ALRIGHT WE'RE GONNA WE'RE GONNA
BEGIN HERE SHORTLY AS A
SUBCOMMITTEE, UM I WOULD INVITE
ALL MEMBERS OF THE SENATE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TO APPEAR IN
ROOM 2100. UM SO WE HAVE 50% OF
THE REPUBLICAN COMPONENT. WHO IS
PRESENT. SO UM. WE'RE GOING TO
COME TO ORDER AS A SUBCOMMITTEE.
UM GOOD MORNING AS WE CONTINUE
TO TAKE SOME PRECAUTIONS TO
MANAGE ONGOING COVID 19 RISK.
THE SENATE CONTINUES TO WELCOME
THE PUBLIC TO OUR HEARINGS AND
HAS PROVIDED ACCESS TO BOTH IN
PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE
PARTICIPATION FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT. PROBLEM INDIVIDUALS
WISHING TO PROVIDE PUBLIC
COMMENT. THE PARTICIPANT TOLL
FREE NUMBER AND ACCESS CODE IS
POSTED ON OUR COMMITTEE WEBSITE
WILL BE DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN
THAT WILL ANNOUNCE IT NOW.
TODAY'S PARTICIPANT NUMBER IS
8772 TO 6. 8163 AND THE ACCESS
CODE IS 648862. FOR DETAILED
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW THE
TELECONFERENCE SYSTEM WORKS.
PLEASE REFER TO THE SENATE AND
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WEBSITE. I
WILL MAINTAIN THE QUORUM DURING
THE HEARING, AS IS CUSTOMER IN
ANY INDIVIDUAL WHO IS DISRUPTIVE
MAY BE REMOVED FROM THE REMOTE
MEETING SERVICE OR HAVE THEIR
CONNECTIONS MUTED. WE'RE HOLDING
OUR COMMITTEE HEARINGS HERE IN
THE OFF STREET BUILDING ALSO
KNOWN AS THE SWING SPACE. I ASK
THAT ALL MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE COME TO ROOM 2100 SO
WE CAN ESTABLISH OUR QUORUM AND
BEGIN THE HEARING. UM. WE ARE
LACKING THREE MEMBERS FOR A
QUORUM. LET ME ANNOUNCE WHAT IS
ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. WHICH
WILL BE TAKEN UP ONCE WE
ESTABLISH A QUORUM. UH THE
FOLLOWING ITEMS ON THE CONSENT
COUNTER FILING NUMBER SIX A. B
18 65 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER BENNETT
FILING NUMBER SEVEN A. B 29 12
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BERMAN FILE
, UM, NUMBER 11 A B 1467 BY SOME
OF THE MEMBERS CERVANTES WITH
AMENDMENTS FILE THEM NUMBER 12 A
B 29 60 BY ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE FILE NUMBER 13 29 61,
ALSO BY THE ASSEMBLY JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE FILE NUMBER 17 81 355
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S THE LEVIN
FILING NUMBER 1980 23 70, ALSO
BY SOMEBODY MEMBER, LEVINE.
PILOT NUMBER 21 A B 7 40 BY SOME
OF THEM. RICCARDI FILE HIM
NUMBER 22 A B 2495 BY SEVEN
MEMBER PATERSON WITH AMENDMENTS
FILING NUMBER 23 A B 22 80 BY
SOME OF THEM ARREST FILE NUMBER
24 23 26 BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
FILE NUMBER 25 A B 20 TO 60 BY
SOME OF THE MEMBER RODRIGUEZ
FINALLY, FILING NUMBER 26, MAYBE
26 55 BY SOME OF THE MEMBER
BLANCA RUBIO. ALL RIGHT. THE
FIRST BILL WE'RE GOING TO TAKE
UP IS THIS IS A B 22 23 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS, UM,
FOLLOWED BY A B 2777 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS. UM AS IS
CUSTOMARY. WE WILL TAKE, UM,
SUPPORT IN OPPOSITION SUPPORT.
THERE WILL BE TWO PRIMARY
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT EACH WILL
HAVE TWO MINUTES. OPPOSITION
WILL HAVE THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT
OF TIME TWO MINUTES FOR EACH.
WHO WISHES TO EACH OF THE TWO
PRIMARY WITNESSES WHO WISH
TESTIFYING OPPOSITION. THEN
WE'LL TAKE THOSE WHO ARE HERE IN
THE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM TO
APPROACH THE MICROPHONE AND GIVE
US THEIR NAME THEIR AFFILIATION
IN THEIR POSITION. AND THEN WE
WILL TURN TO THE PHONE. UM, WE
WILL FIRST TAKE SUPPORT AND THEN
WE WILL TAKE OPPOSITION. SOME
MEMBER WICKS. UM, I SEE YOU'RE
HERE. YOU'VE BEEN PATIENTLY
WAITING. A B 22 TO 3 FLOOR IS
YOURS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR
CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE ALSO WANT TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR ALL OF THEIR
HELP ON THIS BILL. IN THE PAST
TWO DECADES, AT LEAST 1300
PREGNANT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED FOR HAVING
MISCARRIAGES OR STILLBIRTHS OR
SELF MANAGING AN ABORTION.
CALIFORNIA IS NOT EXEMPT FROM
THIS, DESPITE CLEAR LAW THAT
ENDING OR LOSING A PREGNANCY IS
NOT A CRIME. PROSECUTORS IN THIS
STATE HAVE CHARGED PEOPLE WITH
HOMICIDE OFFENSES FOR PREGNANCY
LOST. TWO EXAMPLES ARE THE CASES
OF CHELSEA BECKER AND ADORA
PEREZ TO CALIFORNIA WOMEN WHO
ARE RECENTLY PROSECUTED AND
IMPRISONED FOR THEIR
STILLBIRTHS. THE SAME GROUP
ATTACKING ABORTIONS. RIGHT
ABORTION RIGHTS HAVE SPREAD
DISINFORMATION ABOUT THIS BILL.
THEREFORE I WANT TO BE CLEAR
ABOUT WHAT THE SPILL DOES AND
DOES NOT DO. TO PROTECT PEOPLE'S
REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM AND
DECISION MAKING A B 22 23 WILL
REINFORCE EXISTING STATE
PROTECTIONS TO ENSURE THAT NO
ONE IN CALIFORNIA WILL BE
PROSECUTED FOR ENDING A
PREGNANCY OR EXPERIENCING
PREGNANCY LOSS. THIS BILL
PROTECTS AGAINST PROSECUTION OF
PREGNANCY OUTCOMES, INCLUDING
ABORTION, MISCARRIAGE,
STILLBIRTH AND PERINATAL DEATH
DUE TO CAUSES THAT OCCURRED IN
UTERO. HERE'S WHAT THE BILL
WON'T DO. A B 22 23 WILL NOT
PREVENT AUTHORITIES FROM BEING
ABLE TO INVESTIGATE THE FACTS OF
A NEWBORN NEWBORN CHILD'S DEATH,
INCLUDING WHETHER THE CHILD WAS
BORN. LIVING THIS BILL ONLY
PREVENT FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF
THE PREGNANT PERSON IN THE EVENT
THAT THE DEATH WAS DETERMINED TO
BE A PREGNANCY RELATED CAUSE
THAT OCCURRED IN UTERO. IT IS
DESIGNED TO PROTECT PARENTS WHO
EXPERIENCED THE TRAUMA OF LOSING
A CHILD FROM BEING RE
TRAUMATIZED BY UNWARRANTED
INVESTIGATIONS. TO BE CLEAR THIS
BILL WILL NOT PREVENT POLICE
FROM INVESTING INTO FETAL DEATH.
THAT OCCURRED AS A RESULT OF A
CRIME COMMITTED AGAINST A
PREGNANT PERSON AGAIN. THIS BILL
WAS DESIGNED TO STOP ROGUE
PROSECUTORS FROM USING PEOPLE'S
PREGNANCIES AGAINST THEM. IN
ADDITION, THIS BILL DOES NOT
DIMINISH OR CHANGE THE ABILITY
OF THE STATE TO INTERVENE TO
PROTECT A LIVING CHILD AND
INSTANCES OF ABUSE OR NEGLECT OR
FROM INVESTIGATION INVESTIGATING
AN INFANT DEATH THAT OCCURRED AS
A RESULT OF AN ACTOR MISSION
THAT TOOK PLACE AFTER DELIVERY.
IT IS ONLY FOCUSED ON PREGNANCY
OUTCOMES AND THE EVENTS THAT
OCCURRED IN UTERO. HERE'S WHAT A
B 22 23 WILL DO. THIS BILL WILL
REMOVE OUTDATED PROVISIONS
REQUIRING CORNERS TO INVESTIGATE
CERTAIN PREGNANCY LOSSES.
CLARIFY THAT THE REPRODUCTIVE
PRIVACY ACT PROTECTS
CRIMINALIZATION OF PREGNANCY,
LOSS OF PREGNANCY, PREGNANCY
OUTCOMES AND CREATE A PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION FOR PEOPLE WHOSE
RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED. THIS
BILL IS SPONSORED BY A NUMBER OF
ORGANIZATIONS AND SUPPORTED BY
NUMBER OF REPUTABLE
ORGANIZATIONS, INCLUDING A C L U
CALIFORNIA ACTION. BLACK WOMAN
FOR WELLNESS ACTION PROJECT.
CALIFORNIA LATINAS FOR
REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE, IF WHEN,
HOW LAURIER LAWYERING FOR
REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE. NARAL
PLANNED PARENTHOOD. OUR DOCTORS
, OUR NURSES ARE MIDWIVES AND
MANY OTHER GREAT ORGANIZATIONS
ALSO WANT TO ADD THAT THIS BILL
WILL ENSURE THAT IF SOMEONE IS
SEEKING AN ABORTION FROM OUT OF
STATE THAT THEIR RIGHTS WILL BE
PROTECTED HERE IN CALIFORNIA.
WITNESSES WHO WILL BE TESTIFYING
OVER THE PHONE. UM ARE FARAH
DIAZ TAYO OF IF ONE HOW
LAWYERING FOR REPRODUCTIVE
JUSTICE, AND SAMANTHA LEE OF THE
NATIONAL ADVOCATES FOR PREGNANCY
WOMEN FOR PREGNANT WOMEN. UM.
MISS TELLO. IF YOU'RE ON THE
PHONE IF YOU WOULD ANNOUNCE
YOURSELF HI. I'M HERE. GOOD
MORNING. GOOD MORNING. GO AHEAD
, SARAH DÍAS, IF ONE HOW WE ARE
PROUD SPONSORS OF MAYBE 22 23
INSTEAD OF INSTEAD OF SPEAKING
TO YOU TODAY AS A LAWYER WHO
CONTENDS WITH THE
CRIMINALIZATION OF PRESIDENCY
DAILY, I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD MY
TIME TO THE WORDS JESSICA TEBOW.
LIVING IN GLENDALE IN 2000 AND
NINE WHEN SHE EXPERIENCED
FIRSTHAND WHAT HAPPENS IN LAW
ENFORCEMENT INTERFERENCE WITH
PREGNANCY LOSSES. IN HER WORDS.
THERE HAVE BEEN A HEARTBEAT AT
EIGHT WEEKS. BUT SOMETHING
WASN'T RIGHT. THEY SENT ME TO A
SPECIALIST A 10 WEEKS AND THAT'S
WHEN WE KNEW IT WAS OVER. FOR
SOME PEOPLE. THIS WOULD HAVE
BEEN VERY SIMPLE, BUT I HAD BEEN
PASSIONATELY PRO LIFE 18 YEARS
AND HEARD ALL THE STORIES OF
MIRACLES. A WEEK LATER, IT
STARTED TO GET ILL AND MY DOCTOR
IS WORRIED THAT THE TISSUE THAT
HAD ONCE BEEN FILLED WITH HOPES
AND DREAMS WAS CAUSING AN
INFECTION. IT WAS ONLY AFTER I
UNDERSTOOD THAT THE INFECTION
MIGHT HINDER MY ABILITY TO HAVE
FUTURE CHILDREN, BUT I RELENTED
AND TELL I LABORED AND DELIVERED
THAT LITTLE EMBRYO AND TRIED TO
SEE THAT WITH AS MUCH GRACE AND
THE PERSON CAN I KNEW I WANTED
TO HAVE IT TESTED FOR GENETIC
ABNORMALITIES. AND MORE
IMPORTANTLY, I WANTED TO AGREE
THAT PRIVATELY WITH SOME SORT OF
CEREMONY SO ON FRIDAY NIGHT WITH
NO CHANCE OF DROPPING THE TISSUE
AT THE HOSPITAL WITH MY DOCTOR,
I WRAP THAT LITTLE EMBRYO
CAREFULLY AND DID THE ONLY THING
I COULD PRESERVE WHAT WAS LEFT
AND ALLOW MYSELF CLOSURE FROZE
IT. AFTER A WEEKEND OF SHARED
GRIEF. MY HUSBAND CALLED THE
NEAREST FUNERAL HOME AND ASKED
IF WE COULD PAY FOR SOME SORT OF
CREMATION PROCESS. BUT THEN
SOMETHING UNEXPECTED HAPPENED.
HE HAS TOLD THE TWO ENGAGES
FUNERAL HOME SERVICES. WE NEEDED
A DEATH CERTIFICATE AND TO CHECK
WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. MY
HUSBAND WAS THEN TOLD THAT HE
NEEDED TO CONTACT THE CORONER,
AND HE DID. I WOULD BACK AT WORK
AND STARTING TO FEEL BETTER WHEN
I GOT THE CALL. IT WAS A
DETECTIVE FROM THE GLENDALE
POLICE DEPARTMENT. HE WANTED TO
QUESTION ME ABOUT THE BABY I HAD
PUT IN THE FREEZER. I WAS BEING
ACCUSED OF MURDER. I POINTED OUT
THAT IT WAS WITHIN MY LEGAL
RIGHTS TO LET GO OF THE
PREGNANCY THAT HAS ACTUALLY
ENDED IN WEEK EIGHT. HE INSTEAD
INTIMATED THAT I WAS A LIAR WHO
MURDERED MY BABY. I TOLD HIM
THERE WAS NO BABY, JUST A LITTLE
TINY EMBRYO AND HE WENT ON. THEY
COULDN'T FIND BABY. SO WHERE HAD
HIDDEN IT? AND AT THAT MOMENT I
WAS FILLED WITH TERROR. NOT ONLY
HAD I LOST ALL THE LOVE AND
HOPES OF WHO THIS LITTLE DREAM
MIGHT HAVE BECOME, BUT I
pCERTAINTY THAT THEY HAD TAKEN
THE TISSUE ITSELF. HAD STOLEN
WHAT LITTLE BITS REMAINED. I WAS
GOING TO CARRY BACK TO KANSAS
AND GRIEVED PROPERLY. THIS MAN
AND A HOST OF OTHER OFFICERS
WERE IN MY HOUSE TALKING TO MY
BELONGINGS TAIL IF YOU COULD
WRAP IT UP, PLEASE. SURE. I
GUESS HE LOST HIS HEARTBREAKING
BUT IT IS ALSO PART OF THE
NATURAL ORDER BEING VIOLATED
BASED ON SYSTEMIC
CRIMINALIZATION. CONTROL OF
PREGNANCY IS ANOTHER STORY
ALTOGETHER. NO WOMAN SHOULD EVER
FACED SUCH BRUTALITY, ESPECIALLY
NOT WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, UM LET'S NOW TURN TO
MISS SAMANTHA LEE, IF YOU'RE
AVAILABLE. YES THANK YOU. I'M A
STAFF ATTORNEY AT NATIONAL
ADVOCATES FOR PREGNANT WOMEN
WHERE WE WORK TO ENSURE THAT NO
ONE IS ARRESTED, SHAMED OR
DENIED CONSTITUTIONAL INSTRUMENT
RIGHTS BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE
CAPACITY FOR PREGNANCY. ARE
PREGNANT FOR BECAUSE OF ANY%
OUTCOME OF THEIR PREGNANCY,
INCLUDING FIRST MR SILVER FOR
ABORTION. AND WE WERE SOME OF
THE ATTORNEYS WHO REPRESENTED
CHELSEA BECKER AGAINST MURDER
MURDER CHARGES FOR HER SHE LOST
IN HANFORD, CALIFORNIA, SO I
WOULD LIKE TO READ FOR THE
COMMITTEE STATEMENT FROM
INSPECTOR ABOUT HER EXPERIENCE.
MY NAME IS CHELSEA BECKER. I WAS
INCARCERATED IN COUNTY JAIL FOR
MORE THAN A YEAR FROM NOVEMBER
6TH 2019 UNTIL MARCH 10TH 2021
WHILE I WAS AWAITING TRIAL FOR
FIRST DEGREE MURDER AFTER
EXPERIENCING A SILVER ADDICTED
TO METHAMPHETAMINE. I HAVE READ
THE PROPOSED AMENDED BILL. AND
BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE, I
BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE PASSED.
EXPERIENCING THE LOSS OF MY BABY
ALONE, CAUSE A LOT OF TRAUMA FOR
ME, AND WHILE I WAS IN CUSTODY,
I WAS UNABLE TO RECEIVE THE
PROPER COUNSELING TO HELP ME
WITH THE GRIEF PROCESS. EVEN
WITH THE COUNSELORS AT THE JAIL.
I WAS AFRAID ANYTHING I MIGHT
HAVE SAID TO THEM WOULD BE USED
AGAINST YOU IN COURT, SO I
SUFFERED ALONE. WHILE I WAS IN
JAIL. MY YOUNGEST LIVING SON,
WHOM I HAD CUSTODY OF UP UNTIL
THIS TIME, HAD BEEN TAKEN INTO
TPS AND WAS LATER ADOPTED. AT
THE HOSPITAL HAS NEVER INVOLVED
ENFORCEMENT DUE TO THE SILVERS
HAPPENING. I WOULD STILL HAVE
CUSTODY OF MY SON. THE CHARGE
WAS DISMISSED UNTIL MAY 2021.
BUT THEN THE ADOPTION HAD BEEN
FINALIZED MONTHS PRIOR.
EXPERIENCE WITH THE JUSTICE
SYSTEM IN CHAINS, COUNTY WAS
DETRIMENTAL TO MY MENTAL HEALTH,
AND I FEEL THAT I WOULD FAILED
PEOPLE. IF THIS BILL IS PASSED,
IT WOULD PREVENT OTHER PEOPLE
FROM EXPERIENCING WHAT I DID AND
BEING PROSECUTED AND PUNISHED
FOR SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE
HAPPENED TO ANYBODY. I HOPE THAT
IN THE FUTURE NO WOMAN WILL EVER
BE PROSECUTED FOR LOSING A
PREGNANCY. AND I DELETE WOULD
LIKE TO EMPHASIZE TO THE
COMMITTEE THAT ABOUT 15% OF ALL
KNOWN PREGNANCIES END IN
PREGNANCY LAW. THIS IS A FACT OF
BIOLOGY, NOT BEHAVIOR.
METHAMPHETAMINE DID NOT POSITIVE
SPEAKERS. PREGNANCY LOST, NOR
COULD IT HAS PREGNANCY LOSS IS
SO TRAUMATIC ALREADY AND IT
TASTES LIKE MISS BECKER
MULTIPLIES THAT TRAUMA
EXPONENTIALLY. EVEN AS SHE
ULTIMATELY WON HER CASE AND
REGAINED HER FREEDOM. SHE SPENT
16 MONTHS IN JAIL DURING COVID.
SHE FOUGHT THE CHARGES FOR 19
MONTHS, AND SHE LOST HER OLDER
CHILD TO THE SYSTEM. IN ORDER TO
PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING TO
ANYONE ELSE IN CALIFORNIA. WE
STRONGLY URGE THE COMMITTEE TO
GIVE IT FULL SUPPORT TO THE
SPILL TO FURTHER CLARIFY THE
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS LEE,
IF YOU COULD WRAP IT UP YES. AND
UM, THAT THIS BILL WILL ALIGN
WITH THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE
LAW, WHICH WAS TO PROTECT
PREGNANT PEOPLE IN CALIFORNIA.
THANK THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ALRIGHT LET'S NOW TURN TO, UM
SUPPORT HERE IN ROOM 2100. IF
YOU'RE IN SUPPORT IF YOU
APPROACH THE MICROPHONE, GIVE US
YOUR NAME, YOUR AFFILIATION AND
YOUR POSITION. MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS. I'M AARON EVANS ON
BEHALF OF NARAL PRO CHOICE,
CALIFORNIA, A COSPONSOR OF THIS
MEASURE, AS WELL AS THE
CALIFORNIA NURSE MIDWIVES
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING,
MOLLY ROBSON WITH PLANNED
PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA, WHERE A CO SPONSOR
AND STRONG SUPPORT HAVE ALSO
BEEN ASKED TO PROVIDE A SUPPORT
ON BEHALF OF EQUALITY,
CALIFORNIA THANK YOU. CINDY
HILLARY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
IN STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, GENESIS GONZALEZ
ON BEHALF OF THE TENANT
GOVERNOR, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
LENNY COULD BLOCK IS IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ALRIGHT OTHERS HERE
IN ROOM 2100 SEEING NO ONE ELSE
PRESENT MODERATE IF WE TURN TO
THE PHONE. THANK YOU. YES LADIES
AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU WISH TO
SPEAK IN SUPPORT, PLEASE PRESS
ONE AND ZERO AT THIS TIME. AND
FIRST WE'LL HEAR FROM LINE 68,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY THEY
DROPPED THEMSELVES. IF YOU STILL
WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE PRESS 10.
AND WE WILL GO TO LINE 37.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD MORNING.
TURN MEMBERS. MY NAME IS LAUREN
LATINAS FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE
, SPONSOR AND SUPPORT OF A B 22
23. THANK YOU. AND NEXT, WE HAVE
LINE 38, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS CARLOS
ROMERO, RESIDENT OF LOS ANGELES
, CALLING IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
18 22 23. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
NEXT. WE HAVE LINE 27, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD MORNING, SYLVIA
CASTILLO WITH ESSENTIAL ACCESS,
HEALTH AND STRONG SUPPORT AND
ALSO EXPRESSING SUPPORT ON
BEHALF OF THE AND THE EPIDEMICS
COALITION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
. NEXT. WE HAVE LINE 40, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. HELLO. YES. GO AHEAD,
GO AHEAD. HI MY NAME'S WILLIAM
BED IN COURT. I'M A MEMBER OF
NARROW APPROACHING CALIFORNIA. I
STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANKS FOR
YOUR FINE. 63. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD MORNING SALON. THIS ACTION
PROJECT ABOUT THEM SPONSOR AND
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. THANK YOU. NEXT. WE HAVE
LINES 78, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
CURTISS FLYING WITH THE
CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION IN
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. NEXT. WE HAVE LINE 19,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD MORNING.
THIS IS LAURA JIMENEZ, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR AT CALIFORNIA, LATINAS
TO REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE AND
RESIDENT OF SENATE-DISTRICT 18
IN BURBANK IN STRONG SUPPORT OF
THIS BILL. THANK YOU. NEGATIVE
LINE. 41, PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS MARICELA. I'M A
RESIDENT OF NORTH ORANGE COUNTY
. AND I'M STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS
STUFF. THANK YOU. NEXT. WE HAVE
LINE 31, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
COMMITTING TO OUR MEMBERS, OFTEN
WITH HULU CALIFORNIA ACTION,
CALLING IN STRONG SUPPORT AND
OTHER TOPICS. I WANT TO THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. MAY PROVE LINE
34, PLEASE GO AHEAD. MORNING
SHARON MEMBERS. THIS IS ASHLEY
LOPEZ, AND I'M, A RESIDENT IN
LOS ANGELES IN SUPPORT OF THIS,
BILL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT
JUST LINE 70, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD MORNING. THIS IS MARIANNE
CHERRY. I'M IN LOS ANGELES, A
MEMBER OF NARAL PRO CHOICE
CALIFORNIA AND I'M VERY
EMOTIONAL SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
NEXT JUST LINE 28, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
MARTA PENA. I AM A RESIDENT IN
EAST L A. AND I'M STRONG SUPPORT
OF 20 TO 26. HERE. NEXT WE HAVE
LINE 76, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
KATHY VAN OSTEN, REPRESENTING
THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
UNIVERSITY WOMEN, CALIFORNIA
SUPPORT OF MAYBE 22 23. THANK
YOU. NEXT. WE HAVE LINE 82,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. PRIVATE HUNT,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PEACH AND
SUPPORT OF A D 22 TO 3. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. AND LAST WE HAVE
LINED 49. PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS LEE. OSAMA
AND I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF
EQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES AND THE
STRONGER CALIFORNIA AT THE HITS
THEM IN STRONG SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. AND THAT WAS ALL
WE HAD IN Q. RIGHT NOW, LET'S
TURN THE OPPOSITION AND THE
PROPONENTS, UM. WENT OVER A BIT
. UH THEY TOOK FIVE MINUTES AND
15 SECONDS AND SO IN ORDER TO
PROVIDE EQUAL TREATMENT. THE
OPPONENTS WILL BE AFFORDED THE
SAME FIVE MINUTES AND 15 SECONDS
. ALRIGHT UM IN TERMS OF PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. AH, WE
HAVE. SUSAN ARNELL IN MATTHEW
MCREYNOLDS HERE IN OPPOSITION TO
A B 22 23. MISS DARNELL. I SEE
YOU AT THE MICROPHONE. GO AHEAD.
THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SUSAN
ARNEL. I AM A CALIFORNIA
ATTORNEY AND THE VICE PRESIDENT
OF LEGAL AFFAIRS FOR THE RIGHT
TO LIFE LEAGUE, AMERICA'S FIRST
PRO LIFE ORGANIZATION, ALTHOUGH
THIS BILL'S STATED PURPOSE IS TO
SHIELD PREGNANT MOTHERS FROM
PROSECUTION FOR PREGNANCY LOSS A
B 22 23 IS A HORRIFIC ATTACK ON
LIFE AND WOMEN'S HEALTH SECTION
78 OF THE BILL OVERRIDES ALL
EXISTING RESTRICTIONS ON
ABORTIONS BY GRANTING TOTAL
CIVIL AND CRIMINAL IMMUNITY TO
MOTHERS NO MATTER HOW THEY
CHOOSE TO OBTAIN THEIR
ABORTIONS. SEVEN B WILL GIVE
TOTAL CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
IMMUNITY TO ALL COOPERATORS FOR
ANY ACTIONS THEY DO LEGAL OR
ILLEGAL UP TO AND BEYOND BIRTH.
SO LONG AS THE MOTHER CONSENTS
COOPERATORS COULD BE LICENSED
ABORTIONISTS OR ANYONE WHO HELPS
BRING ABOUT A PREGNANCY OUTCOME
, REGARDLESS OF THEIR LACK OF
TRAINING OR LACK OF LICENSE.
SECTION SEVEN B IS BROAD GRANT
OF IMMUNITY. WILL POTENTIALLY
REMOVE STATE LICENSING AND
OVERSIGHT OF PREGNANCY OUTCOMES
, INCLUDING ABORTION, AND IT
WILL EVISCERATE EXISTING HEALTH
REGULATIONS DESIGNED TO PROTECT
PREGNANT WOMEN. SECTION NINE
WILL PROVIDE A PENALTY OF
$25,000 PLUS ATTORNEY'S FEES
AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT OR
ANYONE WHO THREATENS TO
INVESTIGATE A MOM OR A
COOPERATOR. THIS INCLUDES
MANDATED REPORTERS, PRACTICALLY
SPEAKING, THAT MEANS NO ONE WILL
DARE INVESTIGATE ANY INFANT
DEATH WHATSOEVER. WHEN COUPLED
WITH SCHNUR, THE ABORTION
AMENDMENT TO THE STATE
CONSTITUTION. A B 22 23 WILL
LEGALIZE ABORTION ON DEMAND
PERFORMED BY ANYONE, REGARDLESS
OF MEDICAL MEDICAL
QUALIFICATIONS. FROM THE MOMENT
OF CONCEPTION TO DELIVERY AND
BEYOND. TAKE A LOOK AT THE
LANGUAGE OF THE BILL. IT IS SO
POORLY WRITTEN, IT NEEDS TO BE
GUTTED, OR IT WILL PUT WOMEN AT
RISK IF THE TRUE PURPOSE OF THE
BILL IS TO PROTECT MOTHERS FROM
PROSECUTION FOR PREGNANCY
OUTCOMES. THE BILL HAS FAILED
MISERABLY. 22 23 WILL ABSOLUTELY
NOT PROTECT WOMEN. IT WILL
ENDANGER THEM. PLEASE VOTE. NO,
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR
MCREYNOLDS IS HERE. MR CHAIRMAN
. ACTUALLY MY NAME IS MILTON
MATCH CHECK AND THE STAFF
ATTORNEY WITH PACIFIC JUSTICE
INSTITUTE. MR MCDONALD'S HAS THE
YEAR LATEST TIME TO ME. THERE
WAS WE TRIED TO COMMUNICATE THAT
WITH THE COMMITTEE, BUT THIS
DIDN'T HAPPEN. GO AHEAD, SIR.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING,
SENATORS. THANK YOU FOR HEARING
ME ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE
BEFORE YOU TODAY AS I SAID, MY
NAME IS MILTON DATUK I'M
CURRENTLY A STAFF ATTORNEY WAS
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE. I'M A
RETIRED PROSECUTOR OF 18.5 YEARS
EXPERIENCE AS A DEPUTY, D A FOR
A SMALL CALIFORNIA COUNTY D A S
OFFICE. PROSECUTORS AND LAW
ENFORCEMENT IN GENERAL ARE
TASKED WITH THE DUTY TO
INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE CRIMES
AGAINST THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. WITHIN THAT DUTY
THERE TO PROTECT THE MOST
VULNERABLE. AMONG THOSE
VULNERABLE ARE PREGNANT WOMEN
AND THE UNBORN CHILD WITHIN THE
WOMB. THIS BILL UNDER THE GUISE
OF REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, WHICH
THEREFORE DEALS WITH HUMAN
BEINGS IN THE WOMB LIMITS CHILLS
AND EVEN TRIES TO PERSUADE
AGAINST THE PROSECUTION OF
POTENTIAL CRIMES. AGAINST WOMEN
AND THEIR UNBORN CHILD.
