RE NOW MOVING FROM
EYES TO CATALYTIC CONVERTERS.
REMEMBER O'DONNELL ITEM NUMBER
14 ASSEMBLY BILL 24 07 VEHICLE
TEMPERING. PROCEED WHEN READY.
WE PROCEED. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I'M
PLEASED TO PRESENT A B 2407
WHICH TIGHTENS THE REQUIREMENTS
ON THE SALE OF USED CATALYTIC
CONVERTERS, MAKING IT MORE
DIFFICULT FOR THE USER TO
PROFIT. FROM SELLING STOLEN
CONVERTERS. CADILLAC CONVERTERS
ARE EMISSION CONTROL DEVICES ON
CARS AND TRUCKS THAT USE SEVERAL
COMPONENTS SUCH AS PRECIOUS
METALS LIKE PLUTONIUM, PALLADIUM
RHODIUM AND TO CONVERT TOXIC
GASSES INTO LESS HARMFUL.
CHEMICALS. UNFORTUNATELY THE
INCREASE IN THE PRICES OF THESE
PRECIOUS METALS IN THESE DEVICES
HAS RESULTED IN THEM BECOMING A
LUCRATIVE TARGET FOR THIEVES
ACROSS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AND I KNOW YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH
THAT. CATALYTIC CONVERTERS CAN
BE REMOVED FROM VEHICLES IN AS
LITTLE AS TWO MINUTES AND TAKE
IT TO A RECYCLER, WHERE THEY CAN
BE SOLD FOR HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS
AGAIN FOR THOSE PRECIOUS METALS
INSIDE THEM. DESPITE SIMILAR
CARRIES TWO OTHER SCRAP METALS
THAT ARE FREQUENTLY STOLEN AND
OFFERED TO RECYCLERS CATALYTIC
CONVERTER SALES DO NOT HAVE THE
SAME ANTI THEFT REPORT
REQUIREMENTS AS THOSE OTHERS AS
THOSE DO WITH OTHER METALS.
MAYBE 24 7 ELIMINATES THESE
INCONSISTENCIES, VERY REQUIRING
CORE RECYCLERS TO REPORT
INFORMATION ABOUT THE SALES TO
LAW ENFORCEMENT, OBTAIN A
THUMBPRINT OF THE SELLERS AND
REQUEST RECEIVE NOTIFICATIONS
FROM A THEFT ALERT SYSTEM. THESE
REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN SHOWN BY
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CRIME
BUREAU TO REDUCE METAL THEFTS
AND WE'LL DO THE SAME FOR
CATALYTIC CONVERTERS. WE BELIEVE
HERE TO TESTIFY, I BELIEVE IS
RYAN SHERMAN. AH ON BEHALF OF
THE RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S
ASSOCIATION AND OTHER LAW
ENFORCEMENT GROUPS. MR CHAIR, MR
SHERMAN, THREE MINUTES THANK
YOU, MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS RYAN
SHERMAN WITH THE RIVERSIDE
SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION, ALSO
TODAY REPRESENTING THE POLICE
OFFICER ASSOCIATIONS OF
CLAREMONT CORONA, POMONA PALACE
FOODS, NEWPORT BEACH. UPLAND
SANTA ANA, BURBANK, INGLEWOOD,
ARCADIA, RIVERSIDE, L. A SCHOOLS
FULLERTON AND COVER CITY POLICE
OFFICER ASSOCIATION ON SUPPORT
OF THE BILL. WE BELIEVE, AS THE
OTHER STATE OF THE STRENGTHENS
THE LAWS GOVERNING THE SALE
VIEWS CATALYTIC CONVERTERS,
MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR
THIEVES TO PROFIT FROM SELLING
STOLEN CONVERTERS. AND
SPECIFICALLY, THE BILL REQUIRES
PERSON PERSONS THAT ARE BUYING A
CATHOLIC CONVERT TO SHARE THEIR
WRITTEN INFORMATION. UM AND
OBTAINED THE SELLER'S THUMBPRINT
AND REQUESTS RECEIVE
NOTIFICATIONS ABOUT CATALYTIC
CONVERTER THEFTS. ALSO ADDS
KELLY CONVERTER THEFT TO LIST OF
CRIMES LAW ENFORCEMENT'S
ENCOURAGED TO REPORT TO THE
THEFT ALERT NOTIFICATION SYSTEM.