ESPECIALLY WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF
D A S. THERE ARE ALREADY ETHICAL
STANDARDS IN PLACE TO GUARD
AGAINST PROSECUTORIAL
MISCONDUCT. AND THE BRINGING OF
CHARGES AGAINST THE BLATANTLY
INNOCENT. WHY GIVE SOMEONE TO
WRITE TO SUE A PROSECUTOR FOR
SIMPLY DOING THEIR JOB? A B 22
TO 3 SEEMS TO DO MORE TO PROTECT
THE SPECIAL INTERESTS AND THE
CRIMINAL OFFENDERS RATHER THAN
THE VULNERABLE WOMEN AND THE
UNBORN CHILD. PLEASE DO DO YOUR
DUTY TO PROTECT THE MOST
VULNERABLE OF HUMAN BEINGS. AND
DO NOT LET A BE 2 TO 3 OUT OF
COMMITTEE. THIS BILL. A B 2223
IS A SWORD AND A SHIELD. BUT
THIS IT SHIELDS THE CRIMINAL
OFFENDER. NOT THE INNOCENT AND
IS A SWORD AGAINST THOSE WHO ARE
ENTRUSTED WITH PROTECTING THE
INNOCENT AND PROSECUTING THE
CRIMINALLY GUILTY. IT DOES THE
EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT IT IS
PROPOSED TO BE DOING. PENAL CODE
. 1 87, FOR EXAMPLE, DEFINES
MURDER IS THE UNLAWFUL KILLING
OF A HUMAN BEING OR A FETUS WITH
MALICE AFORETHOUGHT. SO WHAT IF
LAW ENFORCEMENT SUSPECTS THAT
THERE MAY BE THE POSSIBILITY OF
A MURDER OF AN UNBORN CHILD AS A
RESULT OF, SAY, AND UNLAWFUL,
AIDING AND ABETTING OF ABORTION?
WILL THEY BE CHILLED? MAYBE EVEN
FRIGHTENED EVEN FROM
INVESTIGATING OR PROSECUTING
BECAUSE OF FEAR OF RETALIATORY
LAWSUITS AGAINST HIM, WHICH ARE
ENCOURAGED BY A B 2223. IF THERE
IS A POSSIBILITY OF, SAY,
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE OR MEDICAL
MALPRACTICE, CRIMINAL
NEGLIGENCE. INVOLVED IN THE
DEATH OF AN UNBORN CHILD. WILL
ANY INVESTIGATION OR PROSECUTION
BE DENIED? AND THAT CRIMINAL
NEGLIGENCE BE PROTECTED BECAUSE
OF THE PROTECTIONS AFFORDED THE
OFFENDER OUTLINED WITHIN THIS
BILL. A B 22 TO 3 CHILLS,
PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION, CHILLS
VALID LEGAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
INVESTIGATIONS OF DEATHS OF THE
UNBORN. AND LIMITS THEIR ABILITY
TO USE CERTAIN EVIDENCE, SUCH AS
CORONER'S REPORT TO DECDE
WHETHER A CRIME IF YOU COULD
WRAP IT UP. YES THANK YOU AGAIN.
I STRONGLY URGE FROM
PROSECUTORIAL. I AM A RETIRED
PROSECUTOR. BUT AFTER SPENDING
18.5 YEARS IN THERE, I STRONGLY
URGE YOU TO VOTE. NO AGAINST
THIS, BILL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ALL RIGHT. UM OTHERS IN
ROOM 2100 WHO WISH TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 22 TO 3,
PLEASE APPROACH MICROPHONE AND
STATE YOUR NAME YOUR AFFILIATION
YOUR POSITION. JAMES COOK,
PASTOR, LIGHTHOUSE BAPTIST
CHURCH AND CONQUERED. I ALSO
REPRESENT UM, PROJECT TRUTH. AND
I AM STRONG OPPOSITION OF THIS
BILL, AND YOU OUGHT TO BE
ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES. THIS IS
DIFFERENT. GABRIELLE INGRAM,
FOUNDER OF STANDARD SACRAMENTO
COUNTY. WE OPPOSE THIS BILL.
EVEN WITH THE AMENDMENT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS TERRY. HEY, COBIAN. I AM
HERE ON BEHALF OF ROCK HARBOR
CHURCH, BAKERSFIELD, AS WELL AS
CALVARY. VISALIA VISALIA. UM
CHAPTERS I AM WITH THREE
DIFFERENT COALITIONS TO LARRY
COUNTY FREEDOM. UH HUH.
BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY AS WELL AS
, UM, TO LARRY, UM, COALITION.
WE ARE STANDING ALL OF US IN
VIOLENT OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL
, REGARDLESS OF THE AMENDMENTS,
IT IS MURDER. THANK YOU FOR
LISTENING. HELLO MY NAME IS LEE
ANDREW LUCK. I WORK WITH
CALIFORNIA FAMILY COUNCIL AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE A B 22 23. THANK
YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING PASHA WILLIAMS ON BEHALF
OF JAMES P. BRADLEY AND LADIES
OF LIBERTY. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE
THIS BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GREG BURKE WITH THE CALIFORNIA
FAMILY COUNSELING OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT,
MODERATOR, LET'S TURN TO THE
PHONE. UM IF THOSE WHO ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO 22 23 COULD BE
QUEUED UP. IN STATE, THEIR NAME
THEIR AFFILIATION IN THEIR
POSITION. MODERATOR. THANK YOU
IN ORDER TO SPEAK, PLEASE PRESS
10 AT THIS TIME. AND WE WILL
START WITH BUYING 68. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. 68 IS THAT ME? THERE WAS
SOME ISSUES WITH THE PHONE. CAN
I BE HEARD IN SENATE JUDICIARY
YOU'RE ON. EXCELLENT I AM
CALLING TO REPRESENT, SUCH AS
MYSELF MILLIONS OF PRO CHOICE.
CALIFORNIANS I HAVE HAD TWO
ABORTIONS. THANK YOU. COULD YOU
AGAINST THIS BILL IN YOUR
POSITION? MY AFFILIATION IS A
CALIFORNIAN WHO HAS HAD TWO
ABORTIONS AND I AM AGAINST THIS
BILL. NEXT CALLER. NEXT WE HAVE
LINE 81, PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO
IS THIS LINE 81? YOU LOVE THE
SENSORS WORK. YOUR PHONES. DON'T
WORK WITH YOUR YOUR NAME YOUR ON
YOUR NAME YOUR AFFILIATION IN
YOUR POSITION. FACE THAT PEOPLE
WERE. ALL RIGHT. NEXT CALLER,
PLEASE SUPPORTING THEM. NEXT
CALLER. YOU HEAR ME? YES WE CAN
HEAD. MY NAME IS VERONICA. I AM
A RESIDENT OF THE COUNTY AND I
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED A V 22 TO
3. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. NEXT. WE HAVE LINE 58,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI THIS IS TONY
ROBLES WITH CAPITAL RESOURCE
INSTITUTE IN OPPOSITION FOR A V
22 23. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
NEXT MOVE LINE. 12, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. YES MY NAME IS PATRICIA
HUBERT AND CALLING FROM
PRESIDENT CALIFORNIA AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSED THIS BILL AS A
MOM WHO HAS SUFFERED A
MISCARRIAGE. THANK YOU. THIS
BILL, THANK YOU. AND NEXT WE
HAVE LINED 70 AIRLINE 85, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. BY AN 85. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. HELLO. YES. GO AHEAD. HI.
MY NAME IS ELIZABETH FUEL, AND
I'M A RESIDENT OF ELDORADO
COUNTY, AND I STRONGLY OPPOSED
THIS BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
NEXT. WE HAVE LINES. 71, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. 9 71. YOUR LINE IS
OPEN. YES. THIS IS VICKY RAIN
KEY TALAVERA COUNTY RESIDENT AND
I AM OPPOSED TO 2 TO 3. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. LINE 25, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. SHEILA GREEN WITH THE
CALIFORNIA LIFE COUNCIL AND
OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY BILL 22.
23 THANK YOU. THANK YOU AND LAST
WE HAVE LINE 47, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. CAN YOU HEAR ME? CAN.
THIS ISJENNIFER KLEPTO,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY WITH FAITH,
FAMILY AND LIFE COALITION. WE
STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. AND THAT IS ALL
I HAD IN.Q ALRIGHT, LET'S BRING
IT BACK HERE TO COMMITTEE
HEARING ROOM QUESTIONS, COMMENTS
BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS. NO
QUESTIONS, ALRIGHT. UM. THIS IS
A SUBCOMMITTEE. SO WHEN THE
QUARANTINE AQUARIUM IS
ESTABLISHED, AND FULL COMMITTEE
APPEARS, I EXPECT THERE'LL BE
EMOTION. SEVEN MEMBER WEEKS. YOU
CARE TO CLOSE AND I VOTE. THANK
YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP. YOU
HAVE A B 2777 AND JUST AS AN
ANNOUNCEMENT HOUSEKEEPING MATTER
, UM S CHN SENATE CONSTITUTIONAL
MEMBER 10 WILL BE HEARD AT 1 30
THIS AFTERNOON. BUT AFTER
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS PRESENTS
A B 2777, WE WILL THEN TURN TO
REMEMBER FOUR A B 16 66 AND ITEM
NUMBER FIVE A B 25 71.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS. GO AHEAD
. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR
AND COMMITTEE MEMBER A B 22 77 6
TO ACCOUNT FOR THE NATURAL DELAY
THAT OCCURS AFTER A TRAUMATIC
EXPERIENCE LIKE SEXUAL ASSAULT
OR HARASSMENT. BY CREATING A
PATHWAY FOR SURVIVORS TO BRING
THEIR CASE TO COURT WHEN THEIR
CLAIMS WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE BEEN
BARRED SOLELY BECAUSE THE TIME
HAS RUN OUT. THIS INCLUDES
CLAIMS AGAINST THE DEFENDANT
ENTITY WHO HAS ENGAGED IN A
COVER UP OF A PRIOR INCIDENT OF
SEXUAL ABUSE OR MISCONDUCT. THE
LANGUAGE OF THIS BILL IS NOT NEW
AND FOLLOWS THE SAME DISTINCTIVE
AND FEASIBLE FRAMEWORK SURVIVORS
ACROSS THE STATE AND IN OTHER
STATES AND IN THIS LEGISLATIVE
BODY HAS ALREADY SHOWN TO
SUPPORT AND TRUST NOTHING IN
THIS BILL CHANGES OR SHIFTS THE
BURDEN OF PROOF. SURVIVORS AND
THEIR COUNSEL STILL MUST PROVE
ALL THE ELEMENTS OF THEIR CLAIM.
WITH ME TO TESTIFY ABOUT THE
IMPORTANCE OF COURT ACCESS FOR
SURVIVORS IS SAMANTHA MALONEY,
WHO IS A SURVIVOR AND BRIAN
WILLIAMS OF LEGAL RESOURCES AND
VOLUNTEER FOR VICTIM POLICY
INSTITUTE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU
. UM MISS MALONEY, IF YOU'RE ON
THE PHONE IN ONE MOMENT. OH,
THERE WE GO. I'M SORRY. UM
ALRIGHT, SO SAME GROUND RULES
TWO MINUTES EACH FOR PRIMARY
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT TWO
MINUTES EACH FOR PRIMARY
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. THEN
WE'LL TURN TO THOSE IN THE
COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM. BOTH
STARTING WITH SUPPORT AND THEN
FOLLOWED BY OPPOSITION. ALRIGHT
MISS MALONEY, GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING CHAIR AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS SAMANTHA
MALONEY IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
I AM A CLASSICALLY TRAINED
PERCUSSIONIST WHO STUDIED MUSIC
AT NEW YORK CITY'S PREMIER MUSIC
AND ARTS HIGH SCHOOL. A SCHOOL
YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF REFERRED
TO AS FAME. I WORKED IN THE
MUSIC INDUSTRY FOR OVER 30
YEARS. I WAS A DRUMMER WITH
WHOLE MOTLEY CRUE. BILLY RAY
CYRUS AND ON HANS ZIMMER'S SCORE
OF BLACK HAWK DOWN. AFTER 20
YEARS I MOVED TO THE BUSINESS
SIDE OF THE MUSIC INDUSTRY AS
VICE PRESIDENT AT WARNER BROTHER
RECORDS. WOMAN SOON BECAME
COMING TO ME WITH THEIR STORIES
OF THE SEXUAL PREDATORS WORKING
FOR THE RECORD LABEL. ONE ARTIST
TOLD ME OF AN ATTEMPTED RAPE. I
THOUGHT THE BEST WAY FORWARD TO
PROTECT HER WAS TO REPORT IT TO
MY BOSSES. HE DID. THEY DROPPED
THE FEMALE ARTIST AND KEPT THE
MALE PREDATOR. THEN. IT WAS MY
TURN. IN 2017, A SONG I CO
PRODUCED WAS UP FOR A GRAMMY.
AND IT WAS THE HIGHEST EARNER
FOR THE LABEL. AS IT HAS BEEN
REPORTED BY NATIONAL NEWS
PUBLICATIONS. AT THE GRAMMYS
THAT YEAR. ONE OF THE TOP THREE
MOST POWERFUL CEO S IN THE
INDUSTRY. CONGRATULATED ME. BUT
AFTER SOME SMALL TALK HE'S
SEXUALLY PROPOSITIONED ME FOR
THREE WAY. WITH HIM AND HIS
ESCORT. MY STOMACH SANK. AFTER I
SHARED WHAT HAPPENED WITH MY
BOSS. I WAS LET GO. IT IS NOW
2022. AND I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE
TO FIND WORK WITH ANY RECORD
LABEL. YET. AS REPORTED EARLIER
THIS YEAR IN AN EXPOSE BY
ROLLING STONE. THE COMPANY
CONTINUES TO EMPLOY THESE MEN.
FULLY AWARE THAT THEY ARE
HABITUAL SEXUAL PREDATORS. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. UM. MR WILLIAMS AS MR
WILLIAMS PRESIDENT AND THE
COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM.
UNDERSTANDING YOU'RE ON THE
PHONE. ALL RIGHT. AND YOUR DID
YOU WISH DID YOU WISH TO
TESTIFY? GOOD MORNING, BRIAN
WILLIAMS, SERVING AS A LEGAL
RESOURCE AND VOLUNTEER FOR
VICTIM POLICY INSTITUTE. I'M
HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS,
ALL RIGHT. THAT CONCLUDES THE
PRIMARY WITNESS IN SUPPORT.
THOSE HERE IN THE HEARING ROOM
IN SUPPORT OF A B 2777 IF YOU
APPROACH THE MICROPHONE AND GIVE
US YOUR NAME, YOUR AFFILIATION
AND YOUR POSITION GOOD MORNING,
MOLLY ROBSON ON BEHALF OF
PLANNED PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA WERE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU, UH, SAYING NO ONE
ELSE IN THE COMMITTEE HEARING
ROOM, LET'S TURN TO THE PHONE
MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD QUEUE UP
THOSE AND SUPPORT OF A B 2777
THANK YOU, LEE. JOE MISS. WE
WISH TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF A B.
2777 PLEASE. PRESS STARS. SORRY
PLEASE PRESS ZERO, THEN ONE. I
SAID THAT BACKWARDS, PLEASE.
PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO. WE'LL
START WITH LINE. 49, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. MY NAME IS LEAH SANDLER
AND I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF
EQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES AND
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AND
ONCE AGAIN IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK
IN SUPPORT, PLEASE PRESS ONE
THAN ZERO. AND I HAVE NO ONE
ELSE IN QUÊ. AH THANK YOU,
MODERATOR. ALRIGHT BEFORE WE
TURN THE OPPOSITION, LET ME JUST
CLARIFY SOME ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
WICKS. DID YOU ACCEPT THE
AMENDMENTS AS PROPOSED IN THE
ANALYSIS?
WRECKED ANSWERS YET. BELIEVE
THERE WERE AMENDMENTS FROM THE
COMMITTEE. ALRIGHT WE CAN. WHY
DON'T WE DOUBLE CHECK THAT? I
WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE SO DO I.
OKAY ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT THANK YOU.
WE WILL COME BACK TO THAT IN A
MOMENT. LET'S TURN TO OPPOSITION
NOW. UM OPPOSITION WITNESSES. WE
HAVE JOY BOWMAN AND, UH, JAMIE
HUFF. YOU APPROACH THE
MICROPHONE. ALRIGHT THERE, MR
CHAIR MEMBERS. GOOD MORNING,
JAMIE. HALF ON BEHALF OF C. JACK
AND WE'RE TRYING TO LOCATE OUR
OUR OTHER WITNESS. WE ARE
ADDRESSING THE COMMITTEE TODAY
WITH CONCERNS ABOUT A B 2777. I
WANT TO START OFF BY SAYING THAT
WE HAVE NOTHING BUT THE HIGHEST
REGARD FOR SURVIVORS AND WHAT
THEY HAVE BEEN THROUGH AT THIS
CONCERN THAT WE HAVE IN TERMS OF
OUR OPPOSITION. IS REALLY
FOCUSED ON THE BROAD DRAFTING OF
THE BILL AND THE UNEVEN
APPLICATION BETWEEN PRIVATE AND
PUBLIC ENTITIES. THE BILL
REVIVES AN EXTREMELY BROAD RANGE
OF CLAIMS THAT ARE VAGUELY
DEFINED, OPENING THE DOOR TO
LAWSUITS AGAINST BUSINESSES AND
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS ALLEGING
NOT ONLY SEXUAL ASSAULT, BUT
ANYTHING THAT MIGHT BE
CONSIDERED. INAPPROPRIATE
CONDUCT COMMUNICATION OR
ACTIVITY, NO MATTER HOW LONG AGO
THE INCIDENT OCCURRED. STATUTE
OF LIMITATIONS EXIST IN OUR
CIVIL SYSTEM TO FUNCTION
PROPERLY TO ALLOW JUDGES AND
JURIES TO DECIDE LIABILITY WHEN
THE BEST EVIDENCE IS AVAILABLE.
WHEN WE ARE IN. WE HAVE
WITNESSES THAT CAN TESTIFY WHEN
RECORDS ARE STILL AVAILABLE WHEN
WE KNOW THE CONTEXT FOR WHEN
THINGS ARE HAPPENING, WE
SHOULDN'T DISREGARD A KEY
ELEMENT OF THE CIVIL JUSTICE
SYSTEM THAT PROTECTS THAT
ACCURACY AND THE RELIABILITY OF
DECISIONS. ANOTHER TROUBLING
ASPECT OF THIS BILL IS THAT IT
DOES NOT APPLY THE SAME BETWEEN
PUBLIC ENTITIES AND PRIVATE. THE
INTENT OF THE MEASURE IS TO
PROTECT SURVIVORS PROVIDE THEM
WITH RECOURSE, SO THERE'S NO
REASON TO TREAT THOSE SURVIVORS
WHO VISITED OR WORKED FOR A
PRIVATE ENTITY. DIFFERENT THAN A
PUBLIC ONE. HAVE A LONGER PERIOD
IS NEEDED FOR SURVIVORS OF
SEXUAL ABUSE TO FILE CLAIMS.
OTHER THAN THE 10 YEAR PERIOD
THAT ALREADY EXISTS UNDER
CALIFORNIA LAW, THEN WE SHOULD
CONSIDER EXTENDING THAT PERIOD
RESPECTIVELY. SEE JACK IN THE
COALITION WILL REMOVE OPPOSITION
TO THE BILL WITH THE ELIMINATION
OR NARROWING OF THAT BROAD
LANGUAGE CONTAINED AND THE FAIR
APPLICATION TO BOTH PRIVATE AND
PUBLIC ENTITIES. THESE CONCERNS
ARE ALSO IN LINE WITH COMMENTS
THAT OTHER MEMBERS OF THE
LEGISLATURE HAVE MADE TO THE
AUTHOR PREVIOUSLY. AND WITH
THOSE CHANGES, WE WOULD REMOVE
OUR OPPOSITION, BUT FOR NOW
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MS HOFF. ALRIGHT, UM. JOY BOWMAN. IF YOU'RE PRESENT
EITHER HERE OR ON THE PHONE.
APPARENTLY NOT ALL RIGHT, UM
OTHERS WHO ARE IN OPPOSITION TO
A B 27 77 WHO ARE IN THE
COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM IF YOU
WOULD APPROACH THE MICROPHONE,
SEEING NO ONE APPROACHING THE
MICROPHONE. LET'S TURN TO THE
PHONES MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD
QUEUE UP THOSE WHO ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 27 77. THANK
YOU IN ORDER TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION OF A B 27 77 PLEASE
PRESS 10 AT THIS TIME. THAT IS
ONE THAN ZERO ON YOUR PHONE. AND
I HAVE NO ONE IN. Q THANK YOU.
MODERATOR BACK TO YOU.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS ON PAGE
SEVEN OF THE ANALYSIS THERE'S
SUGGESTED AMENDMENT IS WHETHER
IT'S YOURS OR OURS OR WHOMEVER.
YOU ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT
IRRESPECTIVE OF THE SOURCE.
ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. GREAT. THANK
YOU. OKAY WE HAVE CONCLUDED
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION QUESTIONS
BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS. SEEING
NONE. UM SAME AS TRUE AS THE
PREVIOUS BILL. WHEN THERE'S A
QUORUM, I EXPECT THERE'LL BE A
MOTION, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR MY VOTE.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UM
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BAUER-KAHAN. IF
YOU ARE HERE, I DON'T SEE YOU
HERE IN THE COMMITTEE HEARING
ROOM IF YOU WOULD PRESENT
YOURSELF OR ANY OTHER AUTHOR WHO
WISHES THEIR BILL TO BE HEARD.
FIRST COME FIRST SERVE AT THIS
POINT.
ALRIGHT UH, ASSEMBLY MEMBER. AH
BRIAN ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S KOREA, UM
FRIEDMAN. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S JOAN
SAWYER.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S LEVIN
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MAN SHINE. UM.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SUHARTO. AH
SOME REMEMBER TING OR WARD. IF I
SKIP THE SIMILAR MEMBER, LEE,
THEN CALLING ON ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
EARLY AS WELL. YEAH.
ALRIGHT ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CARILLO. UM. ITEM NUMBER 10, ABC
748. I SEE YOU CAME IN BEFORE
SOMEBODY MEMBER WARD SO AH! FOR
THOSE WHO ARE FOLLOWING ON THEIR
PROGRAM. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 10
, ABC 748.
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY,
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CARILLO. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. PROUD TO PRESENT
A SEMI BILL 748. I WILL BE
ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENTS, WHICH
WOULD REQUIRE CALIFORNIA'S
MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOLS TO
DISPLAY A POSTER MAKING
INFORMTION AVAILABLE TO
STUDENTS ABOUT COMMON. ADVERSE
MENTAL HEALTH SYMPTOMS TO LOOK
OUT FOR COPING STRATEGIES AND
SCHOOL SITE MENTAL HEALTH
RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THEM.
EVEN BEFORE THE PANDEMIC, THE
BIANNUAL CALIFORNIA HEALTHY KIDS
SURVEY FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION AND DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH CARE SERVICES NOTED THAT
THERE WAS AND HAS BEEN A
INCREASE IN DEPRESSION, ANXIETY
AND OTHER ADVERSE MENTAL HEALTH
SYMPTOMS AMONGST CALIFORNIA
MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
SINCE 2015 THE SURVEY ALSO NOTES
THAT STUDENTS OF COLOR ARE MORE
LIKELY TO BE AFFECTED. THIS YEAR
, WE WILL RECEIVE THE RESULTS OF
THE FIRST CALIFORNIA HEALTH KIDS
SURVEY CONDUCTED IN 2019 SINCE
2019 AND THE RESULTS ARE SURE TO
BE TROUBLING. LAST OCTOBER, THE
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
AND SEVERAL OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
THAT REPRESENT PRACTITIONERS
DESCRIBE THE SITUATION AS A
MENTAL HEALTH STATE OF
EMERGENCY. AMONG OTHER
INDICATORS, THERE WAS MORE THAN
50% SPIKE AND VISITS FOR
SUSPECTED SUICIDE ATTEMPTS TO
EMERGENCY ROOMS AMONG TEEN GIRLS
IN EARLY 2021. COMPARED TO THE
SAME PERIOD IN 2019. AS STUDENTS
COME BACK TO CAMPUS. NOW IS THE
TIME TO OFFER MEANINGFUL
INTERVENTIONS AND HELP THOSE
THAT NEEDED TO GET BACK ON
TRACK. RESEARCH SHOWS THAT THE
AVERAGE TIME BETWEEN WHEN A
PERSON BEGINS TO EXPERIENCE
ADVERSE MENTAL HEALTH SYMPTOMS
AND WHEN THEY SEEK TREATMENT
FROM A CLINICIAN IS ABOUT A
DECADE. RESEARCH ALSO SHOWS THAT
COMMON MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES SUCH
AS DEPRESSION, ANXIETY AND
SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS
GENERALLY EMERGED DURING
ADOLESCENCE, MAKING OUR STUDENTS
AWARE OF WHAT TO LOOK OUT FOR
AND HOW TO ADVOCATE FOR
THEMSELVES. AND SEEK HELP AS KEY
AND THAT IS WHAT THIS BILL AIMS
TO DO. AVAILABLE TO TESTIFY AND
TALK MORE ON HOW THIS WOULD
HELP. CALIFORNIA'S YOUNG PEOPLE
ARE STUDENT LEADERS ESTHER KIM
AND CATHERINE SUE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF
STUDENT COUNCILS, AND BEFORE WE
GO TO THEM, I WOULD JUST SAY
THAT WE CONVENED IN EARLY 2018
WHEN I FIRST CAME TO THE
LEGISLATURE, A GROUP OF MIDDLE
SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
IN OUR DISTRICT UM, AND THEIR
NUMBER ONE CONCERN, WHICH IS
INCREDIBLY, UM, RELEVANT IN
TODAY'S CONVERSATION WHERE
SCHOOL SHOOTINGS THE ANXIETY
THAT STUDENTS HAVE FELT AND
FEELING SAFE AT SCHOOL. MENTAL
HEALTH CHALLENGES THAT AROSE
BECAUSE OF THAT, AND THE LAST
FEW YEARS THAT WE'VE BEEN
THROUGH A PANDEMIC IN WHICH MANY
YOUNG PEOPLE ACROSS THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA HAVE SEEN AND HAVE
SUFFERED FROM THE PANDEMIC AND
HAVE LOST APPARENT LOVED ONE OR
A RELATIVE RELATED TO COVID AND
HOW YOUNG PEOPLE ARE GOING TO
MANAGE AND COPE WITH MENTAL
HEALTH IS SOMETHING THAT THE
STATE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY INVEST
IN THIS MAKES IT INCREDIBLY EASY
FOR THOSE RESOURCES TO BE
AVAILABLE, AND ONE FINAL THING
THAT I WOULD ADD WHEN I WAS
GOING TO HIGH SCHOOL WHAT WE HAD
AND WHERE THIS IDEA DEVELOPED
FROM WHERE HIV AND AIDS POSTERS
AWARENESS OF WHAT THAT WAS BACK
IN THE NINETIES. NOW WE HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THE
CONVERSATION AROUND MENTAL
HEALTH. SOMETHING THAT IS AN
EVERYDAY CONVERSATION AND THE
SEEKING HELP. SHOULDN'T BE AN
EMBARRASSING THING FOR A YOUNG
PERSON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR CARILLO ARE. UM, MRS
OOH. MISS KIM, FATHER OF YOU ON
THE PHONE IF YOU WOULD IDENTIFY
YOURSELVES. GOOD MORNING. MY
NAME IS KATHERINE SHOE. AND I'M
A STUDENT AT WESTLAKE HIGH
SCHOOL. MCNALL VALUE TO FIGHT
SCHOOL DISTRICT. AS A LOT OF
MANY STUDENTS WHO STRUGGLE TO
NAVIGATE THE COVID 19 PANDEMIC
AND THE RETURN THAT IN PERSON
LEARNING, I'VE CONTINUED TO
STRUGGLE WITH MY OWN MENTAL
HEALTH. THEY'RE A BIG MOMENTS
WHEN I FELT LOST, CHALLENGED
ANXIOUS IN THE PRESS, THESE
INSTANCES OF FEELING DOWN HAD
COME WITH GREAT CONSEQUENCES,
SUCH AS THE LOSS OF IT OF
MOTIVATION AND DEPRESSIVE
EPISODES. I STRUGGLE WITH
pIT AFFECTS ME ON A CONDITIONAL
BASIS IMPACTING ME DURING THE
WINTER MONTHS. THE CIRCUMSTANCES
HAVE FROM TIME TO TIME AFFECT MY
PERFORMANCE IN SCHOOL AND MY
BEHAVIOR THROUGHOUT THOSE MONTHS
. I SPEAK NOT JUST FOR MYSELF,
BUT FOR MY SOUL STUDENTS IN
PIERCE, WHO SIMULTANEOUSLY
STRUGGLED WITH THEIR OWN MENTAL
HEALTH AT VARIOUS LEVELS. I'VE
KNOWN BRANDS WHO SUFFERED FROM
DEPRESSION AND NOT REACH OUT FOR
ANY SUPPORT AND HELP UNTIL LATER
WHEN THEIR MENTAL HEALTH KIDS TO
SEVERE LEVELS. THIS ISSUE
AFFECTS ME PERSONALLY AND IT
HITS ME. UM, REALLY CLOSE TO
HOME. WE HAD A COUPLE INFLUENCES
IN MY HOMETOWN LIKE THE
BORDERLINE TRAGEDY, THE
BORDERLINE SHOOTING THAT REALLY
AFFECTED STUDENTS MENTAL HEALTH
. UM AND I THINK A LOT OF
STUDENTS WERE SO LOST AFTER
THAT, AND DIDN'T REALLY HAVE
LIKE ANY RESOURCES OR LIKE
AWARENESS OF THE RESOURCES. THAT
WERE OFFERED TO HELP COPE WITH
THAT TRAGEDY. ACCORDING TO THE
NATIONAL LINES FROM MENTAL
ILLNESS. THE U. S. 16.5% OF AGES
BETWEEN 6 TO 17 EXPERIENCE A
MENTAL HEALTH DISORDER IN 2016
AND, ACCORDING TO THE AMERICAN
ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOLS,
PSYCHOLOGIST ANXIETY BASED SCORE
. REFUSAL AFFECTS 2 TO 5% OF
SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN. THESE DIARY
NUMBERS PICKED THE RABBIT ISSUE
OF DECLINING MENTAL HEALTH BY
IMPLEMENTING POSTERS THAT
CONTAIN RESOURCES FOR YOUTH.