TAKEN TOGETHER, THESE
REQUIREMENTS WILL MAKE IT MORE
DIFFICULT FOR THIEVES TO PROFIT
OFF STOLEN CATALYTIC CONVERTERS.
MAKE IT EASIER FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO CATCH THESE AND
TO DISCOURAGE THEM FROM
COMMITTING THE CRIME IN THE
FIRST PLACE. FOR THESE REASONS,
WE STRONGLY SUPPORT A B 24 07
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. NOW
LET'S HEAR FROM ANY OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES IN THE HEARING
ROOM NAME. AFFILIATION AND
POSITION ON THE MEASURE, PLEASE
MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS, RANDY PERRY
WITH ERIN REED ASSOCIATES ON
BEHALF OF THE ALLIANCE FOR
AUTOMOTIVE INNOVATION, AND WE'RE
IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THANKS.
THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT, PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR
MEMBERS, ANTHONY SAMSON ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA NEW CAR
DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU ANY OTHER SUPPORT
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM,
SEEING NONE. LET'S MOVE TO THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE MODERATOR
. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROMPT ANY
INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO TESTIFY
IN SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY BILL 24
07 WILL BEGIN WITH THEM. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF 24 7
PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN
THAT IS ONE AND THEN ZERO HERE
IN SUPPORT OFA B 24 07. WE WILL
GO TO LINE 2 21. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
EVENING, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE SHARING GONZALVES
ON BEHALF OF THE CITIES OF
CORONA AND RANCHO PALOS VERDE
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU NEXT,
PLEASE. LINE 3 25. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. GOOD EVENING CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. ELISA OUR CITY AKONA,
WITH THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU
NEXT, PLEASE. LINE 3 26. THEIR
LINE IS OPEN. THEY DIDN'T EVEN
CHAIR AND MEMBERS THERE. TURNER
WITH LEGAL PAPERS AND ASSOCIATES
ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DOWN
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU NEXT, PLEASE. MR CHAIR. WE
HAVE NO FURTHER SUPPORTING QUÊ
AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. LET'S
MOVE TO OPPOSITION OPPOSITION
WITNESSES IN THE HEARING ROOM.
OPPOSITION WITNESSES SEEING
NONE. LET'S MOVE TO WITNESSES
WILLING TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION
DURING THE VIA THE
TELECONFERENCE SERVICE.
MODERATOR PLEASE PROMPT ANY
INDIVIDUALS WAITING, TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY BILL 24
07. THANK YOU FOR YOUR POSITION
OF A B 24 7. YOU MAY PRESS ONE
AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE
AND THEN ZERO. IF YOU'RE AN
OPPOSITION OF A B 24 07 AND MR
CHAIRS. WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. LET'S BRING THE
CONVERSATION BACK TO MY
COLLEAGUES ON THE DAIS
COLLEAGUES ANY QUESTIONS,
COMMENTS CONCERNS. AND MOVED BY
SENATOR LEYVA. COMMENT. SENATOR
ARCHULETTA ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD. I SEE THAT QUITE A FEW
CITIES IN MY DISTRICT ARE IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL AND I WOULD
LOVE TO BE A CO AUTHOR. AS WELL.
AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE
CRIME WAVE AND I CALL IT A CRIME
WAVE ACROSS NOT ONLY MY DISTRICT
, BUT ACROSS CALIFORNIA. IT'S
ATROCIOUS. IT'S TERRIBLE. I'M
LOOKING FORWARD TO STRONGER.
BILLS THAT WERE BECOME BEFORE US
THAT NOT ONLY THE STOP THIS SORT
OF THING, BUT TO INCARCERATE
PEOPLE FOR GETTING INVOLVED IN
THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY, SO I
THINK THAT YOU'RE IN THE RIGHT
STEP. TO GIVE THE GENERAL PUBLIC
A SENSE OF RELIEF THAT WE HERE
IN IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING ON
THEIR BEHALF, AND I APPRECIATE
IT AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE
BILL. WITHOUT A DOUBT. THANK
YOU. SO LET ME REMEMBER. IT'S
BEEN MOVED BY SENATOR LEVEL.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE MY VOTE?
MOTIONS DO PASS. WE REFER THE
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. 24 7
MOTION IS DO PASS AND REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC
SAFETY. I MELINDA'S MELINDA'S
AYE ARCHULETTA DEBATES. BATES, I
BECKER. DIED. EGGMAN TATO JONES.