THESE POSTERS WILL ENCOURAGE AND
PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
STUDENTS WHO HAVE MENTAL HEALTH
ISSUES. TO REACH OUT FOR HELP.
STUDENTS WILL HAVE THE NECESSARY
INFORMATION TO RECOGNIZE SIGNS
OF DECLINING MENTAL HEALTH IN
THEMSELVES AND IN THEIR PEERS.
THERE'S STILL WILL HELP ENSURE
THAT STUDENTS HAVE RESOURCES
THAT ARE READILY AVAILABLE.
WHILE ALSO DEMONSTRATING THEM
ALREADY. THANK YOU, MISS MISS
YOU IF YOU WOULD WRAP IT UP.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. AH, MISS
KIM, ARE YOU AVAILABLE? GOOD
MORNING. MY NAME IS TIM AND I AM
A STUDENT IN HIGH SCHOOL IN THE
VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
I'M HERE TO STAY REPRESENTING
TEACHERS COUNCILS AS THE TALKERS
POLICY DIRECTOR TO DEMONSTRATE
OR SUPPORT IN SPONSORING THIS
BILL. ASK, YOU ALL KNOW. OF THE
21ST CENTURY. AND ONE OF OUR
YOUTH MOST MEANS. TO COMBAT THE
STUDENT MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS.
EDUCATIONAL LEADERS AND
LEGISLATORS LIKE YOU HAVE TAKEN
INITIATIVE STUDENTS WITH MENTAL
HEALTH RESOURCES SPEND THE MOST
TIME TO SCHOOL. RECENT
LEGISLATION SUCH AS THE 14,
WHICH EXCUSES MENTAL HEALTH IS
UNDER LOCK PROVIDES STUDENTS
WITH STRUCTURAL SUPPORT TO
PROTECT THEIR WELL BEING. MY
SCHOOL HAS TAKEN EXTRAORDINARY
MEASURES TO COMBAT THE STUDENT
HEALTH CRISIS. SOME MPS
INSTITUTE INTERVENTION SYSTEMS
READILY AVAILABLE COUNSELING
SERVICES. HOWEVER I WAS
COMPLETELY UNAWARE OF ANY OF
THESE RESOURCES FOR THE FIRST
TWO YEARS OF MY HIGH SCHOOL
EXPERIENCE. ALTHOUGH IT WENT
THROUGH STRUGGLES WITH PANDEMIC
PRESSURES AND SELF IMAGE THAT
FAMILY IMPACTED MY MENTAL HEALTH
. NO ONE INFORMED ME THAT OUR
SCHOOL HAD THREE CONTRACTS AND
COUNSELING PROGRAM OR WELLNESS
CENTER. AND TOTALLY BECAME A
STATE OF BOARD MEMBER AND
STARTED REACHING OUT TO ADVOCATE
FOR RESOURCES THAT WERE ALREADY
IN PLACE. I LATER FOUND OUT THAT
TEACHERS AND COUNSELORS WOULD
RECOMMEND STRUGGLING STUDENTS TO
THESE RESOURCES, BUT BECAUSE I
WASN'T PHYSICALLY DISCUSSED. I
WASN'T DIRECTLY TO THE RESOURCES
THAT I DESPERATELY NEEDED. I AM
NOT ALONE EXPERIENCE. MY SPORT
IS ONE OF OVER THOUSANDS IN THE
STATES THAT STUDENTS GRADES 6 TO
12. STUDENTS ARE UNABLE TO
UTILIZE MENTAL HEALTH MEETING
WITH AT SCHOOL BECAUSE OF A LACK
OF PUBLICLY AVAILABLE
INFORMATION. OTHER POSTERS MAKE
SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN
EXISTING PROVERBS SUPPORT SYSTEM
. THERE ARE CRUCIAL IN ENSURING
THAT ALL STUDENTS ARE AWARE OF
THE SUPPORT. CALIFORNIA HAS
TAKEN LEAPS AND BOUNDS TO
PROVIDE STUDENTS WITH MENTAL
HEALTH RESOURCES, BUT OFTENTIMES
SIMPLY DON'T KNOW WHERE TO FIND
THEM, AND IT IS OUR GOVERNMENT'S
RESPONSIBILITY. TO ENSURE THAT
OUR YOUTH FEW COULD WRAP IT UP.
PLEASE HELP. FOR THOSE REASONS
TO CALIFORNIA THESIS COUNCIL
SUPPORT WRITTEN BILLS. THANK YOU
ALL FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR
CONSIDERATION. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU, MR KIM FOR YOUR TESTIMONY,
ALL RIGHT? OTHERS IN SUPPORT OF
A B 748 WHO ARE HERE IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM. GOOD MORNING,
MOLLY ROBSON WITH PLANNED
PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA WERE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING POLIO ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
ASSOCIATION OF PSYCHIATRISTS AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU OTHERS HERE IN
ROOM, 2100 SAYING NO ONE
APPROACHED THE MICROPHONE. MY
MODERATE IF YOU WOULD QUEUE UP
THOSE IN SUPPORT OF A B 748.
THANK YOU TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF
A B 748 PLEASE PRESS 10 ON YOUR
PHONE. IN WE'LL START WITH LINE
67, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THE MORNING
. SIMON BUMI HAS THE CALIFORNIA
COUNCIL OF COMMUNITY BEHAVIOR,
HEALTH AGENCIES AND SUPPORT
THANK YOU. THANK YOU IN ONE
MOMENT WHILE WE GET MY NUMBERS.
NEXT WE HAVE LINE 102. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. NAME OF WORK K BHD A
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE IN
QUÊ. ALL RIGHT, LET'S TURN THE
OPPOSITION. UM I SEE THAT THERE
ARE NO IDENTIFIED PRIMARY
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION IF YOU
ARE IN OPPOSITION TO A B 748
PLEASE APPROACH MICROPHONE,
SAYING NO ONE APPROACHED THE
MICROPHONE MODERATE IF YOU WOULD
QUEUE UP THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO
SEVEN A B 748. THANK YOU TO
SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF A B 748.
PLEASE PRESS ONE DÂN ZERO ON
YOUR PHONE. THAT'S ONE, THEN
ZERO ON YOUR TELEPHONE KEYPAD.
AND I HAVE NO ONE IN Q. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE QUESTIONS BY COMMITTEE
MEMBERS SEEING. MM YES, SENATOR.
THE RUSSELL. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. I JUST WANNA THANK THE
AUTHOR THINK THIS IS A
EXTRAORDINARILY. IT'S I'M
LEARNING MORE AND MORE, UM
IMPORTANT, UM ISSUE FOR
ESPECIALLY OUR YOUNGER AND
YOUNGER AND YOUNGER PEOPLE, AND
IT'S SAD. BUT I'M GLAD YOU'RE
TAKING IT TO WHERE THEY'RE AT
THEIR LEVEL. AND I HOPE THEIR
CREATIVITY COMES SHOWS THROUGH
WITH THESE MATERIALS AND
POSTERS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
OTHER QUESTIONS. COMMENTS. UH.
WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM. SO AS
SOON AS WE DO, I EXPECT THERE'LL
BE A MOTION. WOULD YOU CARE
CLOSE? THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. THE
BILL HAS NO OPPOSITION HAS
RECEIVED BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, AND
I JUST I'M SO GRATEFUL FOR OUR
WITNESS TESTIMONY OVER THE PHONE
. THEY'RE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
WHO HAD BEEN ADVOCATING FOR WHAT
THEY NEED RIGHT AT THE LOCATIONS
WHERE THEY'RE AT, AND I'M
THANKFUL. TO THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF STUDENT COUNCILS
FOR THEIR WORK AND ADVOCACY ON
THIS ISSUE, AND WE DO HAVE
QUORUM. RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND
I VOTE. THANK YOU. UM I ECHO
YOUR ACCOLADES TO MISS YOU AND
MISS KIM. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
UM MR WARD WAS HERE. SOME
REMEMBER WARD WAS HERE, BUT HE
SEEMED TO HAVE LEFT, BUT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FRIEDMAN IS
HERE. SO ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
FRIEDMAN THIS WOULD BE ITEM
NUMBER 14 A B 23 09. YES, GO
AHEAD, MR FRIEDMAN. YOU AND YOUR
STAFF FOR WORKING WITH US ON THE
BILL, AND I'M HAPPY TO ACCEPT
THE AMENDMENTS OUTLINED ON PAGES
SIX AND SEVEN OF THE ANALYSIS A
B 23 09 STRENGTHENS EXISTING
JUVENILE COURT PROCEDURES AND TO
ORDER GUARDIANSHIP. INSTEAD OF
FOSTER CARE PLACEMENT IN THE
EARLY STAGES OF A DEPENDENCY
COURT CASE IN THE DAYS AND WEEKS
AFTER A CHILD IS REMOVED FROM
THEIR PARENTS CARE ARE CRITICAL.
THESE EARLY COURT HEARINGS
DETERMINE WHERE A CHILD WILL
LIVE AND WHAT SERVICES THE
FAMILY WILL RECEIVE FOR THE
MONTHS AND SOMETIMES FOR THE
YEARS AHEAD. IT'S ALSO AT THE
THIS EARLY STAGE THAT A
DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF
FAMILIES, UH UM WELL, A
DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF
REPRESENTATION STARTS TO APPEAR
SOMETIMES FOR THESE IMPACTED
FAMILIES. COURTS ALREADY HAVE
DISCRETION UNDER THE WELFARE
INSTITUTIONS CODE TO ORDER A
SAFE AND PERMANENT PLAN OF
GUARDIANSHIP AS AN ALTERNATIVE
TO FOSTER CARE PLACEMENT. IN
OTHER WORDS, GUARDIANSHIP WITH
DISTANT FAMILY MEMBER WITH A
GRANDPARENT WITH A FAMILY FRIEND
INSTEAD OF GOING INTO THE FOSTER
CARE SYSTEM. HOWEVER
STAKEHOLDERS REPORT THAT
GUARDIANSHIPS IN LIEU OF FOSTER
CARE ARE OFTEN NOT EVEN
CONSIDERED, EVEN WHEN THAT
OPTION WOULD BE IN THE BEST
INTERESTS OF THE CHILD AND THE
FAMILY. COURTS ARE NOT REQUIRED
TO CONSIDER THE PARENT'S CHOICE
OF GUARDIAN AND TYPICALLY DO NOT
CONSIDER GUARDIANSHIP UNTIL THE
DISPOSAL HEARING JUST POSITIONAL
HEARING AFTER THE CHILD HAS BEEN
DETAINED, SOMETIMES IN FOSTER
CARE SETTINGS, SOMETIMES FOR
MONTHS OR LONGER. 23 09 WOULD
PROMOTE FAMILY DECISION MAKING
AND MINIMIZE THE CHILD'S
EXPOSURE TO THE FOSTER CARE
SYSTEM, WHICH CAN BE VERY
DISRUPTIVE. VERY TRAUMATIC. ONLY
IN CASES, HOWEVER, WHERE THERE
IS A SAFE AND A PERMANENT
GUARDIAN AVAILABLE. SO, OF
COURSE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT
CHILDREN INTO UNSAFE CONDITIONS
. BUT IF A PARENT SAYS I CAN'T
PARENT FOR WHATEVER REASON, BUT
THERE'S SOMEONE IN MY FAMILY WHO
IS WILLING TO AND THAT CHILD CAN
THEN STAY WITH THEIR SUPPORT
SYSTEM WITH THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS
WITHIN WHAT THEY KNOW THE COURT
. THE COURT SHOULD AT LEAST
CONSIDER THAT, AND THAT'S WHAT
THIS BILL WOULD REQUIRE. THE
BILL ALSO REQUIRES THE
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES TO
COLLECT DATA ON CHILDREN LIVING
WITH RELATIVE CAREGIVERS WHO ARE
THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE MOST
LIKELY TO BECOME THE CARETAKERS
UNDER THIS BILL? WITH THAT I
WOULD URGE AND I VOTE TESTIFYING
IN SUPPORT BY PHONE. WE HAVE
SABRINA FORT FROM THE ALLIANCE
OF CHILDREN'S RIGHTS AND JACKIE
RUFFIER FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ALLIANCE OF CAREGIVERS. ALRIGHT.
AH, THIS IS IT, FORTE. OR MR
HAUSER. EITHER OF YOU AVAILABLE
ON THE PHONE IF YOU IDENTIFY
YOURSELF. ALL RIGHT. UM I
REALIZED THAT WE'RE GOING A BIT
OUT OF ORDER SO WE WILL COME
BACK TO THEM IF THEY IDENTIFY
THEMSELVES, BUT IN THE MEANTIME,
WHY DON'T WE TAKE ANY SUPPORT
HERE IN ROOM 2100? IF YOU
APPROACH THE MICROPHONE. AH
SEEING NO ONE APPROACHING MY
PHONE SUPPORT ON THE PHONE
LINES. MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD
QUEUE UP THOSE AND SUPPORT OF A
B 23 09 YES. THANK YOU AND
SUPPORTIVE AB 23 09. PLEASE
PRESS ONE AND ZERO. AND FIRST WE
HAVE LINE 31, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD MORNING. CALIFORNIA ACTION
CALLING SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU AND ONE
MOMENT WHILE WE GET ADDITIONAL
LINE NUMBERS.
AND NEXT WE HAVE LINE 30, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. OKAY FROM PASADENA,
CALIFORNIA SUPPORTERS 23 09.
THANK YOU. AND NEXT. WE HAVE
LINE 1 16, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
HELLO MY NAME IS BRIAN 10. I'M
AN ATTORNEY WITH A NON PROFIT
ORGANIZATION AND THEIR WAY OF
LIFE FOR ENTRY PROJECTS IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THE BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
AND THAT IS ALL I HAD IN QUÊ.
ALRIGHT UM AND ONCE AGAIN IF
MISS FORTE RODENHAUSER, THEY
APPEAR ON THE PHONE LINE WILL
COME BACK TO THEM. BUT LET'S
TURN TO THE OPPOSITION. I SEE
THAT THERE ARE NO PRIMARY
WITNESSES LISTED IN OPPOSITION.
ARE THERE ANY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION HERE IN THE HEARING
OF APPROACHED THE MICROPHONE.
SEEING NO ONE APPROACHING THE
MICROPHONE. LET'S CUE UP THOSE
IN OPPOSITION MODERATOR. ON THE
PHONE LINE. THANK YOU. YOU WISH
TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION, PLEASE
PRESS 10. THAT IS ONE THAN ZERO
ON YOUR TELEPHONE. I HAVE NO ONE
IN QUÊ. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UM
LET'S BRING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
SAYING YES, SENATOR CABALLERO.
HMM I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT
I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT, UM THAT
I REALLY LIKE THIS BILL. UM IT
IS UNBELIEVABLE. I DID A LOT OF
WORK IN THE 300. UM UM. WELFARE
AND INSTITUTIONS CALLED BOTH IN
TERMS OF BEING APPOINTED AS A
AND ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT
PARENTS AND THE KIDS. UM, AND
IT'S UNBELIEVABLE TO ME THAT
GUARDIANSHIPS MAY NOT HAVE BEEN
A PRIORITY AND IN SOME AREAS AND
THE LEAST DISRUPTIVE. ACTION
THAT WE CAN TAKE IS TO REMOVE A
CHILD AND ARE A TEEN AND PLACE
THEM WITH SOMEONE THAT THEY KNOW
YOU KNOW, DURING A REALLY,
REALLY TRAUMATIC TIME IN THEIR
LIVES, AND SO I'M GOING TO
SUPPORT THE BILL. I'LL MOVE THE
BILL WHEN IT'S APPROPRIATE, AND
I'D LIKE TO BE ADDED AS A CO
AUTHOR, IF YOU'D BE SO INCLINED.
WILL BE OUR HONOR. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, UM OTHER
QUESTIONS. COMMENTS WE ARE
SUBCOMMITTEE POINT IN TIME. WHEN
WE HAVE A QUORUM, I EXPECT
THERE'LL BE A MOTION. SOME OF
THE MEMBER FRIEDMAN. WOULD YOU
CARE CLOSE? JUST I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE COOPERATION
AUTHORSHIP OFFERS. WE'RE VERY
PROUD TO HAVE YOU BOTH. AND THE
BILL I BELIEVE HAS WELL, THERE'S
NO KNOWN OPPOSITION. IT'S GOTTEN
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. SO THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. ALL OF YOU APOLOGIZE
TO APOLOGIES TO MISS FORTE AND
RUTH HOUSE OR NO DOUBT THEY'RE
TRYING TO FIND US AT THIS POINT.
SO ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. UM
OTHER ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WHO ARE
PRESENT SEEING NONE. SOMEBODY IS
WALKING OVER HERE, OKAY? SO THIS
IS A RARE OPPORTUNITY. UM. FOR
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S TO HAVE THEIR
BUILDS. HEARD FIRST COME FIRST
SERVE AS I MENTIONED A WHILE
AGO. NOT A RARE OPPORTUNITY OF
THEIR BILLS HER BUT JUST THE
RARE OPPORTUNITY OF THEIR BILLS
HEARD EARLY. RIGHT? HE'S GOING
TO GAVEL DOWN.
AND I SAW ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WARD
HERE POKED HIS HEAD IN. THAT'D
BE REAL COOL FOR HIM BECAUSE
HE'S ITEM NUMBER 29. TRUE.
YES, UM. WE'RE GOING TO RECESS
AT NOON FOR 90 MINUTES AND THEN
COME BACK, AND THERE'LL BE A
SPECIAL ORDER AT 1 30 SCHNUR.
YEAH.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SARTO. LET'S
SEE. YOU ARE ITEM NUMBER 27. SO. WELCOME WELCOME TO SENATE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ITEM NUMBER
27 A B 17 11. UM SOME OF THEM
OVER CR CR TOE. THE FLOOR IS
YOURS. WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR HEARING THIS THIS MORNING.
I'M HERE TO PRESENT 17 11. FIRST
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE
COMMITTEE FOR THEIR ROBUST
DISCUSSION. I'M WITH MY STAFF ON
THIS BILL. UNDER CURRENT LAW IF
A PERSON OR BUSINESS SUFFERS A
DATA BREACH THE REPORT IS
SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE AND THE BUSINESS POSTS A
REPORT OF THE BREACH ON THEIR
WEBSITE. PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE HAD
THEIR DATA EXPOSED AND THEN
NOTIFIED BY PHONE, MAIL OR OTHER
ELECTRONIC MEANS, LIKE EMAIL.
THE SAME PROCESS IS USED WHEN A
STATE AGENCY SUFFERS A DATA
BREACH. HOWEVER CURRENT LAW IS
VAGUE WHEN COMPANIES THAT ARE
ACTUALLY WORKING WITH THE
GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS SUFFER THAT
SAME DATA BREACH. IN THESE
INSTANCES, THE COMPANIES
GENERALLY POST THE REPORT OF THE
DATA BREACH RATHER THAN THE
STATE AGENCY. THIS METHOD OF
REPORTING DOES NOT INFORM THE
PUBLIC THAT THEIR INFORMATION
WAS BEING HANDLED BY THIRD
PARTY. THE PURPOSE OF THESE
REPORTING MECHANISMS IS TO
PROVIDE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
WOULD TRANSPARENCY OF HOW THEIR
PRIVATE INFORMATION IS HANDLED
BY THE GOVERNMENT. THIS IS
ESSENTIAL IN TODAY'S DIGITAL AGE
, AS THIS INFORMATION QUITE
LITERALLY PRESENTS THE KEYS TO
PEOPLE'S LIVES AND LIVELIHOOD IF
IT FALLS INTO THE WRONG HANDS.
IDENTITY THEFT IS BECOMING MORE
AND MORE COMMON SO MUCH MORE
THAT IN IT IS NOW THE MOST
COMMON REASON FOR DATA BREACHES
SINCE 2016 AND ACCOUNTS FOR 59%
OF ALL DATA BREACHES GLOBALLY.
FURTHERMORE BECAUSE OF THE
WIDESPREAD USE OF PHISHING
SCHEMES, MANY PEOPLE OFTEN
ASSUME THAT THESE REAL
NOTIFICATIONS ARE FRAUD BECAUSE
THEY'RE NOT COMING FROM THE
GOVERNMENT, AND THEY ARE NOT
FAMILIAR WITH THE AGENTS ARE THE
BUSINESS THAT IS SENDING THEM
THAT THAT LETTER OR THAT EMAIL.
IT'S UNDERSTANDABLE, CONSIDERING
THAT ALL THESE NOTIFICATIONS MAY
COME FROM A COMPANY AS A THIRD
PARTY CONTROL CONTRACTOR, AND
THE INDIVIDUAL HAS NEVER HAD ANY
INTERACTIONS WITH THEM BEFORE.
CALIFORNIANS SHOULD BE FULLY
INFORMED ABOUT WHO WAS
RESPONSIBLE FOR HANDLING THEIR
PRIVATE INFORMATION. THIS IS
ESSENTIAL TO MAINTAIN
ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY AND
CONFIDENCE THAT SENSITIVE
INFORMATION IS HANDLED
RESPONSIBLY. A B 17 11 WOULD
REQUIRE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO
REPORT DATA BREACHES OF ENTITIES
WHO ARE WORKING ON OR WITH
GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS. IN ADDITION
TO THE REPORTS POSTED BY THOSE
ENTITIES, THIS WILL PROVIDE THE
PUBLIC WITH A MORE INFORMED
UNDERSTANDING AND CLARITY OF HOW
THEIR INFORMATION IS HANDLED AND
ALLOW THEM TO RESPOND.
ACCORDINGLY. THANK YOU. UM I
SEE. NO NO WITNESSES LISTED IN
SUPPORT. NÓI ALRIGHT. BRING
WITNESSES TODAY. ALRIGHT WELL,
LET'S TAKE WITNESSES AND SUPPORT
HERE IN ROOM 2100. IF YOU'RE IN
SUPPORT, PLEASE APPROACH THE
MICROPHONE. SAYING NO ONE
APPROACHES MY PHONE QUEUE UP
THOSE IN SUPPORT OF A B 17 11.
TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF A B 17 11
, PLEASE PRESS ONE AND ZERO ON
YOUR PHONE. AND FIRST WE HAVE
LINE 30. PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI
GARY WITH THE OPEN PRIVACY AND
SUPPORTED A B 17 11. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. AND THAT IS ALL I
HAVE IN QUÊ. ALRIGHT LET'S GO TO
OPPOSITION. UM I HAVE ERIN AVERY
AND DOROTHY JOHNSON AND
OPPOSITION TO A B 17 11. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS ERIN
AVERY WITH THE CALIFORNIA
SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED UNLESS THE
BILL IS AMENDED TO ADDRESS THE
CONCERNS SET FORTH IN THE LETTER
THAT WE SUBMITTED TO COMMITTEE I
FIRST WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR
AND HIS STAFF FOR THEIR
WILLINGNESS TO DISCUSS THIS
ABILITY. HERE ARE CONCERNS.
HOWEVER WE UNFORTUNATELY HAVE
NOT BEEN ABLE TO MAKE PROGRESS
ON KEY ASPECTS OF THE BILL. WELL
THE AUTHORS GOAL OF CREATING A
CONNECTION IN THE MIND OF
RECIPIENT OF A THIRD PARTIES. I
E VENDORS NOTICE OF A DATA
BREACH IN THE AGENCY THEY WERE
WORKING WITH IS A LAUDABLE THIS
BILL SEEKS TO ACHIEVE IT THROUGH
AN INEFFICIENT AND BURDENSOME
MECHANISM. THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS
BILL CAN CAN INSTEAD BE ACHIEVED
BY SIMPLY REQUIRING THAT WHEN A
VENDOR DISCLOSES A DATA BREACH
THAT NOTICE ALSO STATE, THE NAME
OF THE PUBLIC AGENCY, THE VENDOR
WAS CONTRACTING WITH THAT IS THE
PRIMARY AMENDMENT THAT WE ARE
SEEKING. IN ADDITION TO
ELIMINATING THE TAXPAYER COSTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS BILL, ARE
PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD AVOID
OTHER SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS WITH
THE BILL. FOR EXAMPLE, CSD AS
MEMBERS PROVIDE A WIDE RANGE OF
CRITICAL SERVICES RANGING FROM
FIRE PROTECTION TO WATER AND
OTHER PUBLIC UTILITIES. THIS
OFTEN NECESSITATES A LARGE
AMOUNT OF SERVICE CRITICAL DATA.
TO BE LISTED ON HOMEPAGES,
ADDING ADDITIONAL MANDATED
HOMEPAGE DATA CLUTTERS THESE
HOMEPAGES AND DETRACTS FROM THIS
SERVICE CRITICAL DATA THAT
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC EXPECT.
WHEN THEY WALK IN. WE'RE ALSO
CONCERNED THAT WE'RE ABOUT BY
REQUIRING THIS PUBLICLY
AVAILABLE WEBSITE LINK AND MAYBE
CREATING OPPORTUNITIES FOR BAD
ACTORS TO BECOME AWARE OF
VULNERABILITIES AND TO EXPLOIT
THEM. AS NOTED IN THE ASSEMBLY
PRIVACY COMMITTEE ANALYSIS OF
THIS BILL, IT'S NOT EVEN CLEAR
HOW MUCH EXPOSURE THESE NOTICES
ON THESE PUBLIC AGENCY WEBSITES
WILL RECEIVE. WITH A SIMPLE
CHANGE TO CURRENT LAW THROUGH
THE AMENDMENT. WE SEEK WE CAN
ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC GETS THE
NOTICE THAT THEY DESERVE MORE
DIRECTLY AND AT FAR LESS COST
AND RISK TO THE PUBLIC. FOR
THESE REASONS, WE RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR A NO VOTE UNLESS THE
BILL IS AMENDED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. MISS JOHNSON. GOOD
MORNING, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
DOROTHY JOHNSON WITH THE
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS REPRESENTING
PRINCIPALS AND SUPERINTENDENTS
AND LINING THE MAJORITY OF MY
COMMENTS WITH MY COLLEAGUE BUT
WNTEDTO EMPHASIZE THAT THIS
BILL IS SEEKING TO USE LOCAL
PUBLIC RESOURCES FOR AN UNPROVEN
METHOD OF NOTIFICATION, SORT OF
THE PANACEA OF PUT IT ON THE
WEBSITE AND THAT WILL SOLVE ALL
THE PROBLEMS. BUT FOR OUR
SCHOOLS, THESE ARE OPERATIONAL
DOLLARS THAT ARE BEING TAKEN
AWAY FROM THE CLASSROOM.
FURTHERMORE AND ONLINE POSTING
OF THIS NATURE COULD SET OFF AN
ALARM FOR STUDENTS, PARENTS,
TEACHERS, OTHER COMMUNITY
MEMBERS. THOSE THAT AREN'T EVEN
IMPACTED BY THE BREACH. AND THIS
IS IN LARGE FONT AND CONTRAST
AND COLORS. THE FIRST THING
THEY'RE GOING TO SEE WHEN THEY
GET TO THEIR HOMEPAGE. OUR
SCHOOLS HAVE BEEN THE FRONT LINE
FOR THE PANDEMIC AND REGRETTABLY
TRAGIC RECENT EVENTS. WE BELIEVE
THAT THIS TYPE OF BOLD
NOTIFICATION ON THE HOMEPAGE
RESERVED FOR OTHER RESOURCES, UM
, THAT WOULD IMPACT ALL OF THE
COMMUNITY MEMBERS ACCESSING IT.
AND THEN, FINALLY, MANY OF THE
STATEMENTS SHARED THROUGHOUT
THIS BILL'S REVIEW HAS BEEN
ABOUT STATE AGENCIES AND THE
APPLICATION OF THE STATE
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT MANUAL
FOR STATE DOCUMENTS. WE BELIEVE
THIS IS AN INAPPROPRIATE
APPLICATION TO SCHOOLS AND OTHER
LOCAL AGENCIES AND FOR THOSE
REASONS REMAIN OPPOSED UNLESS
AMENDED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MISS JOHNSON. OTHERS IN
OPPOSITION HERE IN ROOM 2100 IF
YOU APPROACH THE MICROPHONE,
SEEING NO ONE APPROACHING THE
MICROPHONE. LET'S TURN TO THE
PHONE LINES. UM MODERN IF YOU
WOULD QUEUE UP THOSE IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 17 11. THANK
YOU AND OPPOSITION OF A B 17 11.
PLEASE PRESS 10. AND FIRST WE
HAVE LINE 1 25, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
I BELIEVE THEY HIT ONE AND ZERO
AND THEY REMOVE THEMSELVES. IF
YOU STILL WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE
PRESS 101. AND I OKAY LINE 11
25, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THAT MEANS
YES. YES, I'M I'M. I WOULD HOPE
THEY WOULD VOTE NO ON THIS.
CALLING INTO ABOUT KNOWING. ALL
RIGHT, THANK YOU THEM TO VOTE
NOW. ON S BI. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. AND THAT IS ALL. I HAVEN'T
YOU, OKAY? AH! LET'S RETURN HERE
TO THE COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM
QUESTIONS. SENATOR ROSCOE
QUESTION. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
IF THE AUTHOR UM COULD. I'M
SORRY, NOT THE AUTHOR. IS IT
POSSIBLE TO HAVE MISS JOHNSON OR
THE AUTHOR RESPOND TO MISS
JOHNSON'S ISSUES AND UM, YEAH.
YES, I'D BE GLAD TO AND OTHER
ISSUES CURRENTLY, THERE ARE
ALREADY REQUIRED TO DO THIS WHEN
THEY'RE THE ONES WHO DO THE DATA
BREACH. THIS JUST REQUIRES THEM
TO BE ABLE TO DO THE SAME THING
WHEN THEY'RE DEALING WITH THE
THIRD PARTY, EVEN THOUGH THE
THIRD PARTY IS REQUIRED TO DO
THAT, AND I CAN KIND OF PUT THIS
INTO REAL LIFE. UM AS IS IN THIS
AFFECTS A LOT OF SENIOR CITIZENS
BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING THROUGH
THEIR TON OF EMAILS THAT THEY
GET IN. A LOT OF THEM ARE
PHISHING SCAMS AND WHEN THEY
WHEN THEY'RE TRYING TO FIGURE
OUT WHICH ONES ARE LEGITIMATE
AND WHICH ONES AREN'T UM, WHEN
THEY SEE A NOTIFICATION FROM A
COMPANY THAT THEY HAVE NEVER,
EVER DEALT WITH. AS OPPOSED TO A
NOTIFICATION FROM A GOVERNMENT
AGENCY THAT THEY KNOW THEY HAVE
DEALT WITH THEIR. THEY'RE MORE
APT TO YOU TO OPEN THAT. UM AND
CHECK IT OUT. UM THE PHISHING
SCHEMES THEMSELVES. ONCE YOU'VE
OPENED UP AN EMAIL, YOU HAVE
OPENED UP YOUR COMPUTER TO FRAUD
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
BATTLE AGAINST IS TRYING TO GIVE
PEOPLE WHO ARE AH, BEING
SUBJECTED TO DATA BREACHES. UH
WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GET,
WHICH IS NOTIFICATION FROM THE
GOVERNMENT AGENCY, WHETHER IT'S
OUT SPECIAL DISTRICT OF SCHOOL,
YOU KNOW SCHOOL DISTRICTS OR
YOUR STATE AGENCIES OR LOCAL
AGENCIES. AH THE NOTIFICATIONS
THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO GET
FROM THEM. AND SO, UH, AS I'VE
SAID, THEY'VE ALREADY THEY'RE
ALREADY REQUIRED TO DO THAT ON
ONES THAT THEY'RE NOT USING
THIRD PARTY. THIS JUST REQUIRES
THEM TO DO THAT. WITH THE THIRD
PARTY. IT DOES NOT AS
PREVAILING. AS TO CREATE THIS,
UH, THIS FIRESTORM OF ACTIVITY.
BUT IT JUST HELPS PROTECT THE
CONSUMER TO IDENTIFY WHEN THEIR
DATA HAS BEEN BREACHED AND GIVE
THEM OTHER MEANS TO IDENTIFY
THAT. ALREADY. THANK YOU. YES,
SENATOR BARREIRO. THANK YOU SO
MUCH, UM, FOR, UM, THAT
EXPLANATION. I THINK THAT THE
CHALLENGE I HAVE IS IN YOUR
YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THERE'S
A WHOLE BUNCH OF REASONS PEOPLE
DON'T WANT TO OPEN EMAILS. I'M
JUST STRUGGLING WITH HOW THERE'S
BEEN A DATA BREACH. MY
INFORMATION HAS BEEN STOLEN. I
GET A TEXT. FROM THE THIRD PARTY
VENDOR. I'M NOT GOING TO OPEN IT
. SO HOW DO I KNOW TO GO TO THE
WEBSITE? I MEAN, AND THAT'S
THAT'S MY CHALLENGE, AND I'M
WONDERING WHY WE DON'T JUST SAY.
BECAUSE I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO DO. I JUST THINK IT'S
THE WRONG SOLUTION. BUT WHY
DON'T WE JUST SAY YOU HAVE TO
SEND IT OUT? THE THIRD PARTY
VENDOR CAN WRITE UP THE NOTICE,
BUT THEN THE PUBLIC AGENCY
SHOULD BE SENDING OUT THE
INFORMATION. BECAUSE IT'S AT
THEIR BEQUESTS THAT THE
INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED OR
COLLECTED. UH THEY'RE THE ONES
THAT HIRED THE THIRD PARTY
VENDOR. WHY NOT JUST DO IT THAT
WAY SO THAT UM, IT'S NOT
SOMETHING THAT I GOT TO GO ON A
WEB PAGE AND SEARCH FOR, UM WHEN
I DON'T KNOW, AND I HAVEN'T
OPENED AN ADVISEMENT. RIGHT I
WOULD BELIEVE THAT WOULD TAKE A
CHANGE IN THE LAW TO, UH, NOT
HAVE THAT THIRD PARTY VENDOR BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING THAT
THEY'D HAVE TO BE TAKEN OUT OF
THE LAW TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
THIS JUST TRIES TO COVER ALL THE
BASES SO THAT PEOPLE HAVE EVERY
OPPORTUNITY. THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS
GOING TO TAKE IT, BUT THEY'RE
THEY HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY. TO
GET THE INFORMATION THAT THEIR
DATA HAS BEEN BREACHED AND TO
TAKE THE NECESSARY ACTIONS THAT
THEY NEED TO PROTECT THEMSELVES
. SO I GET IT TAKES A CHANGE OF
THE LAW. BUT THIS IS TE CHANGE
OF THE LAW GOING TO CHANGE IT.
WHY? WHY DON'T WE CHANGE IT SO
THAT THEY ACTUALLY GET THE
NOTICE? I MEAN, I STILL MIGHT.
IF IT'S A PUBLIC AGENCY, I STILL
MIGHT NOT OPEN IT. THERE'S SOME
WEIRD STUFF OUT THERE. THAT
ABSOLUTELY AGREE WOULDN'T EVEN
BOTHER OPENING IT. BUT AT LEAST
THAT'S MY CHOICE, AND I DECLINED
TO OPEN IT RIGHT THAN SETTING UP
A WEBSITE THAT I THINK HAS SOME
CHALLENGES. AND SO I DO
APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO
DO. AND I JUST THINK THERE'S A
SOMETIMES THE SOLUTION IS TO IS,
UM. IS TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S
A WAY TO DO IT THAT DOESN'T SET
IT MORE LIABILITY, AND WE'VE
TRIED TO EXPLORE SOME OF THOSE.
BUT THIS SEEMED TO BE THE
EASIEST WAY TO BE ABLE TO ENACT
SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP
PROTECT CONSUMERS. AND IT'S NOT
AS ONEROUS ON GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES OR PUBLIC AGENCIES AS
PEOPLE MAKE IT SOUND. ALL IT IS
, IS JUST GIVING THAT PERSON THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SEE SOMETHING
THEY'RE FAMILIAR WITH AND SAYING
YES, I REMEMBER DEALING WITH
THESE YOU KNOW THIS, BUT THIS
ISSUE IN THE GOVERNMENT AGENCY
IS TELLING ME THERE'S AN ISSUE.
I'M GOING TO LOOK AT THAT. AND
BECAUSE I DO THIS FOR FRIENDS
AND RELATIVES OF MINE GO THROUGH
THEIR EMAILS TO MAKE SURE
THEY'RE NOT OPENING THINGS THAT
ARE GOING TO BE BAD FOR THEIR
COMPUTERS. AND YOU SEE A LOT OF
THIS. SO ALL RIGHT, UM, BUT THAT
I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR I VOTE.
OKAY WE'RE SUBCOMMITTEE WHEN WE
OKAY. REACH QUORUM WILL LIKELY
BE EMOTION. ALRIGHT. APPRECIATE
IT. THANK YOU. SO REMEMBER, ALL
RIGHT. SOME MEMBER BARAKEH ON.
GOOD ALMOST AFTERNOON. YES UM
AND YOU HAVE A B 1666 ITEM
NUMBER FOUR AND THEN ITEM NUMBER
FIVE A B 2571. ALSO PRESENTING A
B 2091 FROM PONTA. ALRIGHT ALSO
2091 FOR MISS BONTA, SO LET'S
BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
PERFECT MAYBE 16 66. THANK YOU,
MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. A B 16 66
IS THE BILL TO PROTECT ABORTION
CARE HERE IN CALIFORNIA LAWS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE MAKING
ABORTION, A CRIME OR PROVIDING A
CIVIL PENALTY OFTEN THAT COMES
WITH TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS IN PENALTIES FOR BOTH
PATIENTS AND PROVIDERS. THE
SUPREME COURT, AS WE KNOW IS
POISED TO OVERTURN ROE V. WADE
WHICH WOULD AFFECT MANY OF THESE
LAWS AND THE LIABILITY THAT
WOULD BE PUT ONTO PATIENTS
PROVIDERS THROUGHOUT THE NATION.
THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER
ABORTIONS WILL HAPPEN. WE KNOW
THEY WILL CONTINUE TO HAPPEN.
THE QUESTION IS WHETHER WE WISH
RISK AND RUIN THE LIVES OF THOSE
WHO NEED THEM, OR WE PROTECT
THOSE INDIVIDUALS. WHETHER
ABORTION WILL BE SAFE OR
DANGEROUS, WHETHER CHOICE WILL
BE LEGAL OR FINANCIALLY RUINOUS
. WITH ABORTION LEFT UP TO THE
STATES, IT IS UP TO STATES LIKE
CALIFORNIA TO STAND UP FOR THE
RIGHT TO CHOOSE TO STAND UP FOR
OUR PATIENTS AND TO STAND UP FOR
OUR PROVIDERS. A B 16 66 WILL
PROACTIVELY PROTECT CALIFORNIANS
FROM CIVIL LIABILITY FOR THEIR
ACTIONS TO RECEIVE PROVIDE AID
IN ABORTION CARE? MAYBE 16 66
SIMPLY DECLARES ANY CIVIL ACTION
FOR AIDING IN OR RECEIVING
ABORTION TO BE CONTRARY TO THE
PUBLIC POLICY OF CALIFORNIA. AND
THEREFORE UNENFORCEABLE IN OUR
COURTS. I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR
THAT WE HAVE ENSURED AND WE ARE
CONTINUING TO WORK ON LANGUAGE
THAT WILL MAKE SURE THAT
MALPRACTICE IS STILL SUBJECT TO
CIVIL LIABILITY HERE IN
CALIFORNIA ANYTHING IT IS
CURRENTLY ILLEGAL UNDER
CALIFORNIA LAW WILL REMAIN SO
UNDER THIS. LOSS. AS AN ATTORNEY
MYSELF, AND I KNOW I HAVE MANY
SITTING BEFORE ME AS WELL. WE
KNOW THE POWER OF THE FULL FAITH
AND CREDIT CLAUSE, THE PUBLIC
COLLEAGUES THE EXEMPTION OF THE
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE
STATES THAT IT DOES NOT REQUIRE
ONE STATE TO APPLY ANOTHER
STATE'S LAW THAT VIOLATES ITS
OWN LEGITIMATE PUBLIC POLICY.
CALIFORNIA HAS NO OBLIGATION TO
ENFORCE THE CIVIL PENALTIES THAT
VIOLATE ABORTION RIGHTS
PROTECTED IN OUR OWN
CONSTITUTION WHEN A PREGNANT
PERSON'S CHOICE ABOUT THEIR OWN
BODY IS QUESTIONED. THE LIVES OF
ALL PREGNANT PEOPLE ARE AT STAKE
IN CALIFORNIA HAS BEEN CLEAR ON
WHERE WE BELIEVE WE STAND ON
THAT A B 16 66 CREATES THE
PROTECTIONS TO MAKE CALIFORNIA
ILLEGAL SANCTUARY FOR
REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE WITH ME
TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL ARE
SELENA SANDOVAL, O B. G Y N AND
PROVIDER, A UC SAN DIEGO AND
LISA MATSUBARA, GENERAL COUNSEL
AND VICE PRESIDENT OF POLICY AT
PLANNED PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA. AND I BELIEVE LISA'S
HERE IN PERSON. BUT SELINA
SANDOVAL IS ON THE PHONE. ALL
RIGHT. WHY DON'T WE START WITH
MISS MATSUBARA? GOOD MORNING,
CHAIRPERSON NUMBER GANG MEMBERS
. I'M LISA MATSUBARA FROM
PLANNED PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA, REPRESENTING THE
SEVEN AFFILIATES IN THE STATE
OPERATING OVER 100 HEALTH
CENTERS. THE CONSTITUTIONAL
PROTECTIONS UNDER ROE VERSUS
WADE, OR NO LONGER ENSURING
ACCESS TO ABORTION ACROSS THE
NATION AND ARE LIKELY TO BE
RAISED IN THE COMING WEEKS. ANY
DAY. NOW THE U. S. SUPREME COURT
IS POET POISED TO RULE ON A
DIRECT CHALLENGE TO ROE. IT IS
ALREADY UPHELD. TEXAS SENATE
BILL EIGHT, AND IT'S DELIBERATE
LEGAL SCHEME TO CIRCUMVENT
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AN
UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW. THE TEXAS
ABORTION BAN HAS BEEN IN EFFECT
FOR OVER NINE MONTHS. HAS
FOLLOWED SUIT, ADOPTING THE SAME
MECHANISM TO EFFECTIVELY BAN
MOST ABORTIONS. AT THE SAME TIME
, ANTI ABORTION LAWMAKERS HAVE
INTRODUCED OVER 500 RESTRICTIONS
IN 42 STATES THIS YEAR. IN OTHER
STATES, LIKE MISSOURI, LAWMAKERS
ARE TAKING EVEN MORE EVEN MORE
AGGRESSIVE APPROACH, ATTEMPTING
TO BURN RESIDENTS FROM LEAVING
THE STATE TO ABORT. OBTAIN AN
ABORTION IS ESTIMATED THAT IN
THE NEXT FEW WEEKS OVER 36
MILLION PEOPLE FOCUS AND OVER
HALF OF THE STATES WILL LOSE
ACCESS TO ABORTION IN THEIR HOME
STATE. WE KNOW THE KINDS OF
HARMS THESE LAWS CAUSE AND ARE
PROUD OF THE WORK THAT
CALIFORNIA IS DOING TO ENSURE
ALL PEOPLE CAN ACCESS ABORTION
HERE, BUT WE MUST DO MORE AT
PLANNED PARENTHOOD AFFILIATE
HEALTH CENTERS. CLINICIANS
PROVIDE HIGH QUALITY CARE TO
EVERY PERSON WHO NEEDS IT. NO
MATTER WHAT NO ONE WHO PROVIDES
A RECEIVED ABORTION CARE IN
CALIFORNIA SHOULD BE PENALIZED
FOR DOING SO CONSISTENT WITH THE
LAWS OF THE STATE. A B 16 66
DECLARES THAT THE LAWS AND OTHER
STATES THAT PENALIZE THE
PROVISION OF ABORTION CARE ARE
CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC POLICY OF
CALIFORNIA AND PROTECTS ABORTION
PROVIDERS AND OTHERS WHO COULD
BE SUBJECT TO CIVIL SUIT. UNDER
ANOTHER STATE'S LAW PENALIZING
ABORTION BY PROHIBITING THE
SEIZURE OF THEIR FINANCIAL
ASSETS HERE IN CALIFORNIA. WE
THANK THIS COMMITTEE FOR THEIR
THOROUGH ANALYSIS AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BARRICADE HAM
FOR CARRYING THIS IMPORTANT
BILL, SO CALIFORNIA PROVIDERS
CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE HIGH
QUALITY ABORTION CARE TO THOSE
WHO SEEK IT IN OUR STATE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. UM DOCTOR
SANDOVAL. IF YOU'RE AVAILABLE BY
PHONE IF YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF
YES, THIS IS UNDERSTANDABLE.
ALREADY GO AHEAD. PERFECT. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR AND THE MEMBERS OF
THIS COMMITTEE FOR A LOT OF
ALLOWING ME TO PRESENT TESTIMONY
TODAY AGAIN. MY NAME IS DR ELENA
SANDOVAL. I'M A BOARD CERTIFIED
OB. JOANNE MY FAMILY PLANNING
SPECIALISTS AND MEMBER OF THE
CALIFORNIA FUTURE OF ABORTION
COUNCIL. I'M TESTIFYING TODAY
REPRESENTING DISTRICT NINE IN
THE AMERICAN CONGRESS THAT
SECTOR COLLEGE ISTS WHO ARE CO
SPONSORING AT SOME OF THE 16 66.
ASSEMBLY BILL 16 66 PROVIDES
PROTECTION TO ABORTION PATIENTS
AND CLINICIANS BY PROHIBITING
CIVIL ACTIONS FROM ANY OTHER
STATE LAW FROM BEING APPLIED TO
THOSE IN CALIFORNIA. AS
EFFICIENT POSITION WHO PROVIDES
FULL SPECTRUM ABORTION CARE. I
CAN SAY WITH CERTAINTY THAT
THESE PROTECTIONS ARE ABOUT MOST
IMPORTANT AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE
CURRENT POLITICAL CLIMATE IS
ALLOWING FOR UNPRECEDENTED
AMOUNTS OF LEGISLATION ATTACKING
REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS IN
CALIFORNIA. MY COLLEAGUES AND I
ARE SEEING PATIENTS TRAVELING
FROM TEXAS AND OKLAHOMA
FREQUENTLY DID TAKE CARE. IN MY
CAREER. I PROVIDED ABORTION CARE
THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES,
INCLUDING CALIFORNIA, KANSAS,
MINNESOTA AND IOWA. I'VE SEEN
FIRSTHAND THE EFFECTS OF
LIMITING ACCESS TO ABORTION
PATIENTS ARE FORCED TO DELAY
THEIR CARE TRAVEL HUNDREDS, IF
NOT THOUSANDS OF MILES AND FACE
FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES. JUST
UNDERGO A SIMPLE AND SAFE
MEDICAL PROCEDURE, AND
UNFORTUNATELY, THESE PATIENTS
ARE THE LUCKY ONES, THE ONES
WITH THE PRIVILEGE AND THE MEANS
TO TRAVEL. PERHAPS EVEN MORE
CONCERNING IS THE PREVIOUSLY
PROPOSED LEGISLATION OUT OF
MISSOURI THAT WOULD HAVE
SUPPORTED CIVIL SUITS AGAINST
ANYONE PERFORMING AN ABORTION ON
HIM IS VERY REDMAN. I TAKE MY
PATIENTS AT THESE VALUES. THEY
COME TO ME WITH THE NEED FOR A
SERVICE THAT I CAN PROVIDE, AND
I WILL NEVER INTERROGATED
PATIENTS ABOUT THEIR STATE OF
ORIGIN. I KNOW MY COLLEAGUES
TREAT THEIR PATIENTS WITH THE
SAME RESPECT AND WE KNOW THAT
LEGISLATION SUCH AS THIS WILL
CONTINUE TO BE PRESENTED AND
WILL BE SUCCESSFUL. THIS IS NO
LONGER THEORETICAL AND
LEGISLATION LIKE THIS PUTS OUR
CALIFORNIA PROVIDERS AT RISK.
ABORTIONIS ESSENTIAL HEALTHCARE
CALIFORNIA IS BECOMING A SAFE
HAVEN AND DESTINATION STATE FOR
PROTECTING REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS.
I'M HONORED TO SERVE MY PATIENTS
, BUT I CAN ONLY CONTINUE TO DO
THIS SAFELY WITH THE APPROPRIATE
PROTECTION. PLEASE ALLOW MY
COLLEAGUES AND I THE PEACE OF
MIND TO FOCUS ON THE PATIENTS
SITTING IN FRONT OF US EVERY DAY
HELP US PROTECT ABORTION ACCESS
IN CALIFORNIA BY VOTING ION
ASSEMBLY BILL 16 66 THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ALL RIGHT, OTHERS IN
SUPPORT OF A B 16 66 THAT ARE
HERE IN THE HEARING ROOM. IF YOU
HAD APPROACHED THE MICROPHONE,
GIVE US YOUR NAME YOUR
AFFILIATION IN YOUR POSITION.
CINDY HILLARY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
AND SUPPORT THANK YOU. HELLO
GENESIS GONZALEZ ON BEHALF OF
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR. ELENI
KALLAKIS IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
AARON EVANS ON BEHALF OF NARAL
PRO CHOICE CALIFORNIA AND THE
CALIFORNIA NURSE MIDWIVES
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. THANK
THANK YOU. ALRIGHT SAYING NO ONE
ELSE HERE IN ROOM 2100. LET'S
TURN TO THE PHONE LINES
MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD QUEUE UP
THOSE IN SUPPORT OF A B 16 66
YES. SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF A B 16
66, PLEASE PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO
AND YOUR PUNK AND WE WILL START
WITH BLIND WITHIN 32, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI MR CHAIRMAN MEMBERS
KATHY VAN, OFTEN ON BEHALF OF
THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
UNIVERSITY WOMEN, CALIFORNIA AND
DRUNK SUPPORT WERE ALSO SPONSOR
ON THE BILL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. NEXT LINE. 1 15, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. FRANK SPENCER ON BEHALF
OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF O B.
G Y N SPONSORS OF THE BILL AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK YOU
LINE 1 33, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
CURTIS PLAYING WITH THE
CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION IN
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. ONLINE. 1 34, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. TOMMY MARTIN ON BEHALF OF
EQUALITY, CALIFORNIA COSPONSOR
OF THE BILL IN STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. I WON 35 PLEASE GO
AHEAD. REBECCA GONZALES WITH THE
NATIONALIST SOC ATION AS SOCIAL
WORKERS CALIFORNIA CHAPTER IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. AND 1 27,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD MORNING,
SYLVIA KFT OR WITH ESSENTIAL
ACCESS HEALTH IN STRONG SUPPORT
OF THIS STUFF. LINE. 30, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. WITH OAKLAND PRIVACY
AND SUPPORTED 16 66. THANK YOU.
LINES. 51, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
MORNING. SHARON MEMBERS. AMY ALI
, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR WITH THE
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,
ROB BONTA, WHO IS PROUD TO
SUPPORT 80. 16 66. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. AND THAT IS ALL THAT
I HAVEN'T YOU ALL RIGHT, LET'S
TURN TO OPPOSITION. WE HAVE TWO
WITNESSES LISTED IN PRIMARY
OPPOSITION, MISS ARNELLE AND MR
MCREYNOLDS. YES OR NO. THANK YOU
. MY NAME IS SUSAN ARNEL. I AM
AN ATTORNEY AND THE VICE
PRESIDENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS AT
THE RIGHT TO LIFE LEAGUE,
AMERICA'S FIRST PRO LIFE
ORGANIZATION. A B 16 66 IS THE
EQUIVALENT OF A LEGISLATIVE
TEMPER TANTRUM. IT BLATANTLY
VIOLATES THE FULL FAITH AND
CREDIT CLAUSE OF THE UNITED
STATES CONSTITUTION. CHERRY
PICKING WHICH OUT OF STATE
JUDGMENTS CALIFORNIA WILL
RECOGNIZE THIS IS VIRTUE,
SIGNALING DRESSED UP IN AN
UNCONSTITUTIONAL BILL. IN THE
CASE. BAKER BY THOMAS VERSUS
GENERAL MOTORS CORP. THE SUPREME
COURT CLEARLY STATES THAT THERE
IS ABSOLUTELY NO PUBLIC POLICY
EXCEPTION WHEN IT COMES TO
HONORING THE FINAL JUDGMENTS OF
ANOTHER STATE YET. A B 16 66 AT
SECTION TWO B. SAYS
UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT CALIFORNIA
QUOTE SHALL NOT ENFORCE OR
SATISFY A CIVIL JUDGMENT
RECEIVED FROM ANOTHER STATE. THE
COURT IN BAKER SAID QUOTE A
COURT MAY BE GUIDED BY THE FORUM
STATES PUBLIC POLICY IN
DETERMINING THE LAW APPLICABLE
TO A CONTROVERSY, BUT OUR
DECISIONS SUPPORT NO ROVING
PUBLIC POLICY EXCEPTION TO THE
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT DO
JUDGMENTS. A B 16 66 CLEARLY
VIOLATES COURT ESTABLISHED
PRECEDENT AND WILL FALL WHEN
CHALLENGED. LET'S SAY CALIFORNIA
ENACTS A LAW PROTECTING LGBT Q
PERSONS AND SOMEONE VIOLATES
THOSE LAWS IS SUED AND GETS A
$14 MILLION FINAL JUDGMENT ON
THEM. BUT THE ONLY PLACE THAT
THE PERSON OWNS PROPERTY IS
TEXAS. LET'S SAY TEXAS HAS JUST
PASSED A BILL EXACTLY LIKE A B
16 66, WHICH REFUSES TO ENFORCE
A JUDGMENT BASED ON LAWS
PROTECTING LGBT Q PERSONS. DO
YOU SEE THE PROBLEM? FOR VERY
GOOD REASONS. STATES CANNOT PICK
AND CHOOSE WHICH FINAL JUDGMENTS
THEY WILL OR WILL NOT ENFORCE.