LEVER. LEVI MEN, MEN I, NEWMAN
NEWMAN, I OKO BUG TURBO. I CAN
AND I HAS 10 VOTES WILL HOLD THE
ROLE CONTRAPTION MEMBERS. THANK
YOU, SIR. ITEM NUMBER 15
ASSEMBLY BILL 26 82
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GRAY, THANKS
FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
PLEASE PROCEED. YES. THANK YOU.
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS. A B 26 82
ADDRESSES. SKYROCKETING RATES OF
CALA CONVERTED THEFT BY
REQUIRING CALIK CONVERTERS TO BE
PERMANENTLY MARKED WITH THE
VEHICLES. VIN. CRIMINALIZING THE
TAMPERING OR REMOVAL OF THE
BENCHMARKING AND REQUIRING SMOG
CHECKS TO NOTIFY AND DRIVERS IF
THEY'RE CALIK CONVERTER HAS NOT
BEEN MARKED. I WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR PROVIDING SOME
ADDITIONAL TIME FOR US TO HEAR
THE BILL AS I WORKED WITH
STAKEHOLDERS THESE LAST TWO
WEEKS TO RESOLVE SOME CONCERNS
AND DEVELOP WHAT WE THINK IS THE
MOST COST EFFECTIVE. AND
PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS TO ACHIEVE
OUR SHARED GOALS. AT THIS POINT
. THE BILL IS SUPPORTED BY THE
CALIFORNIA CAR DEALERS
ASSOCIATION DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ASSOCIATION, THE CALIFORNIA
POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION, THE
PERSONAL INSURANCE FEDERATION
AND THE SAND. MARKEN VALLEY AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT,
AMONGST OTHERS. AND I'M HAPPY TO
GET INTO OTHER DETAILS ON THE
BILL. BUT I THINK THE COMMITTEE
IS FAIRLY, UH, FLUENT THE
SUBJECT AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS I DO HAVE
WITH ME TODAY, ANTHONY SAMPSON
ON BEHALF OF NEW CAR DEALERS. ON
THE PHONE. WE HAVE TRAVIS OUR
AND ON BEHALF OF THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S IF IT PLEASES THE
CHAIR. OKAY MR SAMPSON SAY, MR
AUSTIN. PLEASE PROCEED. THREE
MINUTES. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR
CHAIR MEMBERS, ANTHONY SAMPSON
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA NEW
CAR DEALERS ASSOCIATION, PLEASED
TO BE IN SUPPORT HERE TODAY, AND
YOU KNOW THE CALIFORNIA NEW CAR
DEALERS UNDERSTAND THE SEVERITY
OF THE ISSUE. IN FACT, THEY HAVE
BEEN VICTIMS TO THIS AS WELL IN
THEIR OWN LOTS AND HAVE WORKED
VERY CLOSELY WITH
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GRAY AND OTHER
STAKEHOLDERS TO TRY TO CRAFT A
SOLUTION THAT MAKES THE MOST
SENSE WHAT WE HAVE SAID FROM THE
VERY BEGINNING, AND WHAT WE
CONTINUE TO SAY NOW IS THE
CALIFORNIA NEW CAR DEALERS IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARE
WILLING TO DO THIS WORK. FOR
BOTH NEW AND USED VEHICLES. IT
IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WORK
. THERE ARE TWO ISSUES THAT WE
HAVE BEEN FOCUSED ON, AND THE
ASSEMBLY MEMBER HAS GRACIOUSLY
BEEN WILLING TO INCORPORATE INTO
THE BILL. NUMBER ONE IS TO
ESTABLISH SOME TYPE OF
VISIBILITY EXEMPTION TO ENSURE
THAT DEALERS AREN'T SADDLED WITH
THE RESPONSIBILITY TO VIN
NUMBERS INTO CATALYTIC
CONVERTERS. THAT ARE VERY HARD
TO REACH, AND THAT ARE LOCATED,
FOR EXAMPLE, WITHIN THE EXHAUST
MANIFOLD. NUMBER TWO. WE'VE BEEN
ASKING TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS
EXPRESS AUTHORIZATION TO BE ABLE
TO CHARGE FOR THE WORK BEING
PERFORMED, SEEING HOW WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT BOTH NEW AND USED
VEHICLES. IT IS A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF WORK. FROM A LABOR
STANDPOINT AGAIN, THE DEALERS
HAVE COME TO THE TABLE, WILLING
TO DO THE WORK, AND WE SIMPLY
NEED THE ABILITY TO EXPRESSLY
AUTHORIZED A CHARGE TO ENSURE
THAT OUR COSTS CAN BE RECOVERED.