NOW DO ABORTION. THE GOAL AND
HUBRIS OF THIS BILL ARE AN
EMBARRASSING SHAMED AT THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. WE MUST RESPECT
FINAL VALID JUDGMENTS OF OTHER
STATES, WHETHER WE LIKE THEM OR
NOT. THIS BILL DISRESPECTS OTHER
STATE LAWS NOT OUT OF ANY
CONCERN FOR THE LAW, BUT RATHER
FOR A VULGAR POLITICAL PURPOSE
TO THANK YOU. WRAP UP MODEL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. MR MCREYNOLDS. THEIR
10 YEAR, RIGHT? YOU'RE GOOD. ALL
RIGHT. GOOD MORNING. UH PERHAPS
AFTERNOON CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MATTHEW MCREYNOLDS
HERE, SENIOR STAFF ATTORNEY WITH
THE PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE
CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY. I'D
LIKE TO ECHO WHAT MY COLLEAGUE
IS. ARNOLD WAS EXPRESSING ABOUT
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE.
THERE CERTAINLY ARE SOME SERIOUS
PROBLEMS THERE. UM I SYMPATHIZE
WITH THE TASK OF THE COMMITTEE
STAFF AND TRYING TO UNPACK AND
UNRAVEL THAT IT IS A LONG AND
COMPLICATED CASE HISTORY AT LAST
CHECK. THERE WERE JUST SHY OF
40,000 PRECEDENTS. UM THAT TURN
UP IN LEXUS WHEN YOU LOOK FOR
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT, SO THIS
IS AN EXTRAORDINARY, COMPLICATED
AREA OF THE LAW THAT THE AUTHOR
HAS GLOSSED OVER. QUITE A BIT
AND MASKED. UH QUITE A NUMBER OF
THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT
THAT WOULD RESULT JUST JUST A
FEW ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES THAT
COME TO MIND. FULL FAITH AND
CREDIT HAS BEEN AT THE CENTER OF
DISPUTES BETWEEN CALIFORNIA AND
OTHER STATES INVOLVING THINGS
LIKE TAX COLLECTION IN SPECIFIC
TO THE PUBLIC POLICY ARGUMENTS
IN THE DEBATE OVER WHETHER OR
NOT PUBLIC POLICY ALLOWS THOSE
OTHER STATES TO IGNORE JUDGMENTS
HERE. WITH THE EXODUS OF
CALIFORNIANS AND CALIFORNIA
BUSINESSES TO OTHER STATES. YOU
COULD VERY WELL WHEN THE BATTLE
AND LOSE THE WAR ON THIS IF YOU
DID SUCCEED. IN HAVING A STATUTE
LIKE THIS UPHELD AND EXPANDING
THE REACH OF MORE RATHER
DIMINISHING THE EFFECTS OF FULL
FAITH AND CREDIT AS IT WOULD
SEEK TO DO THAT COULD ACTUALLY
END UP VERY BADLY FOR
CALIFORNIA'S TAX COLLECTION
AUTHORITIES. UM AND THAT TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF OTHER LITIGANTS WHO
REPRESENTED BY BY THE
PRESIDENT'S JUST ONE OTHER THING
I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT. THANK YOU
, MR MCREYNOLDS. IF YOU'D WRAP
UP AGREE WITH THE AUTHOR, THERE
ARE SOME SERIOUS DRAFTING
CONCERNS BECAUSE THE CURRENT
VERSION DOES OPEN THE DOOR FOR
MALPRACTICE TYPES OF SUITS. AND
TO BE SHIELDED, SO I WOULD URGE
THE COMMITTEE TO TAKE A CLOSER
LOOK AT THIS POINT. YOU HAVE TO
BILL THANK YOU, MR THANK YOU, MR
MCREYNOLDS, OTHERS HERE IN THE
COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM IN
OPPOSITION. YOUR NAME, YOUR
AFFILIATION AND YOUR POSITION.
MY NAME IS LEE ANDREW LEFT HIM
WITH CALIFORNIA FAMILY COUNCIL.
AND I OPPOSE THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. GREG BURKE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA FAMILY COUNCIL AND
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, TERRY JACOBEAN ON
BEHALF OF ROCK HARBOR CHURCH,
BAKER FLOW PREDICTING AND BARNES
AND BORN CALVARY CHAPEL SEARCH
VISALIA PROTECTING THE UNBORN
HILLARY COLLISION FOR FREEDOM IN
THE LIFE OF THE UNBORN. I DIDN'T
ASK TERRY COUNTY STOP THE MURDER
OF THE SILENT BLESSINGS OF
LIBERTY, PORTERVILLE, PROTECT
THIS THE YOUNG AND SPEAK UP FOR
THE UNBORN IN VIOLENT
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU, SIR.
THANK YOU. RUSSIA WILLIAMS ON
BEHALF OF JAMES P. BRADLEY AND
LADIES FOR LIBERTY IN OPPOSITION
. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, LET'S
TURN TO THE PHONE. OTHERS WHO
ARE IN OPPOSITION. FOR THOSE IN
OPPOSITION, PLEASE PRESS ZERO OR
MODERATOR ONE MORE HERE IN THE
COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM. SORRY
KIDS IN BATHROOM. GABRIELLE
INGRAHAM I OPPOSE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ALRIGHT UM MODERATE.
NOW WE CAN TURN TO THE PHONE
LINE. THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN,
PLEASE PRESS 10 TO SPEAK. AND WE
WILL START WITH LINE 1 38.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO COMMITTEE
. MY NAME IS ROBERT BYRD. I AM A
CONSTITUENT AND, UH,
SENATE-DISTRICT 11 AND I URGE
YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS BILL
ALREADY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
AND NEXT, WE HAVE LINE 93,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO I MISSED
THE SUPPORT. IT DIDN'T GO
THROUGH. SO I'M MY NAME IS JULIA
HEMLO. I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF
WOMEN FOR AMERICAN VALUES AND
ETHICS. AND WE STRONGLY SUPPORT
BUILT A B 16 66 PROTECT WOMEN'S
RIGHTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
NEXT. THANK GOODNESS WE HAVE
LINE 1 41, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
PLANE. 1 41 YEAR LINE IS OPEN.
OKAY NEXT WE HAVE LION 1 36,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO I'M GERRI
SHELAGH BUTLER FROM OAKLAND,
CALIFORNIA AND I OPPOSED THIS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND NEXT
WE HAVE LINE 1 41, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI. MY NAME IS EMMA CRAIG
WITH PRO LIFE MEMBERS. CISCO,
PLEASE VOTE NO ON A B 1666.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THAT
IS ALL THAT I HAVE BEEN QUÊ.
ALRIGHT, LET'S BRING IT BACK TO
THE COMMITTEE QUESTIONS BY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. SEEING WE'RE
SO, UM NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
UM SO WE ARE A SUBCOMMITTEE AT
THIS POINT, ALTHOUGH IF TWO MORE
MEMBERS APPEAR WE WILL BE A
COMMITTEE WILL REACH QUORUM, UM
AND FOR HOUSEKEEPING PURPOSES.
THIS IS GOING TO BE THE LAST
BILL THAT WE HEAR BEFORE WE
BREAK FOR, UM, CAUCUS. AND SO
AFTER WE RETURN, WE WILL HEAR
ITEM NUMBER FIVE AND THEN ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT. UM THERE'LL BE A
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS. UM SC
8 10 AT 1 30, ALRIGHT. UM NO
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BAR CAM, YOU
CARE TO CLOSE. CHAIR AND MEMBERS
. I APPRECIATE YOUR
THOUGHTFULNESS AND THE
INCREDIBLE ANALYSIS BY YOUR
COMMITTEE ON THIS THAT ADDRESSES
MANY OF THE CONCERNS OF THE
OPPOSITION. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS
IS INCREDIBLY GOOD AND VALID
LAW. THESE ARE NOT LAWS THAT WE
WOULD EVER PASS NOR ENFORCE HERE
IN CALIFORNIA. IF THEY WERE OUR
OWN, THEY WILL NEVER BE OUR OWN.
AND SO WE DO NOT BELIEVE IT IS
WITHIN. UM THE LAW THAT WE WOULD
HAVE TO ENFORCE OUT OF STATE
LAWS THAT ARE OUTSIDE BOTH THE
PUBLIC POLICY EXCEPTION OF THE
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE, AS
WELL AS AS NOTED IN THE ANALYSIS
. WE ALSO BELIEVE IT FALLS UNDER
THE PENAL EXCEPTION, WHICH GIVES
US TWO GROUNDS ON WHICH WE
BELIEVE THIS TO BE BOTH
CONSTITUTIONAL AND GOOD POLICY
FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WITH
THAT, I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR I
VOTE ALREADY. THANK YOU,
COUNCILOR. AH LET'S SEE IF WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE ANY CHANCE WE'RE
GOING TO MORE MEMBERS APPEAR, UH
, IN THE NEXT FEW MOMENTS, I SEE
HEAD SHAKING AND THE NEGATIVE,
SO ALL RIGHT. WE WERE GOING TO
RECESS HERE UNTIL 1 30. AT THAT
TIME, WE WILL HAVE A SPECIAL OR
BUSINESS. AND I'M HOPING QUORUM
. SO THANK YOU. ALL SO I SHOULD
RETURN AFTER THE SPECIAL ORDER
OF BUSINESS FOR MY OWN. WE'RE
GOING TO 1 30. WE HAVE A SPECIAL
OR BUSINESS AND WHENEVER THAT'S
CONCLUDED, AND, UM WE WILL BEGIN
BACK AGAIN AND FILE ORDER.
AWESOME. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR.
THANK YOU.
WE'RE GONNA WE'RE GONNA WHAT?
ONE SECOND ONE SECOND WE'RE
GOING TO. WE'RE GOING TO UM,
WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE HERE
FOR PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING A
QUORUM AND WE WILL VOTE ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. UM ALL RIGHT,
AND I SEE SOME OF THE
EMBARKATION HERE, SO WE'LL TAKE
A VOTE ON HER BILL AS WELL.
ALRIGHT SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND
ESTABLISH A QUORUM. THEN WE'LL
VOTE ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
AND ON, UM, ITEM NUMBER FOUR A B
16 66, AND THEN WE WILL RECESS,
ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S ESTABLISH A
QUORUM. MADAM SECRETARY IF YOU
WOULD CALL THE ROLL. HAMBURG.
I'M OUT OF HERE BEFORE GIS
COMING 00 HERE, DORIS Ó. DURAZO
HERE. GONZALEZ GONZALEZ HERE,
HERTZBERG JONES LAYERED STERN
STERN HERE, WIECKOWSKI WIENER.
WIENER PRESENT. YOU HAVE A
QUORUM. ALRIGHT UM IS THERE A
MOTION ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR?
ALL RIGHT, SENATOR COVER HE
REMOVES THE CONSENT CALENDAR. IF
YOU CALL THE RULE ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR, MADAM SECRETARY
HAMBURG, HAMBURG, GORGEOUS
CABALLERO. D!I DURAZO. H
NZALES. GONZALES. I HERZBERG
JONES LAYERED STERN STERN. I
WIECKOWSKI WIENER WIENER. AYE. 6
TO 0 WITH MEMBERS MISSING BILL
IS WE'LL PUT THE BILL BACK ON
CALL. ALRIGHT ALRIGHT, LET'S
LET'S JUST DO ITEM NUMBER FOUR A
B 16 66 SINCE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BARAK KHAN IS HERE. SO MADAM
SECRETARY, IF YOU WOULD CALL THE
ROLE AND THEN OTHER MATTERS WELL
, WE WILL HOLD THEM IN A BALANCE
UNTIL AFTER WE WERE RETURNED AT
1 30. OKAY WE NEED A MOTION,
SENATOR. CAVALLERO UH, OK. THANK
YOU REMOVES THE BILL. OKAY? UM
HUM, BERG BERG. OH THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS HAMBURG. GORGEOUS
CABALLERO. COUPLE EURO, I
DURAZO. YOU'RE A SO I GONZALEZ.
GONZALEZ I HERZBERG JONES
LAYERED STERN. STERN I
WIECKOWSKI WIENER WIENER. I 6 TO
0 TO PUT THAT BILL ON CALL.
WE'LL SEE EVERYONE AGAIN AT 1 30
13 30 FOR YOUR MILITARY TYPES.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
ALRIGHT UM, ASSEMBLY. EXCUSE ME.
THAT WAS FRIDAY AND. THE SENATE
COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY. WE WILL
RECONVENE. UM WE HAVE SET AS A
SPECIAL ORDER. UM SC 8 10. TO BE
HEARD. AND MADAM PRO TEM. ALL
RIGHT. UM WE HAVE A BIT OF A
DIFFERENT PROCESS FOR, UM S CHN
, UH, WILL BE A TOTAL OF 10
MINUTES FOR PRIMARY WITNESSES
AND SUPPORT AND 10 MINUTES FOR
PRIMARY WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION
. EACH SIDE WILL HAVE THREE
PRIMARY WITNESSES. UM, AFTER
THAT. ANYONE WHO WISHES TO
PROVIDE THEIR NAME. THEIR
AFFILIATION IN THEIR POSITION
MAY APPROACH THE MICROPHONE.
THEN WE'LL TAKE SUPPORTING
OPPOSITION ON THE PHONE. SO UM,
MADAM PRO TEM FLOOR IS YOURS. MR
CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU, COLLEAGUES
. THANK YOU. I'M HERE TODAY TO
PRESENT SENATE CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT 10. WE'RE ON THE BRINK
OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT
DECISION THAT WE HAVE EVERY
REASON TO BELIEVE WILL TOPPLE
ROE VERSUS WADE AND ERODE THE
RIGHT TO ABORTION THAT WAS
SECURED NEARLY 50 YEARS AGO.
ALTERING REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM IN
AMERICA AS WE KNOW IT. IN
CALIFORNIA. WE CANNOT STAND BY
AS WOMEN AND FAMILIES ARE LEFT
VULNERABLE AS OUR HIGHEST COURT
MOVES TO STRIP AWAY OUR RIGHTS
AND PUT COUNTLESS PEOPLE IN
HARM'S WAY. ALONGSIDE SPEAKER
RENDON AND SO MANY OF OUR
COLLEAGUES. WE'VE INTRODUCED
SCHNUR ENSURE THAT THE
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO CHOOSE TO
HAVE AN ABORTION AND TO USE
CONTRACEPTION. IS PROTECTED IN
CALIFORNIA NOW AND FOR
GENERATIONS TO COME. ABORTION IS
HEALTHCARE, PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
AND LIKE MANY IMPORTANT MEDICAL
DECISIONS, IT'S A DISCUSSION
BETWEEN THE PATIENT AND THEIR
HEALTH CARE PROVIDER. NO JUDGE.
NO POLITICIAN SHOULD BE IN THAT
ROOM OR MAKING THIS DECISION.
THESE ARE DEEPLY PERSONAL
CHOICES THAT SHOULD BE GROUNDED
IN SCIENTIFIC FACTS AND NOT
ANYONE'S POLITICAL AGENDA. WHEN
THE ABILITY TO ACCESS SAFE LEGAL
ABORTION IS TAKEN AWAY. THINGS
GET GRIM. AND DANGEROUS AND I
ASSURE YOU I'VE ACTUALLY SEEN IT
FIRSTHAND. DURING MY TIME
PROVIDING CLINIC SERVICES THAT
WOMEN'S HEALTH CENTER I MET A
DISTRAUGHT MOTHER WHOSE DAUGHTER
DIED AFTER AN ILLEGAL ABORTION
IN ANOTHER STATE. HER STORY HAS
NEVER LEFT ME. IT HAUNTS ME EVEN
TODAY. I HELD THE HAND OF A
WOMAN IN THE NAVY WHO HAD BEEN
INCORRECTLY LED TO BELIEVE SHE
COULD NOT SAFELY DELIVER HER
BABY. BECAUSE SHE HAD AN STD
SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE.
SHE CAME TO US BECAUSE SHE
COULDN'T GET AN ABORTION IN THE
NAVAL HOSPITAL WHERE SHE WAS SHE
SERVED IN THE NAVY. SHE WAS
SCARED, CONFUSED AND SHE WAS
ALONE. AND SHE WAS MISINFORMED.
WE HELPED HER UNDERSTAND ALL OF
HER OPTIONS AND THAT SHE COULD
DELIVER A HEALTHY BABY DESPITE
HAVING AN STD. SHE WENT HOME.
SHE HAD A BABY LATER, AND SHE,
UH, HAD A DOCTOR THAT INFORMED
HER OF ALL OF HER OPTIONS, AND
SHE MADE THAT CHOICE. THIS IS
WHAT'S AT RISK, REAL FAMILIES,
REAL LIVES AND REAL OPTIONS, SO
I RESPECTFULLY ASKED YOU TO
CONSIDER PASSING SCHNOOR TODAY I
HAVE A NUMBER OF EXPERT
WITNESSES WITH ME AND WE STAND
READY TO TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS AND
COMMENTS. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU, MADAM PRO
TEM. MISS HICKS. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
JODY HICKS CURRENTLY SERVES AS
THE PRESIDENT AND CEO OF PLANNED
PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA, REPRESENTING SEVEN
AFFILIATES IN OVER 100 HEALTH
CENTERS THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA.
I'M ALSO HERE AS A MEMBER OF THE
STEERING COMMITTEE OF THE
CALIFORNIA FUTURE OF ABORTION
CUNCIL, REPRESENTING FOR OVER
40 ORGANIZATIONS WORKING
TOGETHER SINCE SEPTEMBER TO
REALLY PREPARE CALIFORNIA FOR
THE CRISIS. AT HAND AND ENSURING
THAT CALIFORNIA'S ABORTION
NETWORK IS READY FOR WHAT? WE'RE
FACING THIS COMING YEAR. AND
WELL, I WISH YOU WERE HERE UNDER
BETTER CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT GIVEN
THE ONGOING ATTACKS ON ABORTION
NATIONWIDE, I AM GRATEFUL FOR
THE CONTINUED LEADERSHIP. OF OUR
CALIFORNIA POLICYMAKERS,
INSURING IN THIS MOMENT TO
ROTECT AND REALLY EXPAND ACCESS
TO ABORTION. STHN. WILL AMEND
OUR STATE'S CONSTITUTION TO
PROTECT ABORTION AND
CONTRACEPTION. AND IT'S NOT JUST
WHAT IS NEEDED RIGHT NOW TO MEET
THIS MOMENT, BUT IT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT WE ENSURE ACCESS
TO ESSENTIAL SEXUAL AND
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE IN OUR
STATE FOR PEOPLE IN CALIFORNIA
NOW AND CERTAINLY FOR OUR FUTURE
GENERATIONS. AND LET ME BE CLEAR
THE RIGHT TO ABORTION AND THE
RIGHT TO PRIVACY ARE AT RISK.
LIKE NEVER BEFORE. JUST LAST
MONTH, WE ALL SAW A LEAKED DRAFT
DECISION. AND WE SAW FOR THE
FIRST TIME JUST HOW MUCH THE
RIGHT TO ABORTION AND
ULTIMATELY, THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY
IS UNDER ATTACK BY A HANDFUL OF
REALLY EXTREME CONSERVATIVE
JUSTICES ON OUR NATION'S HIGHEST
COURT. AND SEEM TO BE PUT THEIR
EXPLICITLY BECAUSE OF THEIR
HOSTILITY AND OPPOSITION TO ROE
V. WADE SO SIMPLY PUT THE RIGHT
TO PRIVACY IS JUST NOT ENOUGH.
STHN IN ADDITION TO THE
LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE BROUGHT
FORWARD BY THE LEGISLATIVE
WOMEN'S CAUCUS IS ESSENTIAL IN
SHOWING CALIFORNIA'S VALUES AS A
REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM STATE.
SHOWING THAT CALIFORNIA
RECOGNIZES NO MATTER WHAT THE
SUPREME COURT DECIDES HEALTHCARE
, INCLUDING ABORTION IS A
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT. ABORTION IS A
PERSONAL DECISION AND PEOPLE
SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THEIR OWN
MEDICAL DECISIONS WITH THEIR
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS. AND THE
REALITY IS WE'RE FACING A
SUPREME COURT DECISION IN IN
JUST A FEW WEEKS. IMPACTING OVER
HALF THE COUNTRY AND WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT 26 STATES, WHERE
ABORTION SERVICES ARE EITHER
SEVERE, SEVERELY RESTRICTED OR
BANNED COMPLETELY, WHERE PEOPLE
HAVE TO TRAVEL OUTSIDE OF THE
STATE THAT THEY CURRENTLY LIVE
IN. IN ORDER TO GET HEALTHCARE
AND WE ARE SHOCKED, TALKING
ABOUT OVER 35 MILLION PEOPLE. SO
WE NEED TO PROTECT PEOPLE'S
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS RIGHTS TO
CONTROL THEIR OWN BODY TO ENSURE
THAT EVERYONE HAS OPTIONS WHEN
IT COMES TO MAKING DECISIONS
ABOUT THEIR REPRODUCTIVE
HEALTHCARE. AND THE L 10 STHN
WILL CONTINUE TO ALLOW
INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES THE
FREEDOM TO DECIDE IF AND WHEN TO
HAVE CHILDREN, EMPOWERING PEOPLE
WITH THE ABILITY TO PLAN THEIR
LIVES. AND REALLY TO ACHIEVE
THEIR GOALS AND THEIR DREAMS. SO
WE NEED TO ACT NOW TO ENSURE
ABORTION REMAINS SAFE AND LEGAL
HERE IN CALIFORNIA THAT
IMPORTANT HEALTH CARE DECISIONS
ARE LEFT TO A PERSON AND THEIR
PROVIDERS WITH THE BACKING OF
SCIENCE. EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE
AND NOT A POLITICAL AGENDA. THIS
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT SENDS A
CLEAR SIGNAL ACROSS THE COUNTRY
THAT NOT ONLY IS ABORTION CARE,
LEGAL AND AVAILABLE IN
CALIFORNIA, BUT WE AS A STATE
CARE ABOUT YOU, AND WE WILL
FIGHT FOR YOU. IT IS ANOTHER
STEP THAT POLICYMAKERS ARE
TAKING TO ENSURE THAT ACROSS
CALIFORNIA WE HAVE THE ABILITY
TO MAKE THE BEST DECISION FOR
EVERYONE WINNER IF THEY WANT TO
START A FAMILY AND HOW BEST TO
DO SO. IT'S CRUCIAL THAT PEOPLE
FEEL SAFE, ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOW
, WHEN IT'S ACT, ACCESSING THE
ESSENTIAL HEALTH CARE THEY WANT
AND NEED. THROUGHOUT THEIR
PREGNANCY AND BEYOND. THIS
EFFORT PROVIDES THEM MUCH NEEDED
REASSURANCE IN THIS TIME OF
UNCERTAINTY, AND THANK YOU AND I
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU.
MISSHICKS WAS ABOUT SIX MINUTES
LEFT, DR GUPTA. GOOD AFTERNOON
CHAIR. HAMBURG AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. THANK YOU FOR HAVING
ME. MY NAME IS DR PETIT MMA
GUPTA. I'M A BOARD CERTIFIED
OBSTETRICIAN GYNECOLOGIST AND
MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE
OF OBSTETRICIANS AND
GYNECOLOGISTS DISTRICT NINE,
ALSO KNOWN AS A CALM WELL, MAYBE
HARD TO BELIEVE. BASED ON MY
YOUTHFUL APPEARANCE. I'VE BEEN A
PROVIDER OF ABORTION CARE FOR
OVER 20 YEARS. I PROBABLY WORKED
ALL OVER OUR GLORIOUS GOLDEN
STATE FOR MY MEDICAL SCHOOL AND
RESIDENCY IN LOS ANGELES TO A
FELLOWSHIP AND FAMILY PLANNING
AND MASTERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH IN
THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA. AND
I CURRENTLY RESIDE AND WORK IN
SAN DIEGO AT UCSD AND PLANNED
PARENTHOOD, WHERE I ALSO
TRAVELED TO A MORE RURAL CENTERS
TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO CARE. AS AN
OBSTETRICIAN GYNECOLOGIST. I
SUPPORT THE HEALTH SAFETY AND
WELL BEING OF OUR PATIENTS BY
PROVIDING PROVIDING
COMPREHENSIVE MEDICAL CARE,
WORKING TO ENSURE THAT ALL
PATIENTS CAN ACCESS THE FULL
SPECTRUM OF MATERNAL SEXUAL AND
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE
OPTIONS, INCLUDING ABORTION AND
BY PROVIDING INCLUSIVE, PATIENT
CENTERED CARE WITH AN EMPHASIS
ON JUSTICE, RESPECT, COMPASSION
AND DIGNITY. AND IN THAT CONTEXT
, I'M HERE TODAY. SPEAKING IN
SUPPORT OF CHN, WHICH AMENDS OUR
STATE CONSTITUTION TO PROTECT
ABORTION AND CONTRACEPTION AS
ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF
COMPREHENSIVE EVIDENCE BASED
HEALTH CARE. ACCESS TO CARE
SHOULD NOT DEPEND ON YOUR ZIP
CODE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER AND
WHEN TO ACCESS ABORTION CARE
SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE
POLITICAL CONTEXT AND RETURN TO
PATIENTS AND HEALTHCARE
PROFESSIONALS LIKE ME. LAST
WEEK, I SAW A YOUNG ASIAN WOMAN
I STILL REMEMBER HER PINK
SPARKLY PHONE CASE WHO, AFTER
CONSULTATION WITH HER MOTHER AND
HER PARTNER, DECIDED TO
TERMINATE HER PREGNANCY. I
PERFORMED HER ABORTION PROVIDED
THE BIRTH CONTROL THAT SHE
WANTED. WE SHOULD BE PROVIDED
PROUD OF THIS KAREN, CALIFORNIA
BECAUSE THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD
WORK. OUR PATIENTS NEED US AS
THEIR TRUSTED MEDICAL
INFORMATION GUIDES MORE THAN
EVER. NOW IF SOMEONE CALLS ME
SEEKING AN ABORTION, IT'S NOT
ENOUGH FOR ME TO SAY HERE'S THE
NUMBER OF YOUR NEAREST CLINIC. I
NEED TO SAY HERE'S THE CLINIC.
HERE'S THE NUMBER OF AN ABORTION
FUND. SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY
FINANCIAL ISSUES? HERE'S A
HOTLINE FOR EMOTIONAL
CONSULTATIONS AND A PATIENT
NAVIGATOR. PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE
TO ACCESS THE HEALTH CARE THEY
NEED WITHOUT MEDICALLY
UNNECESSARY BARRIERS.
RESTRICTIONS. AND HEALTH CARE
PROVIDERS LIKE MYSELF SHOULD BE
ABLE TO OFFER THAT CARE WITHOUT
INTERFERENCE OR FEAR OF BEING
CRIMINALIZED OR OTHERWISE
PUNISHED. IT'S CRITICAL THAT
CALIFORNIA ACT NOW TO PROTECT
THE SACRED PATIENT CLINICIAN
RELATIONSHIP IN THE PROVISION OF
ABORTION CARE, AND TO ENSURE
THAT NO PERSON IN CALIFORNIA IS
EVER DENIED THE ABILITY TO MAKE
DECISIONS. WITH THEIR HEALTH
CARE PROVIDER ABOUT WHETHER AND
WHEN TO SEEK AND OBTAIN
ESSENTIAL HEALTHCARE. THIS
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT SENDS A
CLEAR SIGNAL TO PATIENTS THAT
ABORTION CARE IS LEGAL. AND
AVAILABLE IN CALIFORNIA AND
PROVIDES MUCH NEEDED REASSURANCE
AT THIS CRITICAL TIME TO
PATIENTS AND PROVIDERS ALIKE. I
ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT CHN.
THANK YOU FOR TIME AND FOR NOT
FOR BEING NOT ONLY LEADERS IN
CALIFORNIA, BUT TRAILBLAZERS.