FOR DOING THE WORK MANDATED
UNDER THE BILL, AND WITH THAT
WE'RE PLEASED TO SUPPORT AND
APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT THE
AUTHOR AND HIS STAFF HAVE DONE
TO GET THE BILL TO THIS POINT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT.
STRAW ESTÁN THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE FOR
GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF A B 26 82
TODAY. DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE
CRIME. CATALYTIC CONVERTER THEFT
POSES UNIQUE CHALLENGES TO LAW
ENFORCEMENT, AND PROSECUTORS IN
THIS BILL DIRECTLY ADDRESSES
THOSE CHALLENGES. IN ORDER TO
INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE ANY
RECEIPT OF STOLEN PROPERTY CASE
THE THRESHOLD QUESTIONS ARE
ALWAYS NUMBER ONE IS THE
PROPERTY, ACTUALLY TOÀN AND
NUMBER TWO WHO IS THE VICTIM
WITHOUT IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
ON THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER LAW
ENFORCEMENT IS SIMPLY UNABLE TO
MAKE THESE DETERMINATIONS. THIS
BILL HELPS SOLVE THOSE PROBLEMS
UNDER THIS BILL, IT IS INCUMBENT
UPON THE ARMOR, AUTOMOTIVE
REPAIR DEALERS AND THOSE HOLDING
A RETAIL SELLERS PERMIT TO
ENSURE THAT IN SPECIFIC
INSTANCES VEHICLES, CATALYTIC
CONVERTERS PERMANENTLY MARKED
WITH THE VIN NUMBER. IN DOING SO
, THIS BILL WILL GIVE ONE FORCE
MINT THE ABILITY TO CROSS
REFERENCE CATALYTIC CONVERTERS.
THAT PEOPLE LEAVE TO BE STOLEN
WITH CATALYTIC CONVERTERS THAT
ARE ACTUALLY STOLEN. THIS BILL
WILL ALSO ALLOW LAW ENFORCEMENT
TO DETERMINE HOW MANY CATALYTIC
CONVERTERS AND BUSINESSES
INVENTORY ARE REPORTED STOLEN IN
CREATE A CHAIN OF CUSTODY THAT
LEADS BACK TO THE VICTIM OF THE
INITIAL FEST. IDENTIFYING THE
VICTIM IS CRITICAL IN ANY
PROSECUTION. SO IN CONCLUSION.
THIS BELL NOT ONLY ASSIST LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND PROSECUTORS BUT
MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT WILL
PROVIDE JUSTICE TO MORE VICTIMS
INTO TURKEY. CATALYTIC CONVERTER
THEFT IN THE FUTURE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, SIR. NOW LET'S HEAR
FROM ANY ADDITIONAL WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT IN THE HEARING ROOM
AND THE ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AND
SUPPORT NAME, AFFILIATION AND
POSITION ON THE BILL, PLEASE.
RHONDA PONTS PRIVATE VOTING
CITIZEN. I SUPPORT ASSEMBLYMAN
GRAY IN THIS BILL. THE ONLY
ADDITIONAL REQUEST I MIGHT HAVE
IS EXPLORING. THE IMPOUND FEES
ASSOCIATED LIKE AS FAR AS
EXPLORING THOSE HIGH DOLLAR
AMOUNT FEES TO RETRIEVE THE
VEHICLE ONCE THE STOLEN CAR HAS
BEEN FOUND. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MA'AM. THANKS FOR
TESTIFYING. ANY OTHER WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT LET'S MOVE TO
WITNESSES WAITING TO TESTIFY VIA
THE TELECONFERENCE SERVICE.
MATTER IF YOU WOULD PLEASE
PROMPT ANY INDIVIDUALS WAITING,
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF ASSEMBLY
BILL 26 82, WE WILL BEGIN WITH
THEM. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT
OF A B 26 82 YOU MAY PRESS ONE
AND THEN ZERO. AGAIN THAT IS ONE
AND THEN ZERO. FEAR AND SUPPORT
OF A B 26 82. AND WE GO TO LINE
2 21. YOUR LINE IS OPEN. PLEASE
GO AHEAD. GOOD EVENING AGAIN. MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE SHARON GONZALEZ, ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDE ISN'T SUPPORT THANK
YOU NEXT, PLEASE. THANK YOU.
LINE TO 46 YEAR LINE IS OPEN.
GOOD EVENING, KAREN MEMBERS
ELENA ORTIZ ON BEHALF OF VALLEY
CLEAN AIR NOW AND CALVIN AND
SUPPORT NEXT, PLEASE. THANK YOU
, MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO FURTHER
SUPPORTING QUÊ. LET'S FOLLOW THE
SAME PROCESS AND HEAR FROM ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. FIRST
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION IN THE
HEARING ROOM, SIR. MR CHAIRMAN,
MEMBERS RANDY PERRY ARE THERE
AND READING ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF
OF THE ALLIANCE FOR AUTOMOTIVE
INNOVATION. WE WERE OPPOSED TO
THE BILL. WE'VE BEEN WORKING
WITH ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GRAY ON
AMENDMENTS FOR THE PAST TWO
WEEKS. AND WE ARE NOW NEUTRAL
AND MEASURE. WE WANT YOU TO KNOW
WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK
ON THE MM S TOGETHER. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU WORK. ANY OTHER
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
HEARING ROOM. SEEING NONE. LET'S
MOVE TO THE TELECONFERENCE
SERVICE MODERATOR. IF YOU WOULD
PLEASE PROMPT ANY INDIVIDUALS
WAITING TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION
TO ASSEMBLY BILL 26 82 WILL
CONTINUE WITH THEM. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR OPPOSITION OF 26 82.
YOU MAY PRESS ONE AND THEN ZERO.
AGAIN THAT IT'S ONE AND THEN
ZERO IF YOU'RE NOT POSITION. AND
MR CHAIR. WE HAVE NO OPPOSITION
NG IN. Q THANK YOU. LET'S BRING
THE MATTER BACK TO MY COLLEAGUES
ON THE DAIS FOR QUESTIONS,
COMMENTS OR CONCERNS. OKAY. UM,
I THINK WOULD LOTS OF PEOPLE
WANT TO MOVE THE BILL. BUT WHAT
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE SENATOR MEN
FIRST, ANY QUESTIONS? NO
QUESTIONS. TRUMAN I DO AND I'M
SORRY. I'M SORRY. THE QUESTION
SO, UM, ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S GREAT.
I KNOW HOW HARD YOU WORK IN THIS
. I COMMEND YOU FOR GETTING IT
THIS FAR. GLAD TO SUPPORT THE
BILL DAY. DO HAVE A QUESTION. I
NOTE IN THE AMENDMENTS, IT SAYS
A DEAL OR PERSON HOLDING A
RETAILS LICENSE MAY IMPOSE A
REASONABLE CHARGE IN DOING THE
MARKING OF A CATALYTIC CONVERTER
. DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF
WHAT THAT WOULD ADD TO
SOMEBODY'S BILL OR PURCHASE
PRICE OR LEASE OF A CAR. WHY
NOT? THE EXISTING COST RANGES
ANYWHERE FROM $1000 TO $4000? UM
I WOULD ASSUME IT'S GOING TO BE
IN THAT SAME RANGE. OF COURSE,
OBVIOUS, DEPENDING ON THE
VEHICLE. AND THEN OF COURSE WE
EXEMPTED. THE MORE EXPENSIVE
VEHICLES IN THE SENSE OF IT
BEING HARDER TO HARDER TO RIDGE
. FOR THE FOR THOSE THAT ARE
REASONABLY EASY TO ACCESS, SO
HOPEFULLY WE'LL FALL IN THE
BOTTOM END OF THAT RANGE BETWEEN
1000 4000 BUCKS. OKAY 1015 100
BUCKS. ALRIGHT. APPRECIATE IT.
WE'VE GOT THE NEW CAR DEALERS
CHAIRS APPROVAL. YES PLEASE. SO
I THINK I THINK, UM YOUR
QUESTION MAY HAVE MISSED BEEN
MISINTERPRETED TO MEAN WHAT DOES
IT COST TO REPLACE THE CATALYTIC
CONVERTER, AND IT'S ENTIRELY MY
QUESTION. WHAT IS THE CUSTOM
MARKET? HOW MUCH FOR PURPOSES OF
MARKET MARKING ITSELF DOES NOT
COST VERY MUCH AT ALL THE LABOR
COST ASSOCIATED WITH GETTING TO
THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER. IT CAN
RANGE DEPENDING ON LABOR RATES.