THANK YOU, DR GUPTA. ALRIGHT I
BELIEVE KERRY FRANKLIN IS ON THE
PHONE. OH, I'M SORRY. YES, THANK
YOU. GO AHEAD, MISS FRANKLIN. MY
NAME IS CARRIE FRANKLIN. I AM
THE MCDONALD'S RIGHT CHAIR OF
LAW AT U C L. A LAW SCHOOL WHERE
I TEACH CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. I AM
ALSO THE FACT THAT THE DIRECTOR
OF YOUTH CENTER ON REPRODUCTIVE
HEALTH PLANS POLICY AS YOU KNOW
, THE SUPREME COURT WILL SOON
ISSUE A DECISION IN A CASE THAT
INVOLVES A DIRECT CHALLENGE TO
CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION FOR
ABORTION THAT HAVE BEEN IN PLACE
SINCE 1973. THE WEAK DRAFT
DECISION INDICATES THAT THE
COURT IS PREPARED TO ASSIST
AERATE THE CONSTITUTIONAL
PRIVACY RIGHTS, PROTECTED AND
ROW AND SEND PARENT HAD BEEN
CASEY, THEREBY ALLOWING STATES
TO BAR ACCESS TO SAFE AND LEGAL
ABORTIONS, CRIMINALIZED PATIENTS
AND PROVIDERS AND CREATE
INSURMOUNTABLE BARRIERS. FOR
PEOPLE ATTEMPTING TO ACCESS TO
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE. EVEN
WITH THOSE PROTECTIONS IN PLACE
FEDERAL RESTRICTIONS SUCH AS THE
HYDE AMENDMENT, WHICH PROHIBITS
FEDERAL FUNDING TO BE USED FOR
ABORTION SERVICES HAVE HAD A
TERRIBLE, DISPARATE IMPACT ON
WOMEN AND PREGNANT PEOPLE WHO
ARE LOW INCOME. WHO ARE MEMBERS
OF HISTORICALLY SUBORDINATED
RACIAL GROUPS AND ALREADY FACING
MULTIPLE BARRIERS TO HEALTHCARE.
AT THE SAME TIME, ANTI ABORTION
LEGISLATORS AND STATES HAVE
PASSED INCREASINGLY RESTRICTIVE
LAWS. THEY'RE NOT WRITTEN IN
SCIENCE THAT ARE DESIGNED SOLELY
MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO
OBTAIN ABORTIONS. THE U. S.
SUPREME COURT HAS RECENTLY PAVED
THE WAY FOR SUCH RESTRICTIONS BY
ENABLING ILLEGAL SCHEME DESIGNED
TO CIRCUMVENT JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
TO ENFORCE CONSTITUTIONALLY
PROTECTED ABORTION RIGHTS. THIS
HAS ALLOWED ABORTION FANS TO GO
INTO EFFECT IN TEXAS AND
OKLAHOMA, SURPRISING MILLIONS OF
AMERICANS OF FUNDAMENTAL
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, AND THE
LEAGUE'S OPINIONS SUGGESTS THE
EROSION OF RIGHTS MAY NOT STOP
HERE. MANY OF THE HARD WON
RIGHTS TO FALL INTO THE RIGHT TO
PRIVACY, INCLUDING RIGHT RELATED
TO THE USE OF CONTRACEPTION,
SEXUAL INTIMACY, MARRIAGE
EQUALITY ARE ALSO AT RISK.
CALIFORNIA CURRENTLY HAS ROBUST
STATUTORY PROTECTIONS FOR
ABORTION. SDA 10 WILL SAFEGUARD
THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE AN ABORTION
OR USE CONTRACEPTION, REGARDLESS
OF WHO'S IN POWER IN THE FUTURE.
IT WILL ENSHRINE THESE RIGHTS IN
THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION.
EXPLICITLY IT WILL ENUMERATE
THEM BY NAME FOR THE FIRST TIME
, ENSURING THESE RIGHTS ARE
CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED UNDER
CALIFORNIA LAW FOR GENERATIONS
TO COME. CAN ALSO UNDERSCORES
HOW STATE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
TO PRIVACY EQUAL PROTECTION ARE
TIED TO A PERSON'S REPRODUCTIVE
FREEDOM IN SO DOING IT, ALONG
WITH OTHER LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS
BY THE BODY WILL HELP TO ENSURE
THAT PEOPLE HAVE THE BASIC
FREEDOM TO ACCESS TO
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE AND THE
LIBERTY AND EQUALITY TO MAKE
THEIR OWN DECISIONS ABOUT IF AND
WHEN TO GROW THEIR FAMILIES.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MR
FRANKLIN. ALL RIGHT, UM, JUST
UNDER THE 10 MINUTE. MARK
APPRECIATE THAT. NOW I SEE OF
SOME GATHERED HERE IN THE
HEARING ROOM 2100 IF YOU WOULD
APPROACH THE MICROPHONE. STATE
YOUR NAME YOUR AFFILIATION IN
YOUR POSITION. THIS IS THE
SUPPORT. FOR GOOD AFTERNOON, MR
CHAIR AND MEMBERS LINDSEY GOLA
HORN WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION FOR NURSE
PRACTITIONERS AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON ADRIANA
CHAMPAGNE ZAMORA WITH THE LEAGUE
OF WOMEN, VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA
AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
MR TURN MEMBERS. I'M AARON EVANS
ON BEHALF OF NARAL PRO CHOICE,
CALIFORNIA, PROUD CO SPONSOR OF
THIS MEASURE AND UM, STEERING
COMMITTEE MEMBER OF THE FUTURE
OF ABORTION COUNCIL. SECONDLY IN
SUPPORT ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA NURSE MIDWIVES
ASSOCIATION, ALSO A MEMBER OF
THE FUTURE OF ABORTION COUNCIL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AFTER THE
INTERIM MEMBERS MOLLY ROBSON
WITH PLANNED PARENTHOOD
AFFILIATES OF CALIFORNIA WHERE
CO SPONSORING STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON GENESIS GONZALEZ ON
BEHALF OF LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR,
LENNY KALLAKIS AS A PROUD CO
SPONSOR. AN URGENT IVO. THANK
YOU. CINDY HILLARY ON BEHALF OF
THE CALIFORNIA MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION IN STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. FRANK SPENCER ON
BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE
OF OBGYN. WOMEN'S DISTRICT NINE
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. HERE ON
BEHALF OF ALL OF US ARE NOT IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ALYSSA MORE
BE HERE BEHALF OF ALL OF US, OR
NONE AS WELL IN FULL SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ALRIGHT SEEING NO ONE
ELSE IN ROOM 2100. LET'S TURN TO
THE PHONE LINES MODERATOR, IF
YOU WOULD QUEUE UP THOSE IN
SUPPORT OF SCHNURR, THEY CAN
PROVIDE THEIR NAME THEIR
AFFILIATION IN THEIR POSITION.
THANK YOU TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT,
PLEASE PRESS ONE AND ZERO ON
YOUR PHONE. AND WE WILL START
WITH LINE 1 64, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
TOMMY MARTIN ON BEHALF OF
EQUALITY, CALIFORNIA AND
SUPPORT. ACCUSED LINE 1 77,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. K VANGUARD
HEALTH ACCESS CALIFORNIA AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU FIND 1. 93,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GET UP IN THE
CHAIR MEMBERS MARQUEE SEADRILL
ON BEHALF OF THE LOST ANGELES
COUNTY BOARD SUPERVISORS AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. THANK YOU
LINE 1 86, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON, KATHY VAN AUSTIN ON
BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN
ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY,
WOMEN, CALIFORNIA AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, LYNN. 1
91, PLEASE GO AHEAD. HIGH FLOOR
HANDS ON BEHALF OF TEACHER
TRAINING. EARLY ABORTIONS.
COMPREHENSIVE HEALTHCARE, ALSO
PART OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE
OF THE FUTURE OF ABORTION,
COUNSELING, SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU LINE 1 68, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ACTION IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LINE 1 66,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON
. SILVIA CASTILLO WITH ESSENTIAL
ACCESS HEALTH, WHERE A PROUD
POST SPONSOR AND FEATURE OF
ABORTION COUNCIL STEERING
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. IN LINE 1 99, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR
SHARON MEMBERS, SONIA MUGICA WAS
BLACK WOMEN FOR WELLNESS ACTION
PROJECT PROBLEM MEMBER OF THE
CALIFORNIA ABORTION COUNCIL
STEERING COMMITTEE AND CO
SPONSORS AND STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
LINE 1 84, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS LEAH
CHANDLER AND I'M CALLING ON
BEHALF OF EQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES
AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
IN LINE WHEN 62 PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD AFTERNOON SHARING MEMBERS,
MADELINE COOPER FROM NIELSEN
MARKSMAN ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY
OF SAN DIEGO IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. TÌM 1 69, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS
IS CLAIRE LOOK SHELTER WITH THE
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN
, CALIFORNIA AND STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THAT
IS ALL THAT I HAVE IN. Q THANK
YOU, MADAM MODERATOR. NOW LET'S
TURN TO THE OPPOSITION
OPPOSITION. UM WE HAVE, MR
DARNELL, MISS. UH, DOMINGO AND
MISS BRADFORD. I BELIEVE ALL OF
YOU ARE HERE IN THE HEARING
ROOM. YOU'LL HAVE 10 MINUTES, SO
I SEE MISS DARNELL AT THE
MICROPHONE. GO AHEAD. MY NAME IS
SUSAN ARNOLD. I'M IN A
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY AND THE VICE
PRESIDENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS FOR
THE RIGHT TO LIFE LEAGUE,
AMERICA'S FIRST PRO LIFE
ORGANIZATION. WE REPRESENT 54
PRO LIFE ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS
THE STATE AND VOTERS ALL AROUND
THE STATE. THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION DECLARES THAT QUOTE
A PERSON MAY NOT BE DEPRIVED OF
LIFE WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW.
OR EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS.
10 THE ABORTION AMENDMENT
DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS THOSE
FUNDAMENTAL, INALIENABLE RIGHTS
TO LIFE AND LIBERTY PROCLAIMED
IN OUR STATE CONSTITUTION. THE
ABORTION AMENDMENTS. DISORDERED
APPROACH GRANTS A CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT TO DESTROY ANOTHER LIFE BY
PLACING A SUBORDINATE RIGHT THE
RIGHT TO PRIVACY AHEAD OF AN
INDIVIDUAL'S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT
TO EXIST. THIS IS A CIVIL RIGHTS
VIOLATION OF MONUMENTAL
PROPORTIONS. YOU ARE WEAPONIZING
OUR CONSTITUTION TO STRIP AWAY
THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF PEOPLE
WHO CAN'T SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
THE MOST VULNERABLE THE MOST
UNDERSERVED THE UNBORN. GAS
PRICES AND INFLATION ARE HITTING
ALL TIME HIGHS INSTEAD OF
HELPING STRUGGLING FAMILIES.
CALIFORNIA WILL SPEND $125
MILLION OF TAXPAYER MONEY. TO
FUND THE ABORTION INDUSTRY. YOUR
SPENDING POLICIES ARE LITERALLY
FORCING MOTHERS TO MAKE
DESPERATE CHOICES BETWEEN HAVING
A BABY OR PAYING RENT. THE
GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE RESEARCH
SHOWS THAT APPROXIMATELY 75% OF
ABORTIONS ARE OBTAINED BY WOMEN
AT OR BELOW THE FEDERAL POVERTY
LEVEL. THESE WOMEN ARE
FINANCIALLY DESPERATE. THEY DO
NOT WANT TO ABORT THEIR BABY.
THEY FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE NO
OTHER CHOICE. THIS ABORTION
AMENDMENT WORKS TOGETHER WITH
MANY OTHER BILLS TO EXCLUSIVELY
FAVOR THE ABORTION INDUSTRY OVER
OTHER LIFE, GIVING REPRODUCTIVE
ALTERNATIVES. INSTEAD OF RAISING
THE LEVEL OF MEDICAL CARE FOR
WOMEN, YOU ARE SLASHING
STANDARDIZED PROCEDURES AND
PHYSICIAN OVERSIGHT FOR ABORTION
. THAT'S SB 13 75 AND FAST
TRACKING ABORTION LICENSES.
THAT'S A B 6 57. INSTEAD OF
RESPECTING OUR CONSTITUTION, YOU
ARE CREATING A SAFE HAVEN FOR
HUMAN TRAFFICKERS. THAT'S A B
16, 66 AND 2091. INSTEAD OF
PROTECTING BABIES BORN ALIVE,
YOU ARE DECRIMINALIZING
INFANTICIDE WITH A B 22 23
INSTEAD OF FUNDING BABY FORMULA.
YOU WERE FUNDING FREE ABORTION.
SB 2 45, WHICH HAS ALREADY
PASSED INSTEAD OF FUNDING
HOUSING FOR HOMELESS MOTHERS.
YOU ARE FUNDING ABORTION
CLINICS. THAT'S A B 12 45.
INSTEAD OF FUNDING ALL BIRTHING
OPTIONS. YOU ARE FUNDING
ABORTION TOURISM WITH SB 11 42.
INSTEAD OF FUNDING MATERNAL CARE
. YOU ARE FUNDING ABORTION
SERVICES WITH A B 21 34. INSTEAD
OF TAKING CARE OF MOTHERS. YOU
ARE TAKING CARE OF THE ABORTION
CARTEL AND USING OUR MONEY TO DO
IT, AND INSTEAD OF FUNDING
ADOPTION SERVICES, YOU ARE
FUNDING ABORTION SCHOLARSHIPS
WITH A B 1918. WITH AN ALMOST
$100 BILLION STATE SURPLUS. IT
IS TIME TO PROVIDE THE FINANCIAL
RESOURCES THAT WOMEN NEED TO
CHOOSE LIFE, NOT SIMPLY
PROMOTING AGENDA, USING TEXT
DOLLARS TO TRAMPLE THE CIVIL
RIGHTS OF UNBORN CHILDREN. THANK
YOU. MR. MINGLE? UM. YES GO
AHEAD, GO AHEAD AND APPROACHED
THE MICROPHONE. HELLO MY NAME IS
KELLY BRADFORD. SORRY, MISS
BRADFORD. I'M 43 YEARS OLD WAS
BORN AND RAISED IN SAN FRANCISCO
AND I HAVE BEEN IN SACRAMENTO
FOR THE PAST 18 YEARS. I AM
BLESSED TO BE THE MOTHER OF TWO
DAUGHTERS AFTER EXPERIENCING
FIVE ABORTIONS, STARTING FROM
THE AGE OF 15 TO 28 YEARS OF
AGE. I FIRST LEARNED OF
ABORTIONS THROUGH SCHOOL AND
FRIENDS. I WAS ABLE TO SEE A
DOCTOR ON MY OWN. WITHOUT MY
PARENTS' CONSENT OR KNOWLEDGE.
AND SCHEDULE AN ABORTION
PROCEDURE. IT WAS EASY TO DO
WITHOUT GETTING ANYONE INVOLVED
AND BECAME A METHOD OF BIRTH
CONTROL AFTER THE SECOND TIME. I
KNOW OTHER WOMEN THAT HAVE
GOTTEN 7 10 OR EVEN MORE
ABORTIONS IN THEIR LIFETIME AND
SOME NO LONGER ABLE TO HAVE
CHILDREN. UNFORTUNATELY IT IS
MORE COMMON IN THE MINORITY
COMMUNITY, AS MANY OF US ARE
BEING RAISED BY SINGLE MOTHERS.
I REMEMBER WANTING TO HAVE THE
CHILD AND BECOME A MOTHER. BUT
BEING TOLD BY MY BOYFRIEND THAT
IT WASN'T A GOOD TIME OR THAT
WAS JUST TOO YOUNG BY MY OWN
FAMILY. SO WHETHER OR NOT I
WANTED TO GO FORWARD WITH IT, I
FELT PUSHED AND OBLIGATED TO GET
THE ABORTION BECAUSE I DIDN'T
HAVE ANY SUPPORT. BEING FACED
WITH AN UNPLANNED PREGNANCY. IS
TERRIFYING. SO WHEN YOU GO AND
SPEAK WITH AN ABORTION COUNSELOR
THEY SELL IT TO YOU AS A WAY TO
GET YOUR LIFE BACK TO NORMAL.
THEY RARELY EVEN DISCUSSED THE
NEGATIVE EFFECTS THAT IT HAS ON
YOUR LIFE, LET ALONE THE
COMPLICATIONS THAT CAN GO ON
DURING THE PROCESS. YOU ARE MADE
TO QUICKLY READ POTENTIAL SIDE
EFFECTS ON A PIECE OF PAPER AND
SIGN IT. I WAS TOLD THAT MY
UNBORN BABY WAS A FETUS AND NOT
ACTUALLY A LIFE. ALSO HE OR SHE
WOULDN'T BE HURT BY THE ABORTION
. I WAS LIED TO REGARDING WHAT
ABORTION REALLY IS, AS ARE SO
MANY PEOPLE ALL OVER CALIFORNIA.
LEGISLATORS IN THIS ROOM ARE
CONTINUING TO TELL THOSE LIES
EVEN TODAY. DURING THE PANDEMIC.
I HEARD A TESTIMONIAL FROM A
FORMER ABORTION DOCTOR THAT
SHOCKED ME. THIS ABORTIONIST
EXPLAINED TO ME FOR THE FIRST
TIME WHAT ABORTION WAS REALLY
LIKE. THE UNBORN BABY IS NOT
JUST VACUUMED OUT AS WE ARE
TOLD, BUT SOMETIMES IT JUST
PULLED OUT IN PIECES BY LIMBS
AND BODY PARTS AND SOMETIMES
STILL ALIVE. I WAS ABSOLUTELY
REPULSED. HERE IN CALIFORNIA HAS
BEEN MADE SO EASY AND COMMON
PRACTICE TO GO OUT AND GET AN
ABORTION THROUGH PLANNED
PARENTHOOD. THAT WOMAN, MANY
WOMEN DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE TO
GO TO GET SUPPORT IF THEY WANT
TO HAVE THEIR BABY. MOST OF THE
WOMEN GOING INTO AN ABORTION
CLINIC TODAY ARE MINORITIES,
YOUNG, AFRAID AND DON'T KNOW
WHAT TO DO. IF THEY DON'T WANT
TO GET AN ABORTION. THEY WALK
THROUGH THOSE DOORS. THEY'RE
TURNED AWAY WITHOUT ANY
INFORMATION OR SUPPORT AVAILABLE
TO THEM. IT'S LIKE THEY DON'T
EVEN CARE. GOD THANK GOD. THERE
ARE PEOPLE OUT ON THE SIDEWALK
THERE THAT DIRECT THEM TO A
LOCAL PREGNANCY PRO LIFE CARE
CENTER. WHERE THEY CAN BE
SUPPORTED AND TAUGHT HOW TO LOVE
THROUGH GOING THEIR FAMILIES AND
NOT DESTROY THEM. PUTTING THE
RIGHT TO AN ABORTION INTO THE
STATE CONSTITUTION IS NOT GOING
TO HELP THE MINORITY COMMUNITY
WHATSOEVER. ABORTION IS NOT
HEALTH CARE. IT HAS LEFT ME AND
MILLIONS OF WOMEN BROKEN,
REGRETFUL, ASHAMED, DEPRESSED
AND SOME EVEN SUICIDAL. IT'S A
TEMPORARY SOLUTION TO A MUCH
DEEPER PROBLEM. YOU WERE LYING
TO PEOPLE WHEN YOU HOLD ABORTION
OUT AS AN EASY ANSWER TO A
COMPLEX PROBLEM. ABORTION IS
DEVASTATING PEOPLE'S LIVES. CHN
IS GOING TO MAKE THE PROBLEM.
EVEN WORSE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT
UM, NEXT, MISS DOMINGO, MISS
DOMINGOS PRESENT. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
KATHLEEN DOMINGO I'M, THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE
CALIFORNIA CATHOLIC CONFERENCE.
THE CALIFORNIA CATHOLIC
CONFERENCE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSES
SENATE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
10, WHICH LOOKS TO ENSHRINE THE
MOST EXTREME FORMS OF ABORTION
INTO THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION. WE BELIEVE IN
PROTECTING LIFE AND EVERY AGE
AND EVERY STAGE INCLUDING UNBORN
HUMAN LIFE. WE ARE EXTREMELY
TROUBLED BY THE LANGUAGE OF CHN
, WHICH IS SO BROAD AND
UNRESTRICTED THAT IT WOULD
ENCOURAGE AND PROTECT EVEN LATE
TERM ABORTIONS, WHICH MOST
CALIFORNIANS CONTINUE TO OPPOSE.
WE ALSO FEAR THE BOUNDLESS SCOPE
OF THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT,
WHICH ASSERTS A NEW
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO
REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM, BUT NOT
DOES NOT DEFINE WHAT THAT MEANS.
THIS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT,
AS WRITTEN, WILL LEGALIZE AND
PROTECT ABORTION UP TO THE POINT
JUST PRIOR TO DELIVERY. IT IS
DISTRESSING THAT SO MANY
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATORS WOULD
SIGN THEIR NAMES TO LEGISLATION
THAT ALLOWS THE TAKING OF A
HUMAN LIFE MOMENTS BEFORE BIRTH.
IN THIS REGARD. SCHNUR MORE
CLOSELY ALIGNED CALIFORNIA WITH
EXTREME ABORTION POLICIES OF
ONLY A FEW COUNTRIES, RATHER
THAN THOSE OF THE MAJORITY OF
WESTERN DEMOCRACIES, WHICH DO
NOT ALLOW LATE TERM ABORTIONS.
SCHNUR UNNECESSARY. THE SAD
REALITY IS THAT CALIFORNIA
ALREADY HAS SOME OF THE MOST
ACCOMMODATING ABORTION LAWS AND
SERVICES IN THE NATION. ALREADY
IN CALIFORNIA. THE REPRODUCTIVE
PRIVACY ACT DECLARES THE
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO CHOOSE TO
BEAR A CHILD OR CHOOSE AND
OBTAIN AN ABORTION. THERE IS NO
LACK OF ABORTION ACCESS IN
CALIFORNIA. THE STATE ALREADY
FUNDS THROUGH FUNDS ABORTION
THROUGH TAX DOLLARS WITH OVER
400 FACILITIES, PERFORMING
ABORTION AND ABORTION OFFERED BY
NURSE PRACTITIONERS. NURSE
MIDWIVES PHYSICIAN ASSISTANCE.
VIA TELEHEALTH ON COLLEGE
CAMPUSES AND THROUGH A DOZEN
SOURCES BY MAIL. S C. A 10 IS
DANGEROUS. THE VAGUE LANGUAGE
CREATES A CONSTITUTIONALLY
PROTECTED RIGHT THAT IS NOT
ADEQUATELY DEFINED. MOST
CALIFORNIANS SUPPORT COMMON
SENSE LIMITS ON ABORTION, NOT
THE OPEN ENDED CREATION OF A NEW
RIGHT WITHOUT ANY OVERSIGHT OR
LIMITS FOR MINORS OR FOR
GESTATIONAL AGE OF THE FETUS. BY
PROVIDING EXTENSIVE FUNDING FOR
ABORTION SERVICES WITHOUT ANY
CORRESPONDING EQUITABLE FUNDING
FOR PREGNANT WOMEN AND MOTHERS.
THE STATE EXERCISES A
DESTRUCTIVE, COERCIVE POWER IN
FAVOR OF ENDING INNOCENT LIVES.
ENSHRINING THIS AMENDMENT
LANGUAGE INTO THE CONSTITUTION
WILL EXTEND THE DANGER OF
COERCIVE ABORTION. TWO BABIES
WITH UNQUESTIONED VIABILITY. THE
CALIFORNIA CATHOLIC CONFERENCE
IS ACTIVELY OPPOSING SB 8 10 AND
IS INSTEAD LOOKING TO PARTNER
WITH PEOPLE OF FAITH AND
GOODWILL WHO SUPPORT WOMEN,
CHILDREN AND FAMILIES. WE WORK
TO EXPAND PAID FAMILY LEAVE
PRIORITY HOUSING FOR PREGNANT
AND PARENTING, WOMEN, WORKPLACE
ACCOMMODATIONS AND OTHER SAFETY
NET SERVICES THAT ALLOW OUR MOST
VULNERABLE CALIFORNIA PARENTS.
TO SUCCESSFULLY RAISED CHILDREN
IN CALIFORNIA WITHOUT FEELING
PRESSURED INTO CHOOSING ABORTION
AS THEIR ONLY OPTION. PLEASE
VOTE NO ON C A 10. ALRIGHTY.
THANK YOU, MR MINGO. ALRIGHT. UH
NOW WE'LL TAKE OTHERS IN
OPPOSITION WHO ARE PRESENT IN
ROOM. 2100 APPROACHED THE
MICROPHONE. PROVIDE YOUR NAME
YOUR AFFILIATION IN YOUR
POSITION. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY
NAME IS HARRISON. I'M HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN COUNCIL
AND WE ARE IN OPPOSITION TO SEE
A 10. THANK YOU. GREG, BUT WITH
THE CALIFORNIA FAMILY COUNSELING
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU. LEANDRA
LEFT WITH CALIFORNIA FAMILY
COUNCIL. I OPPOSE THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. CARE MUELLER AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. CHAIR AND MEMBERS MILTON
MATT CHECK REPRESENTING PACIFIC
JUSTICE INSTITUTE CENTER FOR
PUBLIC POLICY. AND WE OPPOSE
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AH! LET'S
TURN NOW TO THE PHONES. MATTER
IF YOU WOULD QUEUE UP THOSE IN
OPPOSITION TO SEE A 10. TO THE
BIGGEST STATE, THEIR NAME THEIR
AFFILIATION IN THEIR POSITION.
THANK YOU TO SPEAKING OF
POSITION, PLEASE PRESS ONE AND
ZERO. AND WE'LL START WITH LINE.
2 12, PLEASE GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY
THEY REMOVED THEMSELVES TO 12.
IF YOU STILL WISH TO SPEAK,
PLEASE PRESS ONE AND ZERO AGAIN.
WE'LL GO TO LINE 205, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI. MY NAME IS HOCA
VETTORI'S I'M A STUDENT AT UC
BERKELEY. AND I'M ALSO PART OF
PRO LIFE. SAN FRANCISCO AND I
OPPOSED THE BILL. THANK YOU.
NEXT WAY OF LINE TO 11. PLEASE
GO AHEAD. PENNY HARRINGTON FROM
SANYO COUNTY STRONGLY OPPOSED.
THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE LINED 1
98, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THIS IS
TONY ROBLES WITH CAPITAL
RESOURCE INSTITUTE IN
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU NEXT YEAR
OF LINE. 204, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD AFTERNOON JENELLE UPON A
MOTHER OF THREE IN STRONG
OPPOSITION. THANK YOU TWO. OH,
ONE. PLEASE GO AHEAD. MY NAME IS
ROBERT BYRD DISTRICT 11
RESIDENTS. AND ORGANIZER WITH
PRO LIFE SAN FRANCISCO AND I
URGE YOU TO VOTE NO. ON SCHNUR.
THANK YOU. NEXT WAVE LINE TO 15.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. MY NAME IS
RAQUEL HOGAN FROM OVERSIGHT
COUNTY. I REPRESENT CATHOLIC
FAMILIES FOR FREEDOM AND WE
STRONGLY OPPOSE. THANK YOU. NEXT
WAVE LINE TO 17. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M
SORRY. I'M IN SUPPORT. UM I'M
FROM THE NATIONALS ASSOCIATION
OF SOCIAL WORKERS. CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER DILLONLIAM SHAPE AND WE
STRONGLY UPPORT THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANKS FOR
YOUR BLANK TO 14. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. 23-14. GO AHEAD. MY NAME
IS BONNIE WENT SLOW. I AM TIRED
. RN 50 PLUS YEARS IN THE
MEDICINE FIELD. AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSED THE BILL FOR MEDICAL
REASONS. 24 THANK YOU VERY MUCH
. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE LINED
TO SEVEN. PLEASE GO AHEAD. MY
NAME IS WILL CHRIS BORGHESE? I'M
WITH PELLETS. SAN FRANCISCO AND
I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS FILM.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WAY
OF LINE TO 20. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
HELLO MY NAME IS MARSHALL A
BUTLER, MY BRAND NEW MOTHER OF
ONE AND FROM OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA
AND I'M AFFILIATED WITH
FRANCISCO FOR LIFE AND I OPPOSE
THIS BILL. THAN YOU. THANK YOU
. WE HAVE LINE TO 10. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. YES MY NAME IS TERESA
BRENNAN. AND I'M THE PRESIDENT
AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
RIGHT TO LIFE SLEEK AND WE
STRONGLY OPPOSED THIS AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU. THANKS FOR EVELYN 1.
60, PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES. MY
NAME IS LINDA FLEMING. I'M WITH
ANGLICANS FOR LIFE, AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS.
LEGISLATION. THANK YOU. NEXT
LINE TO 24. PLEASE GO AHEAD. MY
NAME IS EILEEN O'NEAL WITH 40
DAYS FOR LIFE. FROM DANVILLE,
CALIFORNIA. I STRONGLY OPPOSED.
THANK YOU. AND THAT IS ALL THAT
I HAVE IN QUÊ. ONE MOMENT LINE.
202 PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES THANK
YOU. MY NAME IS PRESIDENT TURNER
. I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
BULLETIN FRANCISCO. I'M A
LIFELONG CALIFORNIA AND I'M AN
ATHEIST FEMINIST. AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSED FDA TAN THANK YOU. AND
THAT IS NOW THE LAST I HAD IN. Q
ALRIGHT, MODERATE. CAN YOU DO
ONE LAST CHECK AND THEN WE'LL
CLOSE OUT THE OPPOSITION COMMENT
TELEPHONICALLY. THANK YOU,
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ONCE AGAIN
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION, PLEASE PRESS 10 ON
YOUR PHONE. ALL RIGHT MOMENT
WHILE WE GET THE LINE NUMBER.
MADAM MORODER. IS THERE ANYBODY
ELSE ON THE LINE? I HAVE THREE
ON THE LINE HERE VERSUS LINE TO
25. PLEASE GO AHEAD. PLANE TO
20. 9 TO 25. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
HELLO. MY NAME IS DAPHNE HEWITT.%
I'M A RESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA AND
I REPRESENT CATHOLIC FAMILIES
FOR FREEDOM, CALIFORNIA AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSED THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. NEXT WAVE LINE TO 26.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO MY NAME
IS SHERRY FOSTER BERRY. I'M A
CATHOLIC AND A MOTHER AND I
STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS BILL. THANK
YOU. NEXT WE HAVE LINE 1 85,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO MY NAME
IS TRICIA AB ANNOUNCING A. I'M
WITH CORONA. RACHEL, OUR LOVE
LIFE I WAS WITH RIGHT TO LIFE IN
THE EIGHTIES AND I STRONGLY
OPPOSE THIS BILL. IT WILL
DESTROY LIKE YOU. AND NEXT WE
HAVE LINE TO 23. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HELLO. HELLO. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. HELLO. THANK YOU. MY
NAME IS DEBBIE MUNTER. I'M A
NURSING MESSAGES. CATHOLIC. AND
I STRONGLY OPPOSED THIS BILL.
IT'S WRONG. THANK YOU. AND THAT
IS ALL WE HAVE IN KUNA. UM OUR
FEARLESS LEADER HAS RETURNED IN
THE GAVEL HAS BEEN RETURNED TO
HIM. ALREADY THANK YOU. SENATOR
BORDERS, MR VICE CHAIR. AH I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO
AND VOTE AND VETS COMMITTEE.
ALRIGHT NEXT WE'LL BRING IT BACK
TO THE COMMITTEE QUESTIONS OF
THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I SEE
SENATOR GONZALEZ SENATOR
GONZALEZ, THEN SENATOR WIENER.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I JUST WANT
TO THANK WHOLEHEARTEDLY ARE PRO
TEM, THE SPEAKER IN THE ASSEMBLY
FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. UM I
THINK YOU KNOW, HEARD A LOT OF
DEBATE ON THIS REALLY BOGGLES MY
MIND THAT WE'RE STILL HAVING
THESE DISCUSSIONS IN 2022. AND
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS ISSUE,
IT'S NOT ABORTIONIST. WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT WOMEN AND PREGNANT
PEOPLE IN CALIFORNIA. IT'S NOT
AN INDUSTRY THEIR HEALTHCARE
PROVIDERS. AND WE'RE SAFE HAVEN
. WE'VE ALREADY ANNOUNCED
OURSELVES AS A SAFE HAVEN IN
CALIFORNIA TO ENSURE THAT
EVERYONE HAS ACCESS AND IT PAINS
ME TO KNOW THAT PEOPLE OF COLOR
IN PARTICULAR HAVE BORE THE
BURDEN OF HEALTHCARE AND
EQUITIES, AND ESPECIALLY WITH
ABORTION RESTRICTIONS. SO
ENABLING THIS CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT TO MOVE FORWARD NOT
ONLY ALLOWS PEOPLE OF COLOR HERE
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WOMEN
IN PREGNANT PEOPLE OF ALL
DIFFERENT COLORS AND ORIGINS TO
BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS BUT
PEOPLE ACROSS THE COUNTRY THIS
IS A BOLD STATEMENT. AGAIN. I
WANT TO THANK OUR PRO TEM FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I WILL
CONTINUE TO SUPPORT LEGISLATION
LIKE THIS. AND I WANT TO THANK
OUR STAKEHOLDERS FOR BEING HERE
AS WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SENATOR GONZALEZ. ALRIGHT,
CENTER WIENER. MAYBE THEY CAN
TURN THAT OFF. SPEAK UP AHEAD.
CENTER WIENER. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIRMAN. I ALSO WANT TO THANK
MADAM PRO TEM AND MR SPEAKER
FOR, UH, FOR BRINGING THIS
IMPORTANT MEASURE FORWARD, I
THINK GIVEN THE DISASTER. THE
TRAIN WRECK THAT SEEMS TO BE
UNFOLDING AND THE U. S. SUPREME
COURT. CALIFORNIA NEEDS TO ACT
NOW THIS YEAR, NOT NEXT YEAR
NOW. TO MAKE CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT
WE VALUE REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE
THAT WE VALUE THE CIVIL RIGHTS
OF MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. UH
AND THIS WILL MOVE US IN THAT
DIRECTION. SO I'M REALLY
APPRECIATIVE FOR THE QUICK
LEADERSHIP IN RESPONSE TO PART
TWO. WHAT'S HAPPENING? NDC YOU
KNOW, I ALSO, UM WANTED TO SAY
THAT I WISH THAT SOME LEADERS.
IN THE ANTI ABORTION MOVEMENT.
WOULD SPEND LESS TIME TRYING TO
MICROMANAGE PEOPLE'S
REPRODUCTIVE CHOICES. AND MORE
TIME DOING THINGS LIKE ENSURING
THAT ALL CHILDREN HAVE
NUTRITIOUS FOOD AND THAT
CHILDREN CAN ATTEND SCHOOL
WITHOUT BEING SHOT UP BY WEAPONS
OF WAR. UNFORTUNATELY AND THIS
IS NOT TRUE OF EVERYONE IN THE
ANTI ABORTION MOVEMENT. BUT TOO
FAR TOO MANY OF THE MOST VOCAL
LEADERS AND PARTICULARLY ON THE
POLITICAL ARENA, WHO ARE DOING
EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER. TO
BAN ABORTION. OR THE SAME
PEOPLE. WHO HAVE WORKED FOR
YEARS IN CONGRESS. TO DENY
ACCESS TO FOOD BENEFITS. WHICH
WE KNOW THAT WHEN YOU REDUCE
FOOD BENEFITS, IT'S CHILDREN.
THAT SUFFER THE MOST THE SAME
PEOPLE. THE SAME PEOPLE WHO HAVE
BEEN WORKING FOR YEARS TO DENY
ACCESS TO ABORTION OR SOME OF
THE SAME PEOPLE WHO'VE BEEN
MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE. TO HAVE
MEANINGFUL GUN SAFETY REFORMS SO
THAT THOSE SAME SO CHILDREN CAN
GO TO SCHOOL. WITHOUT HAVING TO
BE CONCERNED THAT SOMEONE'S
GOING TO WALK INTO THE
CLASSROOM. AND SHOOT THEM.
UNFORTUNATELY TOO MANY OF THESE
LEADERS APPEAR TO BE TOO BUSY
HAVING MORAL PANIC ABOUT DRAG
QUEENS STORY HOUR OR TRANS KIDS
PLAYING SPORTS. BEEN ACTUALLY
MAKING SURE THAT THESE CHILDREN
HAVE FOOD AND CAN GO TO SCHOOL
SAFELY. AND SO I JUST WANT TO
SAY THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE
HEALTH AND SAFETY AND VITALITY
OF OUR CHILDREN. AND I HOPE THAT
WE CAN DO THAT, UM AND STOP WITH
THIS MICROMANAGEMENT. OF
PEOPLE'S VERY PERSONAL
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CHOICES, SO
I'M HAPPY TO MOVE THE BILL.
THANK YOU, SENATOR. WIENER.
ALRIGHT CONSIDER WIECKOWSKI.
THANK YOU, MR. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. I HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE
I WANT TO BE SURE. THAT
EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S IN
FRONT OF US, AND WE'RE THE STATE
OF THE LAW IS IN CALIFORNIA.
SOMETIMES I FEEL LIKE AN EIGHTH
GRADE CIVICS TEACHER BECAUSE
PAGE SEVEN OF OUR STAFF REPORT
LAYS OUT SORT OF THE 53 YEAR
HISTORY OF CALIFORNIA. WE IN
PEOPLE VERSUS BILLOWS. WE
RECOGNIZE A WOMAN'S FUNDAMENTAL
RIGHT TO HAVE AN ABORTION AN
THAT WAS A JUDICIAL DECISION
THAT WAS MADE 53 YEARS AGO. WE
THEN CODIFIED THAT IN THE UM,
REPRODUCTIVE PRIVACY ACT THAT
BECAME A STATE LAW AND AS THE
OPPOSITION HAS POINTED OUT, WE
CAN EITHER GIVE MORE ACCESS TO
THAT PROVIDE MORE FUNDING AND
CHANGE THOSE STATE LAWS. AND
THEN WE KNOW THAT GOVERNOR
NEWSOM IN 2019 MADE AN EXECUTIVE
ORDER THAT SAID, AS LONG AS I'M
GOVERNOR, I'M GOING. WE HAVE A
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT. AND WHAT PART
OF AND I THOUGHT THE OPPOSITION
WAS WAS ELOQUENT BECAUSE THEY
TALKED ABOUT THOSE STATUTORY AND
JUDICIAL DECISIONS THAT CAN BE
CHANGED BY DIFFERENT CHORD OR BY
A DIFFERENT LEGISLATURE. AND I'M
DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE ALITO
DECISION WILL HAVE ANY EFFECT ON
THE CALIFORNIA LAW AS IT IS
RIGHT NOW. IT ALLOWS STATES TO
CHANGE IT AND SAY ROE V. WADE IS
NOW LONGER TO STATE, THIS STATE
OF THE LAW. OR IN BUT IF WE
DIDN'T DO ANYTHING, CALIFORNIA
ALONG WITH STILL BE AS IT IS.
BUT THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT AND ONE OF THE
OPPOSITION POINTED OUT THAT THEY
THOUGHT THAT CURRENTLY WE HAVE A
PRIVATE RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN THIS
IN THIS CALIFORNIA STATUTE, WE
TALKED ABOUT THAT ALL THE TIME,
AND THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT
THIS. DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL
PROTECTION THEY'RE GUARANTEED TO
INDIVIDUALS. AND THAT THEY
SOMEHOW THAT THE STATUTORY AND
JUDICIAL AND EXECUTIVE LAWS WERE
SUBORDINATE RIGHTS, EVEN THOUGH
WE PROCLAIMED IT AS A STATUTORY
UM, AS A PROTECTION AND BUT WE
DIDN'T EXPLICITLY SAY THE RIGHT
TO PRIVACY INCLUDES THE RIGHT
FOR A WOMAN TO HAVE REPRODUCTIVE
RIGHTS. SO AYE. MY UNDERSTANDING
THAT IF WE DO THIS IF WE MOVE
THIS STATUE CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT AND EXPLICITLY SAY
THAT THE WOMAN HAS A FUNDAMENTAL
CUT PRIVACY BUT REPRODUCTIVE
RIGHTS. THEN WHAT WE'RE DOING IS
PROTECTING THAT WOMAN'S RIGHT
FROM SUBSEQUENT CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURES AND CALIFORNIA
GOVERNORS AND CALIFORNIA SUPREME
COURTS THAT MAY WANT TO SAY THAT
OH, NO, THIS IS JUST SOME
EXECUTIVE ORDER THAT THE GUY
MADE 1920 19 OR A STATUTE. IS
THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING? SENATOR
ATKINS. I'M SO PROUD TO BE
LOOKING AT A JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
OF EIGHT ATTORNEYS ASKING THE
NON ATTORNEY BUT THAT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING. I THOUGHT THE
REPORT LAID IT OUT WELL. AND WE
HAVE AN ATTORNEY ON THE LINE. A
CONSTITUTIONAL ATTORNEY. THAT IS
MY UNDERSTANDING. UM WELL, SAID.
LET ME JUST SPEAK FOR AN AVERAGE
WOMAN WHO HAS WORKED IN THIS
FIGHT FOR ALL WELL, 40 YEARS OF
MY 60 YEARS ON THIS EARTH AS A
WOMAN I'M GLAD THERE ARE
ATTORNEYS THAT CAN OPEN AND TELL
US THIS. I WANT TO KNOW FOR
SURE. I WANT TO KNOW FOR SURE.
THAT THAT RIGHT IS PROTECTED,
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS IS
TODAY THAT WE ARE PROTECTING
OURSELVES FROM FUTURE COURTS.
AND FUTURE. UM POLITICIANS IF
YOU WILL. AND SO WE THINK THIS
IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. AND AS
AN INDIVIDUAL WOMAN WHO HAS
FACED THIS WITH FRIENDS AND
FAMILY. UM THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE
, AND THAT'S WHY I'M DOING THIS
AND I'M GLAD THAT WE HAVE ALL OF
YOU GREAT ATTORNEYS TO ADVISE
US. MR CHAIR. IT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING OF THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS THAT
SHOULD THIS MEASURE MOVE FROM
HERE AND ON THE FLOOR. THEN IT
WOULD GO TO A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE
WHO WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY WEIGH IN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
LIVING IN CALIFORNIA IN 2022,
WHETHER THEY AGREE WITH THE
LEGISLATURE ON THIS
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. IF
THAT, IF THE IF THE AUTHOR COULD
ANSWER THAT. IT'S JUST GOING TO
A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE. IT IS
SENATOR AND I'M GRATEFUL THAT IT
IS THIS IS THIS IS A VERY
IMPORTANT ISSUE, WHICH IS WHY
IT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
WE WANT. THE VOTERS IN
CALIFORNIA TO REAFFIRM THAT THEY
BELIEVE EXACTLY THIS AND THAT IT
WILL CONTINUE TO BE A RIGHT IN
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT
, SENATOR BORDERS THEN. AH,
SENATOR HERZBERG, THEN SENATOR
LARRY. THANK YOU. THIS IS A
REALLY INTERESTING QUESTION.
BECAUSE IT'S CONSTITUTIONAL
QUESTION. IT'S YOU KNOW, WE'VE
HEARD FOLKS DISCUSSES ON MORAL
GROUNDS WE'VE HEARD DISCUSSED ON
POLITICAL GROUNDS. BUT HERE IN
JUDICIARY, THIS IS ILLEGAL
ISSUE. THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE.
AND THE REASON WHY I FIND IT.
INTERESTING. IS BECAUSE AS FAR
AS I'M AWARE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION AND IN SOME
INSTANCES, THE NATIONAL
CONSTITUTION WE DO NOT HAVE A
RIGHT EUTHANASIA. WE DO NOT HAVE
A RIGHT TO FOOD. DO NOT HAVE A
RIGHT TO HEALTH CARE. AND WE DID
NOT HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT
TO UNIVERSITY EDUCATION. SO I
THINK WHAT WE'RE ASKING
OURSELVES HERE. ARE WE ELEVATING
ONE PARTICULAR ISSUE? WHEN OTHER
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS. ACKNOWLEDGED
BY THE U. N AND THE GLOBAL
COMMUNITY GLOBAL COMMUNITY. IF
THEY HAVE NOT ELEVATED THIS.
WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH
HERE? AND I KNOW THAT THE
NATIONAL DEBATE HAS CREATED AN
ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF CONTROVERSY
OVER THIS ISSUE. BUT I DIDN'T
KNOW IF THE AUTHOR WISHED TO
COMMENT ON IF WE DON'T HAVE THE
RIGHT TO DIE. OR TO FOOD.
COLLEGE EDUCATION OR HEALTHCARE.
DOES IT SEEM LIKE WE'RE MISS
PRIORITIZING WHAT SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED A CONSTITUTIONAL
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT IN CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. I
KNOW THAT THERE ARE COLLEAGUES
THAT WORK TO ENSHRINE ALL KINDS
OF RIGHTS THE RIGHT TO DIE WITH
DIGNITY. THAT'S BEEN A PIECE OF
LEGISLATION HERE RIGHT TO FOOD,
THE RIGHT TO HOUSING. WE DEBATE
THESE THINGS ALL THE TIME IN THE
LEGISLATURE, AND WE WOULD
ELEVATE ANY OF THESE ISSUES,
FOOD SECURITY, THE RIGHT TO
EDUCATION. THERE ARE ANY NUMBER
OF US THAT WOULD ELEVATE THOSE
RIGHTS AND ENSHRINE IT IN OUR
CONSTITUTION. I BELIEVE IF WE
COULD, AND WE COULD GET THE
VOTES AND PUT THIS BEFORE THE
PEOPLE. ON THIS ISSUE. THIS HAS
BEEN A RIGHT THAT WE HAVE
ENJOYED FOR 50 YEARS AND TO
QUOTE ONE OF THE SPEAKERS. AN
EASY ANSWER TO A COMPLEX
PROBLEM. HARDLY THIS IS NOT
EASY. THIS IS NOT AN EASY OPTION
THAT PEOPLE CHOOSE, BUT IT
SHOULD BE. I PERCEIVE THIS AS A
CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE FOR PREGNANT
PEOPLE AND WOMEN. WHO SHOULD
HAVE THE OPTION. TO MAKE THE
CHOICE OF WHETHER TO UM, MOVE
FORWARD AND HAVE A FAMILY AND
HAVE A CHILD OR TO MAKE THE
DECISION. THE DECISION NOT TO
AND IT HAS BEEN IN OUR
CONSTITUTION AND SEEING THAT WAY
, INTERPRETED THAT WAY UNDER THE
RIGHT TO PRIVACY FOR 53 YEARS.
NOW IT'S BEING THREATENED TO BE
TAKEN AWAY. VERY LIKELY WILL BE
. AND SO IT'S URGENT THAT WE DO
THIS NOW NOT TO TAKE A RIGHT
AWAY THAT PEOPLE FOUGHT TO GAIN.
SO IF YOU'RE ASKING ME IF I
ELEVATE THIS ABOVE OTHER THINGS
, I DON'T PRIORITIZE. I THINK
MANY ISSUES ARE IMPORTANT. THIS
ONE IS UNDER ATTACK. RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S WHY THIS ISSUE IS BEFORE
US NOW. I APPRECIATE. I
APPRECIATE THAT. THOSE COMMENTS
I THINK NO ONE IS UNDER ANY
IMPRESSION THAT CALIFORNIA AH,
LEGISLATION IS UNDER THREAT IN
THIS DOMAIN. I THINK WE ARE
STAND ALONE. UH, STATE AS A
LEADER IN THIS IN THIS SPACE,
UH, ACKNOWLEDGING, UM ROE V.
WADE AND THE PROTECTIONS THAT
HAVE GONE ALONG WITH THAT. UM,
I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT AS I
MENTIONED THAT WE ARE
UNNECESSARILY TAKING THIS ISSUE.
AND INCORPORATING INTO THE
SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT DOCUMENT
THAT WE HAVE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. WHEN I WOULD SUBMIT
TO YOU AND TO OTHERS THAT IF WE
WERE TO DEVISE A CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE
THE OTHER ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS.
OF OUR. OF OUR OF OUR HUMAN
CONDITION BE RESPECTED AS WELL,
INCLUDING EDUCATION, HEALTH
CARE. FOOD AND WATER. UM AND I
THINK TO IGNORE THAT, I THINK IS
MISSING AN OPPORTUNITY. UM BUT I
WILL SAY THIS I HAVE A LONG
TRACK RECORD AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.
I END AT THE STATE LEVEL, EVEN
ON ISSUES THAT I MAY DISAGREE
WITH. IF IT IS BEING SUBMITTED
TO THE VOTERS. LIKE CALIFORNIANS
DECIDE. AND I THINK THAT IS
ULTIMATELY WHERE THIS HAS TO GO.
AND LET CALIFORNIANS DICTATE THE
WAY THAT CALIFORNIA UH, LAWS AND
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITIES BE
WRITTEN. THANK YOU, SENATOR.
GORGEOUS SENATE, HERTZBERG. I
STARTED OUT. I APOLOGIZE. MADAM
PRO TEM AND MR CHAIR. IF THE
EXTENT I SAY SOMETHING STUPID
NATIVE BECAUSE I WAS JUGGLING A
BUNCH OF OTHER COMMITTEES. I'M
SO SORRY ABOUT THAT. BUT YOU
KNOW, WE HAVE SO MANY COMPLEX
DOCUMENTS BEFORE US ALL THE
TIME. IN LAWS THAT ARE PAGES AND
PAGES WITH CROSS REFERENCES AND
THAT EVEN THOUGH I'VE BEEN A
LAWYER FOR A LONG TIME, HALF THE
TIME I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY
MEAN. THIS IS PRETTY CLEAR. IT'S
BASICALLY ONE SENTENCE AND I
WANT TO READ IT. I WANT TO READ
INTO THE RECORD. THE STATE SHALL
NOT DENY OR INTERFERE WITH AN
INDIVIDUAL'S REPRODUCTIVE
FREEDOM. IN THEIR MOST INTIMATE
DECISIONS, WHICH INCLUDES THEIR
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO CHOOSE TO
HAVE AN ABORTION AND THEIR
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO CHOOSE OR
REFUSE CONTRACEPTIVES. IT'S
BASICALLY ONE SENTENCE.
CONSTITUTIONS ARE ABOUT ONE
SENTENCES IN BASIC PRINCIPLES OF
WHO WE ARE AS A SOCIETY. I DO
THINK THAT WHERE WE HAVE HAD, AS
THE AUTHOR HAS ARTICULATED. A
WHAT THE RULE OF LAW HAS BEEN
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND FOR
CALIFORNIA'S SENATOR, MAKOWSKI
SAID. AS A RESULT OF OCCASION,
69 AS A RESULT OF ALL THESE
INTERPRETATIONS AS TO RESULT OF
WHAT THE IDEA OF THE RIGHT OF
PRIVACY MEANS RIGHT OF PRIVACY,
NOT THE CONSTITUTION. IT WAS
UNDER THE NUMBER OF THE BILL OF
RIGHTS, AS DEFINED IN THE
GRISWOLD GATES BY JUSTICE
WILLIAM DOUGLAS. DIDN'T EXIST.
AND SO THE MESSAGE HERE, AND IT
IS, AS YOU SUGGESTED SENATOR
WIECKOWSKI THAT WE'RE TAKING
THIS TO THE VOTERS THAT WE HAVE
TO MAKE THIS IRONCLAD THAT THERE
CANNOT BE A DOUBT THERE CANNOT
BE ANY COURT JUDGE OR JUSTICE OR
ANYBODY ELSE OR ANY ELECTED
OFFICIAL THAT FUNDAMENTALLY
CHANGES THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE
THAT WILL BE ON THE BALLOT. SO I
JUST WANTED TO JOIN IN.
OBVIOUSLY IN SUPPORTERS IT CO
AUTHOR OF THIS MEASURE, BUT ALSO
TO MAKE THE POINT IN THE
SIMPLEST TERMS ABOUT WHAT IT
SAYS IT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT'S
COMPLICATED, AND IT IS SOMETHING
THAT JUST IN ITS MOST
FUNDAMENTAL SENSE, JUST
REAFFIRMED HIS ALWAYS BEEN THE
LAW OF THE LAND SINCE MOST OF MY
LIFE AND I WOULD ASK FOR AN I
VOTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND
THANK YOU FOR INTRODUCING THIS
MEASUREMENT IN PRO TEM ALONG
WITH THE SPEAKER OF THE
ASSEMBLY. ALRIGHTY. THANK YOU,
SENATOR HERTZBERG. SENATOR
LAIRD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR
CHAIR. IF YOU MM. LOOK AT
TODAY'S NEWSPAPERS WHERE IT SAYS
WHAT HAPPENED ON THIS DATE 55
YEARS AGO TODAY RONALD REAGAN
SIGNED. THE FIRST ABORTION LAW
IN CALIFORNIA 55 YEARS AGO.
TODAY IT WAS A DEMOCRATIC AH
LEGISLATURE AND A REPUBLICAN
GOVERNOR. AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT, AND SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES
HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS THE
PROGRESSION. WHEN I WAS IN THE
ASSEMBLY. THERE WAS A THREAT ON
ROE V. WADE AH, WITH THE GEORGE
BUSH COURT. AND AS A RESULT,
SENATOR SHEILA KUEHL RECOGNIZED
THAT THE LAW THAT WAS IN PLACE
WAS THE LAW THAT WAS SIGNED BY
RONALD REAGAN. AND SO THE
LEGISLATURE ENACTED A DEMOCRATIC
LEGISLATURE AND A REPUBLICAN
GOVERNOR SIGNED AND UPDATE TO
THAT LAW THAT BROUGHT IT MORE
INTO WHERE WE ARE NOW. WITH
REPRODUCTIVE PRACTICES. AND IF
YOU LOOK AT WHERE WE ARE THIS
MOMENT UM, YES, THIS IS A RIGHT
THAT MIGHT BE ENSHRINED IN THE
CONSTITUTION, BUT WE HAVE BY
STATUTE SAID THE RIGHT TO DIE
AND IT IS SURVIVED THE QUARTET
EST. IT IS NOT AT RISK. WE HAVE
SAID BY STATUTE THE RIGHT TO
CLEAN WATER AND THAT HAS NOT
BEEN CHALLENGED AND IS NOT
SUBJECT TO IT RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE
THE RIGHT TO NON DISCRIMINATION
AND THAT SURVIVED THINGS AND IT
HAS NOT BEEN ENSHRINED IN THE
CONSTITUTION AND YET RIGHT NOW
CIRCUMSTANCE THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN
ELEVATED. NOT BY US. IT'S BEEN
ELEVATED BY CIRCUMSTANCE.
BECAUSE THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY IS
NOT ENOUGH TO THE FEDERAL
SUPREME COURT. AND IF YOU LOOK
AT THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY HERE,
WHICH IS GUARANTEED THIS
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WOULD
MAKE SURE THAT THAT IT IS MORE
THAN THAT IN PROTECTING THIS
RIGHT? SO I THINK THE ONE
ADDITIONAL THING TO SAY HE IS
THAT AS SOMEBODY THAT WAS VERY
ACTIVE AT THE OUTBREAK OF AIDS
AND HIV THERE WEREN'T MANY
PEOPLE STANDING WITH US WHEN
THAT HAPPENED, AS A MATTER OF
FACT, IS SOMETHING LIKE 37 OR
38. YEARS AGO, SOMEBODY WAS
FIRED. IN SANTA CRUZ FOR
VOLUNTEERING AT THE AIDS SERVICE
AGENCY, WHERE I WAS ONE OF THE
FOUNDERS AND EVENTUALLY AN
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AND ABOUT
THE ONLY ORGANIZATION THAT STOOD
UP FOR US WHEN THAT HAPPENED.
WAS PLANNED PARENTHOOD. AND I
THINK MANY OF US FROM THAT TIME.
RECOGNIZED THAT THE IMPORTANT
THING AND I AM SO HAPPY THAT THE
MEN ON THIS COMMITTEE HAVE
SPOKEN UP. BECAUSE IT IS PEOPLE
THAT AREN'T THE ONES THAT ARE
MOST IMMEDIATELY AT RISK THAT
NEED TO STAND WITH THOSE THAT
RISK IN A TIME OF CHALLENGE LIKE
THIS, AND SO THIS IS ABOUT
SENATOR WIECKOWSKI SAID. THIS IS
ABOUT LETTING THE PEOPLE DECIDE.