THOSE VARY AMONG DEALERS
THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. WE DON'T HAVE AN
EXACT RANGE RIGHT NOW, JUST
BECAUSE OF THE VARIATION
DEPENDING ON DEALERSHIP AND
AGAIN, DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF
CAR SO THERE ARE CARS WHERE IT
CAN TAKE A LOT MORE WORK TO HAVE
TO GET INTO THE CATALYTIC
CONVERTER AND DO THE ETCHING.
OTHER WORDS ARE VERY VISIBLE AND
RIGHT THERE, SO THERE'S A RANGE,
BUT BUT BUT BUT IT'S NOT A
MATTER OF CONSUMER CHOICES. IT'S
A REQUIREMENT OF THE DEALER TO
DO THAT MARKING CORRECT. AND
THEN THIS BILL ALLOWS FOR THE
DEALER TO PASS THAT ALONG TO
CONSUMERS. I ASSUME IT'S NOT
PROHIBITED TO MARK THAT UP AS
WELL. CAN THEY MAKE A PROFIT ON
THAT WORK? NO THE LANGUAGE AND
THE BILL IS CHARGED TO
REASONABLE CHARGE TO COVER THE
COSTS. IT'S TO SIMPLY COVER THE
COST NOT TO EXCEED THE CAR
CORRECT TO OFFSET OKAY. I MEAN,
I RECALL AROUND THE YEAR WE HAD
A BILL THAT WOULD ALLOW WOULD
HAVE ALLOWED FOR INCREASING THE
CHARGE FOR VEHICLE PROCESSING BY
NEW CAR DEALERS AND THAT THERE
WASN'T WELL RECEIVED. I THINK IT
WAS MUCH SMALLER NUMBER. SO NO
ISSUE HERE. IT SEEMS LIKE REAL
MONEY. YOU KNOW, THE CONSUMER
DOES NOT HAVE THE OPTION OF
FOREGOING THE MARKING. THIS
WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT.
APPRECIATE IT. STILL SUPPORT THE
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS
CONCERNS. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY
SENATOR MEN. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
GRAY WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
THANK YOU. SENATORS FOR THE
DISCUSSION AND RESPECT FASTER. I
VOTE. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS. WE
REFER THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC
SAFETY. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
EVERY 26 82 MOTIONS DO PASS AND
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
PUBLIC SAFETY ROUGH. MELINDA'S.
ARCHULETTA. MERCHANT LETTER. I
BATES BECKER. OCCUR. I DODD
RIGHT. I EGGMAN. EDMUND. I
HURTADO. TÔI JONES. JONES, I
LEVA LEVA. AMEN. MAN I NEWMAN
BIOKO BUG GUY PAN AND I PRE. SHE
ATE THE ENTHUSIASM. BILL HAS 12
VOTES WILL HOLD THE ROLL OPEN.
THANK YOU SENATORS. AND THAT
CONCLUDES ALL OF THE ITEMS ON
OUR AGENDA. LET'S TAKE A MINUTE
AND DO SOME VOTE RECONCILE NG
WHAT WAS IT? WHAT IS IT?
OKAY LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LET'S
OPEN THE ROLE WE'RE GOING TO
CALL THE ROLL, STARTING WITH AT
THE TOP OF THE AGENDA. FILE ITEM
NUMBER ONE. A B 6 75 CURRENT
VOTE IS 7 TO 3 CHAIR VOTING. I
PLEASE OPEN THE ROLE. ITEM
NUMBER ONE A B 6 57 67723
MELINDA'S LINDA'S NO. DODD. MY
GOD, I EGGMAN. EDMUND I MEN.
MOMENT. I MM. VOTE IS 10 TO 4.
THAT BILL IS OUT. NEXT ITEM FILE
ITEM NUMBER TWO. I'LL READ IT
OFF OF HERE SIMPLY BUILT 28 94.
CURRENT VOTE IS 9 TO 1. SURE
VOTING AYE. PILOT AND NUMBER 2
88 28 94 CURRENT VOTE 9 TO 1,
MELINDA'S. DIED. DODD. AYE,
EGGMAN. SIGMUND AYE. MEN, MEN. I. VOTE IS 12 TO 1. THAT BILL IS
OUT. FOLLOWED HIM. NUMBER THREE
ASSEMBLY BILL 852 CURRENT VOTE 6
TO 0 CHAIR VOTING AYE. FILE AND
NUMBER THREE A. B 8 52 CURRENT
VOTE 6 TO 0 MELINDA'S. BELINDA'S
AYE, BATES DODD. DODD. AYE,
EGGMAN. EGGMAN I JONES MEN. MAN,
I NEWMAN. NEWMAN. I KOBO.
VOTE COUNT IS 11 TO 0. THAT BILL
IS OUT. FELL. ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
THEN WE BUILD 17 04 CURRENT VOTE
10 TO 0 CHAIR VOTING AYE. FILE
ITEM NUMBER FOUR A. B 17 OH FOUR
CURRENT VOTE 10 TO 0. MELINDA'S
MELINDA'S. AYE DODD DOT I
EGGMAN. SIGMUND, I MEN. MAN. I.
CURRENT VOTE 14 TO 0 THAT BILL
IS OUT. NEXT ITEM FELL. I
REMEMBER FIVE ASSEMBLY BUILT 18
94 CURRENT VOTE IS 7 TO 0 CHAIR
VOTING? AYE. FILE ITEM NUMBER
FIVE A B 18 94 CURRENT VOTE 7 TO
0 BECKER. BECKER I DODD DOT I
EGGMAN EDMUND. I HEARD TATO. HER
TÔI JONES. JONES. I MEN. MEN. I
NEWMAN NEWMAN. AYE. CURRENT VOTE
14 TO 0 THAT BILL IS OUT. NEXT
ITEM. FILE ITEM NUMBER SIX
SOMEBODY BILL. 20198 CHAIR
VOTING, AYE. AND NUMBER SIX A B
2019 CURRENT VOTE 8 TO 0 BATES.
BECKER. BECKER. I HEARD TATO.
POTATO. I JONES. FILE ITEMS SIX
ASSEMBLY BILL 2019. NEWMAN.
NEWMAN. I DREW A BOOK.
SENATOR YOU VOTING. RUN ITEM
NUMBER SIX ASSEMBLY BILL 2019.
CURRENT VOTE IS 11 TO 0. THAT
BILL IS OUT. FILE ITEM NUMBER
SEVEN ASSEMBLY BUILT 23-14
CURRENT VOTE 8 TO 0 CHAIR VOTING
AYE. FILE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN A B
23-14 CURRENT VOTE 8 TO 0.
MELINDA'S. MELINDA'S, AYE,
BATES. STATES. I BECKER BECKER.
I'D POTATO HER. TATO I MEN MEN.
I NEWMAN NEWMAN. AYE. CURRENT
VOTE. 14 TO 0. THAT BILL IS OUT.
FINALLY REMEMBER EIGHT ASSEMBLY
BUILT 2098 CURRENT VOTE 8 TO 4
CHAIR VOTING AYE. ITEM NUMBER
EIGHT. MAYBE 2098 CURRENT VOTE 8
TO 4. BECKER. POTATO. HARTARTO?
AYE. CURRENT VOTE 9 TO 4. THAT
BILL IS OUT. FINALLY REMEMBER
NINE ASSEMBLY BILL 20 TO 36
CURRENT VOTE 7 TO 1 SHARE VOTING
AYE. ITEM NUMBER NINE A. B 20 TO
36 CURRENT ABOUT 7 TO 1.
MELINDA'S. BATES. DODD DOT I
POTATO. POTATO. I JONES. MEN.
CURRENT VOTE 9 TO 1 THAT BILL IS
OUT. NEXT ITEM. FOUL ITEM NUMBER
11 ASSEMBLY BILL 21 96. CURRENT
VOTE 70 CHAIR VOTING AYE. FILE
ITEM NUMBER 11 80 21 96 CURRENT
ABOUT 70. MELINDA'S MELINDA'S,
AYE, BATES STATES. I BECKER.
SPEAKER I HEARD TATO TATO, I
JONES JONES. I MEN MEN. I NEWMAN
NEWMAN. AYE. CURRENT VOTE 14 TO
0 THAT BILL IS OUT. FOLLOWED HIM
NUMBER 12. ASSEMBLY BILL 23 80
CURRENT VOTE FOR 20 CHAIR VOTING
AYE. PILOT AND NUMBER 12 A B 23
80 CURRENT VOTE FOR 20.
MELINDA'S. BATES. BECKER.
SPEAKER I DODD DOT I HEARD
TAITO. HER TAITO? AYE, JONES.
MEN, MEN I NEWMAN. NEWMAN. I JOB
Ó. PAN, AND I. CURRENT VOTE 10
TO 0 THAT BILL IS OUT. PHILIP
REMEMBER 13 SOME WE BUILT 24 99
CURRENT VOTE FOR 21 CHAIR VOTING
AYE. FILE ITEM NUMBER 13 A B 24
99 CURRENT VOTE FOR 21,
MELINDA'S MELINDA'S NO. BECKER.
TUCKER I DODD DOT I HEARD TATO.
POTATO. NO, JONES. STONE'S NO
MEN. I NEWMAN NEW AND I KOBO.
PAN PAN. AYE. CURRENT VOTE. 924
THAT BILL IS OUT. VOEPEL ITEM
NUMBER 14 ASSEMBLY BILL 24 07
CURRENT VOTE 10 TO 0. SURE
VOTING AYE. FILE ITEM NUMBER 14
80 24 07 CURRENT VOTE 10 TO 0
BECKER BECKER. I DODD. DOT I
HEARD TATO POTATO. I JONES.
JONES. I. CURRENT VOTE 14 TO 0
THAT BILL IS OUT. FINAL ITEM
FILE ITEM NUMBER 15 CAN'T BE
RIGHT AT THE FINAL ITEM. IT'S
FILE ITEM NUMBER 15 ASSEMBLY
BILL 26 82 CURRENT VOTE 12 TO 0
CHAIR VOTING AYE. VIOLET I'M
NUMBER 15 26 82 CURRENT VOTE 12
TO 0 MELINDA'S. BATES. 12 TO 0.
THAT BILL IS OUT. WELL, ITEM
NUMBER 16. ASSEMBLY BILL 26 71.
CURRENT VOTE 6 TO 0. SURE VOTING
AYE. VIOLET DON'T NUMBER 16 A B
26 71 CURRENT VOTE 6 TO 0
MELINDA'S MELINDA'S, AYE, BATES
BATES, I BECKER. BECKER. I DODD.
DOT I EGGMAN. POTATO. POTATO. I
JONES. JONES. I MEN. MAN. I.
CURRENT VOTES 13 TO 0. THAT BILL
IS OUT. FILE ITEM NUMBER 17
ASSEMBLY BILL 26 84 CURRENT VOTE
8 TO 0. CHAIR VOTING, AYE. FILE
ITEM NUMBER 17 A B 26 84 CURRENT
VOTE 8 TO 0 MELINDA'S. MELINDA'S
AYE, EGGMAN. HURTADO. ORTEZ D!I
JONES JONES. I LEAVE TO LEAVE MY
MEN, MEN. I. CURRENT VOTE 13 TO
0 THAT BILL IS OUT. FELL ITEM
NUMBER 18 SIMPLY BUILT 26 85
CURRENT VOTE FOR 20 CHAIR VOTING
AYE. FILE NUMBER 18 A B 26 85
CURRENT VOTE FOR 20. MELINDA'S.
ALL RIGHT. MELINDA'S AYE,
ARCHULETTA TÔI BATES. BEADS. I
EGMOND POTATO. POTATO. I JONES.
JONES. I LIVE TO LIVE A AMEN
MEN. I NEWMAN I PAN. CURRENT
VOTE 12 TO 0 THAT BILL IS OUT.
FELL ON HIM. NUMBER 19 ASSEMBLY
BILL 26 86 CURRENT VOTE 8 TO 0
CHAIR VOTING AYE. FILE NUMBER
FILE ITEM NUMBER 1980 26 86
CURRENT VOTE 8 TO 0 BECKER
BECKER I DODD DOT I EGMOND.
HURTADO. POTATO. I JONES. JONES.
I'M NEWMAN. NEWMAN. AYE. CURRENT
VOTE 13 TO 0. THAT BILL IS OUT.
FILE ITEM NUMBER 20 ASSEMBLY
BILL 26 87 CURRENT VOTE 11 TO 0
CHAIR VOTING AYE. FILE ITEM
NUMBER 28 26 87 11 TO 0. BECKER.
SPEAKER. I HEARD TATO. POTATO I.
NEWMAN NEWMAN. AYE. CURRENT VOTE
14 TO 0 THAT BILL IS OUT. GOOD
JOB. GENTLEMEN THAT CONCLUDES
OUR AGENDA. THANK YOU ALL FOR
PARTICIPATING FOR THOSE WHO
TESTIFIED THANK YOU FOR YOUR
COMMENTS. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY OR WISH
TO DO SO ANYWAY, PLEASE PROVIDE
YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS TO
DIRECTLY TO OUR COMMITTEE. OR ON
OUR WEBSITE. WE LOOK FORWARD TO
HEARING FROM YOU AND VALUE YOUR
TESTIMONY. BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE IS HEREBY
ADJOURNED.