REALLY LETTING THE PEOPLE DECIDE
. WE BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE
ELEVATED. WE BELIEVE THIS
PROTECTION IS THERE, BUT IT'S
ABOUT PUTTING IT IN FRONT OF THE
PEOPLE AND LETTING THEM MAKE THE
ULTIMATE CHOICE OF THEY, AS THEY
HAVE HAD FOR EVERY SECTION OF
OUR CONSTITUTION. SO I REALLY
APPRECIATE THIS BEING BROUGHT TO
US. I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS
DEBATE AND LOOK FORWARD TO
VOTING I ON THIS CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT. ALRIGHT. OTHER YES.
SENATOR RUSSELL. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR, AND I ALSO THANK, UM, PRO
TEM AND SPEAKER FOR BRINGING
THIS FOURTH. THIS IS, UM YOU
KNOW, THE DECISION THAT A WOMAN
FACES AH! IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT,
SOMETIMES. BUT I SEE THIS AS A
HEALTH CARE ISSUE. AND THE RIGHT
TO CHOOSE. TO BE IN A POSITION
TO HAVE THE RESOURCES TO HAVE
EVERYTHING THAT YOU NEED TO
RAISE A FAMILY WHEN YOU WANT TO
RAISE A FAMILY. IN THE MOST
DIGNIFIED WAY. UM, AND
HEALTHCARE ACCESS IS PART OF THE
MOST ESSENTIAL THINGS THAT HUMAN
BEINGS NEED. 20% OF CALIFORNIANS
ARE LATINA WOMEN. SIGNIFICANT
NUMBER OF THEM ARE POOR. A
SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF THEM DON'T
HAVE THE RESOURCES THAT THEY
NEED, AND THEY DESERVE. THE UTNE
NOT BEFORE SOURCED. TO BE A
PARENT WHEN THEY DON'T WANT TO,
OR THEY CAN'T. THE ART TO BE
ABLE TO HAVE A CHILD. WHEN. THEY
CAN AND WHEN THEY WANT, AND TO
ME, THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT IS
PROTECTING THAT BASIC. RIGHT SO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM
PROTEST. THANK YOU, SENATOR.
ALSO OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS.
SEEING NONE. MADAM PRO TEM. YOU
CARE CLOSE VERY QUICKLY. I THINK
MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID A LOT OF
WONDERFUL THINGS. AND I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR THAT. UM I WANT TO
THANK PLANNED PARENTHOOD. ALL OF
THE SPONSORS. THE HEALTH
ADVOCATES THE FUTURE OF ABORTION
COUNCIL WHO UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS
AT STAKE. RIGHT YOU CAN HAVE.
BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE
SERVICES AVAILABLE TO YOU, IF
YOU DON'T HAVE THE PROVIDERS
AVAILABLE TO YOU, THEN IS IT
REALLY A WRITER? AN OPTION THAT
YOU HAVE? SO I REALLY WANT TO
THANK THEM FOR THE WORK THAT
THEY'VE DONE. I WANT TO THANK
THE DOCTORS IN PARTICULAR WHO
ARE ON THE FRONT LINES. DESPITE
THE OPPOSITION AND EMOTION
AROUND THIS ISSUE WHO CONTINUE
TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR THEIR
PATIENTS. REGARDLESS. SO I WANT
TO THANK YOU FOR THIS. THIS IS
VERY IMPORTANT. I WANT TO THANK
ALL OF YOU FOR SUPPORTING, UH,
THIS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
THAT WE CAN PUT BEFORE THE
PEOPLE AND THEY CAN REAFFIRM
THEIR BELIEF THAT THIS IS HEALTH
CARE, AND PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE
THIS RIGHT. I ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT AND YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU
, MADAM PRO TEM MADAM SECRETARY
. OH MOVED BY SENATOR WIENER. I
BELIEVE, UM MADAM SECRETARY, IF
YOU WOULD CALL THE ROLL. THE
MOTION IS BE ADOPTED. BUT FIRST
WE RE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE
ON ELECTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENTS. AMERICA. HAMBURG.
I'VE GORGEOUS. CABALLERO. THE
EURO. I DO RUSSELL LARA. SO I
GONZALES. GONZALEZ I HERZBERG
HERZBERG. I JONES JON SNOW,
LAIRD, I STERN STERN. I
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI. AYE
WIENER. WIENER? AYE. YOU HAVE 9
TO 1 WITH ALL MEMBERS HERE
ALREADY. THANK YOU, UM,
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, 10 IS
OUT. ALL RIGHT. AH! WE'RE GOING
TO COME BACK TO ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BY BAUER-KAHAN. AND NEXT WE HAVE
ITEM NUMBER FIVE A B 25 71. MHM.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
TODAY I AM PRESENTING A B 25 71
A BILL THAT PROTECTS
IMPRESSIONABLE CHILDREN FROM
DANGEROUS FIREARM
ADVERTISEMENTS. GUN VIOLENCE IS
AT ITS MOST DEVASTATING WHEN IT
THREATENS OUR CHILDREN IN 2021.
THERE WERE APPROXIMATELY 259
UNINTENTIONAL SHOOTINGS BY
CHILDREN, RESULTING IN 104
DEATHS AND 168 INJURIES. WEAPONS
USED BY CHILDREN HAVE PUT OTHER
CHILDREN AT RISK. 91% OF THE
VICTIMS IN THE SHOOTINGS BY
CHILDREN ARE ALSO CHILDREN,
OFTEN SIBLINGS. IN CALIFORNIA
GUN VIOLENCE IS THE THIRD
LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH FOR
CHILDREN AND TEENS. THE EPIDEMIC
OF DEADLY VIOLENCE IS FUELED BY
AN INDUSTRY THAT OCCURRED URGES
CHILDREN TO HOLD A GUN AS SOON
AS THEY CAN WALK. GUN
MANUFACTURERS. TARGETS ARE KIDS
WITH SLICK ADVERTISING,
INCLUDING CHILDREN'S BOOKS. THE
ADVERTISING FOR THESE WEAPONS IS
SHAMELESS CHILDREN IN CALIFORNIA
ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BUY A GUN.
AND YET THEY ARE ADVERTISED,
ADVERTISED TO ACROSS ALL FORMS
OF MEDIA WITH CARTOONS, VIDEO
GAMES AND SOCIAL MEDIA. MAYBE 25
71 WILL PROHIBIT A PERSON OR
ENTITY FROM PUBLISHING MATERIALS
THAT ADVERTISE OR MARKET,
FIREARMS OR WEAPONS TO ANYONE
UNDER THE AGE OF 18. THE BILL
WOULD ALLOW THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
DISTRICT OR COUNTY ATTORNEY OR
COUNTY COUNCIL TO BRING A CIVIL
ACTION AGAINST EACH VIOLATION
FOR UP TO $25,000 WITH ME TODAY
IN PERSON IS CRYSTAL LOBE. ALITO
FROM THE MOMS DEMAND ACTION AND
BY PHONE, ALEXA BROWNING FROM
MARCH FOR OUR LIVES. MS LABELLE
ITO. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
CRYSTAL, OPAL OTTO AND THE MOM
LIVING IN THE BAY AREA AND A
VOLUNTEER LEADER WITH THE
CALIFORNIA CHAPTER OF MOMS
DEMAND ACTION FOR GUN SENSE. IN
THAT ROLE I CONNECT WITH PARENTS
AND OTHER CONCERNED COMMUNITY
MEMBERS ALL AROUND THE STATE WHO
WANT TO SEE CALIFORNIA LEAD THE
WAY ON GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION.
I HAVE A DAUGHTER ENTERING
KINDERGARTEN THIS YEAR. THAT
MILESTONE BRINGS EXCITEMENT OVER
NEW FRIENDS AND NEW LEARNING
OPPORTUNITIES. BUT FOR PARENTS
RIGHT NOW, IT ALSO BRINGS NEW
WORRIES OVER HOW TO EXPLAIN
ACTIVE SHOOTER DRILLS AND HOW TO
EVENTUALLY EXPLAINED THAT
SOMETIMES KIDS WHO SHOULDN'T
HAVE ACCESS TO GUNS. DO YOU GET
ACCESS AND BRING THOSE DEADLY
WEAPONS TO SCHOOL? AS WE PLAN
FOR PLAYDATES AFTER RECORD
SPIKES AND NEW FIREARM PURCHASES
. PART OF MY JOB AS A MOM NOW
REQUIRES ASKING OTHER PARENTS,
WHETHER ANY FIREARMS THEY OWN
ARE STORED SECURELY. AND MAKING
SURE MY KID UNDERSTANDS THAT
GUNS ARE NOT TOYS WHEN SHE
VISITS FRIENDS AND FAMILY WHO
OWN FIREARMS. ADVERTISING GUNS
TO MINORS BY USING STUFFED
ANIMALS AND CARTOON CHARACTERS
COMPLICATES OUR ABILITY TO MAKE
THAT CLEAR DISTINCTION TO YOUNG
KIDS THAT GUNS ARE NOT TOYS.
THAT IMPORTANT MESSAGE IS
UNDERMINED WHEN THE STATE ALLOWS
GUNS TO BE ADVERTISED IN WAYS
DESIGNED TO APPEAL TO CHILDREN.
ALLUDING IN ONE INSTANCE WITH
THE USE OF A PACIFIER IN THE
LOGO. MAYBE 25 71 WOULD PROHIBIT
ADVERTISING, FIREARMS AND
MATERIALS DIRECTED TO CHILDREN
AND PROHIBIT PUBLICATION OF
FIREARMS ADVERTISEMENTS OR
MARKETING MATERIALS THAT ARE%
ATTRACTIVE TO MINORS ARE STATE
LAWS ALREADY ACKNOWLEDGED TWO
TRUTHS. ONE FIREARMS ARE
ESPECIALLY DANGEROUS IN THE
HANDS OF MINORS AND TWO WE HAVE
A RESPONSIBILITY TO REGULATE THE
MARKETING OF DANGEROUS PRODUCTS
TO MINORS. 25 71 BUILDS A BRIDGE
BETWEEN THOSE TWO CONCEPTS AND
CLOSES THE GAP IN OUR STATE LAW.
BY REGULATING THE MARKETING OF
FIREARMS TO CHILDREN. ALLOWING
FIREARM ADVERTISEMENTS THAT ARE
DESIGNED TO BE ATTRACTIVE TO
KIDS PROMOTES A GUNS EVERYWHERE
CULTURE THAT TRAGICALLY RESULTS
IN SOME KIDS GETTING ACCESS TO
GUNS AND HARMING THEMSELVES OR
OTHERS. WE SHOULDN'T ALLOW FOR
PROFIT COMPANIES TO INUNDATE OUR
KIDS WITH ADS SUGGESTING THAT
DEADLY WEAPONS ARE DESIRABLE. OY
WE URGE YOUR I VOTE ON TV 25 71
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM AND DO
WE HAVE, UM ALEX BROWNING ON THE
PHONE? YES. GO AHEAD. HELLO MY
NAME IS ALEXIA BROWNING AND I'M
ON THE POLICY TEAM AT MARCH FOR
ALLIES. MATERIALIZES FOUNDED IN
2018 AFTER THE TRAGIC SCHOOL
SHOOTING AT MARJORY STONEMAN
DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL IN PARKLAND
, FLORIDA ORGANIZATION IS YOUTH
DRIVEN, AND OUR GOAL IS TO
CREATE SAFE AND HEALTHY
COMMUNITIES. FOR GUN VIOLENCE IS
POLICE MARCH FOR OUR LIVES IS
UNEQUIVOCALLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. CURRENT LAWS, RESTRICT
CONTENT, PLACEMENT OF
ADVERTISING AND PROMOTIONAL
MARKETING FOR ALCOHOL, CANNABIS
AND TOBACCO IN ORDER FOR TO
PROTECT MINORS. THIS PREVENTS
POTENTIALLY HARMFUL SUBSTANCES.
FROM GETTING IN THE HANDS OF
YOUNG PEOPLE. IT'S TIME WE DO
THE SAME WHEN IT COMES TO
PROTECTING MINORS FROM GUN
GLORIFICATION. FIREARMS OF THE
LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH FOR
CHILDREN AND TEENS IN THE UNITED
STATES AND THE THIRD LEADING
CAUSE OF DEATH FOR CHILDREN AND
TEENS IN CALIFORNIA AT A VERY
EARLY AGE. YOUNG PEOPLE HAVE
BEEN FACED WITH SCHOOL SHOOTING
DRILLS, LOSING A LOVED ONE TO
DEATH BY FIREARMS AND ANXIOUSLY
LOOKING FOR EXITS AT CONCERTS
AND MOVIE THEATERS. YOUNG PEOPLE
ARE EXPERIENCING TRAUMA DUE TO
GUN VIOLENCE THAT'S UNIQUE AND
DEVASTATING TO OUR GENERATION.
MY GENERATION IS SICK AND TIRED
OF BEING AFRAID WERE SO FED UP
THAT THIS PAST SATURDAY, 450
PLUS MARCHES WERE HELD
APPROXIMATION TO CALL ON OUR
LEGISLATORS TO TAKE ACTION ON
GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
LEGISLATION JUST LIKE A B +2571.
HOWEVER DESPITE THE EVERY LIMIT
GUN VIOLENCE WE SEE FIREARM
MANUFACTURERS MARKETING TO
MINORS. WE'RE SEEING COMPANIES
COME OUT WITH THEIR 15 STYLE
GUNS FOR CHILDREN AND MARKETING
THEM TO MINORS BY INCLUDING-CARTOON CHARACTERS AND SAYING
THAT GUNS SHOOT, JUST LIKE MOM
AND DAD'S DONE. YET COMPLETELY.
THEY DISREGARD THE HARM THAT
FIREARMS CAN CAUSE TO YOUNG
PEOPLE. MARCH FOR LIFE PIECES
BILL AS A CHANCE TO HOLD THE GUN
INDUSTRY ACCOUNTABLE AND KEEP
YOUNG PEOPLE SAFE. CALIFORNIA IS
A LEADER WHEN IT COMES TO GUN
REFORM, AND WE SHOULD CONTINUE
TO SHOW THE REST OF THE COUNTRY
HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO RESTRICT
THE ADVERTISEMENT OF FIREARMS TO
MINORS BY PASSING A B 2571.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
OTHERS IN SUPPORT OF A B 25 71
THE PRESENT HERE IN THE
COMMITTEE ROOM. GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON, REBECCA MARCUS,
REPRESENTING THE BRADY CAMPAIGN
AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. OTHERS IN SUPPORT
HERE IN ROOM TWENTY ONE HUNDRED
SIX Ó. GO AHEAD. CASSANDRA WEB
STONE. I'M A VOLUNTEER WITH MOMS
DEMAND ACTION FROM FOLSOM AND
I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. EMILY ALL AMONG
DEMAND ACTION VOLUNTEER FROM
DAVIS AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE
HERE IN ROOM 2100 SEEING NO ONE
ELSE PRESENT. ALRIGHT, LET'S
TURN TO THE PHONE LINES FOR
THOSE IN SUPPORT OF A B 25 71
MODERATOR, IF YOU WOULD QUEUE
THEM UP, PLEASE. YES. IF YOU'RE
IN SUPPORT OF A B 25 71, PLEASE
PRESS ONE THAN ZERO. AND WE WILL
START WITH LINE TO 37. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND
MEMBERS NICOLE KENYANS ON BEHALF
OF EVERY TOWN FOR GUN SAFETY AND
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. NEXT LINE. 1 95, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. CHRIS MEYERS WITH THE
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION AND STRONG SUPPORT.
NEXT TO SIGN 2 39, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS
JIM LINDBERG ON BEHALF OF THE
FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION
TO CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXUS LINE.
1 62, PLEASE GO AHEAD. AND 1 62
YEAR MINUS OPEN. HI. GOOD
AFTERNOON. TURN MEMBERS JAVELIN
. COOPER FROM NIELSEN BIRK
SUMMER ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY
OF INDIEGOGO AND SUPPORT AND
CUTE. NEXT DESIGN. 17, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. YOU KNOW, AFTERNOON. MY
NAME IS DYLAN IN THE SHADE FROM
THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
SPECIAL WORKERS CHAPTER AND I'M
IN STRONG SUPPORT OF 25 71.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND NEXT
SLIDE. 1 73, PLEASE GO AHEAD. MY
NAME IS RAYMOND POLLUTION
CALLING FROM CLAREMONT, AND I'M
A VOLUNTEER WITH MOM DEMANDS
THEIR MOMS DEMAND ACTION AND
VERY TOWN FOR GUN SAFETY. AND
FAMILIAR. INTIMATELY THANK YOU,
SIR. NEXT PLACE. HELLO. THANK
YOU. OKAY. GOODBYE BUT WE HAVE
LINES. I WASN'T ABLE TO WAS
INTERRUPTED. I WASN'T ABLE TO
FINISH. YES THAT WAS INTENTIONAL
SUPPORTED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ALRIGHT. NEXT. THANK YOU. MIX OF
LINE 2 42, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
BLOOD WITH CAFFREY IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THAT
IS ALL THAT I HAVE BEEN QUÊ.
ALRIGHT LET'S NOW TURN TO
OPPOSITION. UM I'M I'M NOT AWARE
OF ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES WHO
ARE HERE OR WISH TO TESTIFY AND
PRIMARY OPPOSITION. IF ANYONE IS
IN OPPOSED TO A B 25 71 HERE IN
ROOM 2100 PLEASE APPROACH
MICROPHONE, SAYING NONE
MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD QUEUE UP
THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSED TO A B 25
71 ON THE PHONE. THAT WOULD BE
GREAT. THANK YOU IF YOU'RE
OPPOSED TO A B 25 71, PLEASE
PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO. AND ONE
MOMENT WHILE WE GET LINE
NUMBERS.
WE'LL START WITH THE LINE TO 38.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI. MY NAME IS
SAM PERATIS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF GUN OWNERS OF CALIFORNIA AND
ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL RIFLE
ASSOCIATION AND THE NATIONAL
SHOOTING SPORTS FOUNDATION. WE
ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THAT
IS ALL THAT I HADN'T QUÊ ALRIGHT
. BRING IT BACK NOW TO COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS BY COMMITTEE MEMBER
SENATOR BORDERS. SO I HAVE 22
LITTLE BOYS. UM AND I'M PAYING
ATTENTION. TO THESE THINGS MORE
THAN I THINK I DID BEFORE. AND
CERTAINLY MODERATOR 11 2ND
CENTERBOARD, JUST MODERATOR IF
YOU COULD CUT OFF THE PHONE LINE
YES, I AM TRYING, SIR. THANK YOU
. ALL RIGHT, SENATOR BOARD. JUST
GO AHEAD. AND, UH UM OBVIOUSLY
WHAT HAS HAPPENED, UH, WITH HIS
SCHOOL VIOLENCE HAS BROUGHT THIS
TO A HEAD. MAYBE YOU CAN WALK ME
THROUGH SOME OF THE BASICS,
THOUGH, BECAUSE I THINK THE IDEA
IS YOU WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND
RESPECT THE CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS? UM OF SPEECH. WE ALSO
NEED TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO
PROTECT PUBLIC SAFETY. THERE'S
ALWAYS A BALANCE WITH THAT. SO.
JUST KIND OF RAPID FIRE. DOES
THIS PERTAIN TO, UH RECREATIONAL
GUNS LIKE BB GUNS AND STUFF LIKE
THAT. MY MICHAEL. THERE WE GO.
YOU COULDN'T HEAR ME. UM O THIS
WOULD APPLY TO ALL, UM, GUNS
MANUFACTURED? I DON'T KNOW IF
WE'VE LOOKED AT THE QUESTION OF
BB GUNS. I HAVE BEEN ASKED THAT
QUESTION BEFORE CENTER FOR JUST
SO I'D HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT
THAT ADDED TO YOUR LIST. OKAY,
UM ALSO SO WE HAVE, UM, LAWFUL,
UM, ADVERTISEMENTS THAT AREN'T
SENSATIONALIZING, BUT OUR
ADVERTISING PRODUCTS, YOU KNOW,
LET'S SAY YOU HAVE YOU HAVE
YOUNG HUNTERS, FOR EXAMPLE.
WOULD WOULD THIS BE CONSIDERED
IN ADVERTISEMENT? THAT WOULD
FALL WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF
THIS OF THIS PIECE OF
LEGISLATION THAT WOULD DISALLOW
AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR LET'S SAY,
UM, SHOOTING RIFLE IF YOU'RE A
YOUNG HUNTER. SO IN CALIFORNIA
AS YOU I'M SURE WELL AWARE IS
INDIVIDUALS UNDER 18 CANNOT
PURCHASE MOST WEAPONS AS YOU
KNOW, RIGHT THOSE BUT THEY CAN
GET IT FROM, YOU KNOW.
INSTRUCTED WITH INSTRUCTIONS
RIGHT AND WE THIS DOES NOT
RELATE TO THE ADVERTISING OF AN
INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM IF YOU
WILL, RIGHT, SO I THINK MAYBE
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT.
BUT IF THEY WERE TO BE
ADVERTISING THE WEAPON TO A
CHILD THAT IT WOULD INCLUDE THAT
BUT NOT A PROGRAM, SO IT ONLY
APPLIES TO GUN MANUFACTURERS.
RIGHT LOGGED. IMAGINE YOU'RE YOU
HAVE A CATALOG LOOKING THROUGH
THE CATALOG. LET'S SAY IT'S A
HUNTER'S CATALOG. WHATEVER. AND
YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT, AND IT'S
CLEARLY A SMALL WINCHESTER RED
RIDER BY DATING MYSELF HERE
TALKING ABOUT, THOUGH I MUST BE
THE SAME CHRISTMAS STORY. YES
SOMETHING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THAT IS IN A CATALOG THAT THAT
APPLIES TO EVERYONE. MOSTLY
ADULT PURCHASERS, BUT IT COULD
BE VIEWED BY BY YOUNGSTERS.
THERE'S SOMETHING LIKE THAT FALL
WITHIN THIS, SO IF YOU LOOK AT
THE BILL, NOW THAT I UNDERSTAND
WHAT YOU'RE ASKING TRYING TO
YES, YES, YES, SO IT REALLY
REQUIRES WHEN LOOKING AT WHETHER
THE MARKETING OR ADVERTISING IS
TARGETED TO A CHILD RIGHT?
BECAUSE THERE'S ALSO THIS YOU
KNOW, I HAVE A 12 YEAR OLD
MYSELF RIGHT AND ADVERTISING
THAT IS TARGETED TO ME. HE'S
OFTEN ATTRACTED TO RIGHT. SO IF
THE BILL IS VERY CLEAR THAT IT
HAS TO USE CARICATURES. YOU KNOW
THAT REASONABLY APPEAR TO BE
MINORS OR CARTOON CHARACTERS
RIGHT? IT TALKS ABOUT OFFERING
STUFFED ANIMALS RIGHT, SO IT
REALLY DOES DELINEATE WHAT THE
COURTS ARE SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT,
UM, DEPICTIONS OF MINORS IN THE
ADVERTISING RIGHT? AND SO THAT
LIST THAT'S IN THE LEGISLATION
REALLY GIVES THE COORDINATOR
STANDING OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING
FOR, AND THESE ARE
ADVERTISEMENTS THAT WOULD BE
TARGETED DIRECTLY TO CHILDREN.
THAT WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THAT
IS TARGETED TO YOU. IF YOU WILL.
I MEAN, THESE ARE THE DELINEATED
STATUTE, I THINK IS CLEAR ON
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. OKAY
SO A JUNIOR OLYMPICS SPONSORED
AYE, ADVERTISEMENT THAT THAT
THAT IDENTIFIES, UM SHOOTING AS
ONE OF THE ONE OF THE OLYMPIC
EVENTS. DESIGNED TO BE READ BY
THAT AGE GROUP WOULD BE INCLUDED
IN THIS BECAUSE THE BILL ALSO
APPLIES. SORRY INTERACTED. YOU
GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD APPLIESTO
FIREARM INDUSTRY MEMBERS, WHICH
IS DEFINED AS MANUFACTURING,
DISTRIBUTION, IMPORTATION,
MARKETING, WHOLESALE OR RETAIL
SALE OF FIREARMS PRODUCTS, SO
THE SPECIAL OLYMPICS WOULD NOT
FALL UNDER THAT. OKAY, UM I AM
SHOCKED AT HOW VIDEO GAMES ARE
AND SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IS THAT
ALSO INCLUDED IN THIS BECAUSE
WOULD IT HAVE TO BE OF A
SUFFICIENT? LEVEL OF DETAIL SO
THAT A VIDEO GAME PLAYER COULD
ASSOCIATE A STYLE OF WEAPON. SO
AGAIN, THE BILL ONLY APPLIES TO
THE MANUFACTURER OR SOMEONE WHO
SELLS FIREARMS RIGHT, SO VIDEO
GAME MANUFACTURER WOULD NOT BE
CAPTURED IN THIS AT ALL. BUT IF
THEY IF IT WAS A VIDEO GAME MADE
BY A GUN MANUFACTURER THAT WAS
TARGETED TO CHILDREN, THEN ARE
THEY IF THEY ADVERTISED THEIR
SPECIFIC GUN IN THE GAME ITSELF?
YES THEN THAT WOULD QUALIFY,
OKAY? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU
ANSWERED YOUR QUESTIONS. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. OTHER COMMENTS
QUESTIONS. SEEING NONE. JUST ONE
COMMENT. I THINK FIREARM IS A
DEFINED TERM IN THE LAW. BUT IF
IT IS NOT A DEFINED TERM, UM
THEN THEN PERHAPS WE NEED TO
DEFINE IT. I DON'T BELIEVE
PELLET GUN OR AIR RIFLE OR THE
RED WRITER. WOULD FAULT WOULD.
WELL IT'S NOT NOT THAT THEY'RE
NOT DANGEROUS. IT'S ONLY THAT
THAT IF THE BILL FOCUSED ON
FIREARMS, THEN IF NOT A DEFINED
TERM THAT I WOULD SUGGEST WE DO
DEFINE AGREE, MR CHAIR, ALL
RIGHT. OH ALRIGHT. OKAY UM,
CHIEF COUNSEL TELLS ME IT IS IN
THE BILL. ALRIGHT GREAT. THANK
YOU. OKAY, UM ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS. CONCERNS COMMENTS. IS
THERE A MOTION SENATOR STERN
MOVES THE BILL. ALRIGHT, YOU
CARE TO CLOSE SIMILAR MEMBER
BARKAN RESPECTFULLY ASK YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ALRIGHT MADAM SECRETARY, IF YOU
WOULD CALL THE ROLL. THIS IS A B
25 71 HAMBURG. SORRY THE MOTION
IS DUE PASS BUT FIRST BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS. UMBERG GORGEOUS.
CABALLERO. CABALLERO, I DURAZO.
GONZALES. HERTZBERG. JONES.
JONES NO, LAIRD, I STERN STERN.
I WIECKOWSKI WIENER. I HAVE 41
SO FAR MISSING CALL. ALL RIGHT,
AND I BELIEVE YOU WERE GOING TO
PRESENT A B 2091 BY A SIMILAR
MEMBER ME A BAN TO ASSUME IT'S
MIA BANTA? YES. ROBIN HAS NO
LONGER ALLOWED LEGISLATION. UM
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I WANT TO
THANK ON BEHALF OF SOMEBODY
AROUND MONT. I WANT TO EXPRESS
HER APPRECIATION TO THE
COMMITTEE STAFF FOR YOUR TIME
WORKING ON THIS BILL. IN THE
PAST YEAR, MULTIPLE STATES HAVE
RAMPED UP THEIR ANTI ABORTION
EFFORTS AND PASSED LAWS
TARGETING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT TO AN ABORTION THAT'S
BEEN THE TOPIC OF CONVERSATION
ON MANY BILLS TODAY. LAST YEAR
ALONE, 108 ABORTION RESTRICTIONS
WERE ENACTED IN 19 STATES. THIS
INCLUDES TEXAS, WHERE THEY'RE
MOST RECENT ANTI ABORTION LAW
ENCOURAGES PRIVATE CITIZENS TO
ACT AS BOUNTY HUNTERS TO SEEK
OUT AND SUE THOSE WHO PROVIDE
ANY FORM OF SUPPORT TO PEOPLE
SEEKING AN ABORTION. INCLUDING
THEIR DOCTOR, THEIR NURSE, A
FRIEND WHO TALKED TO HIM ABOUT
WHETHER TO GET AN ABORTION OR
EVEN THE PERSON WHO DROVE THEM
TO THEIR APPOINTMENT. STATES ARE
CONTINUING TO FOLLOW TEXAS LEAD
JUST THIS PAST MONTH, OKLAHOMA'S
GOVERNOR SIGNED INTO LAW A BILL
THAT OUTRIGHT OUTRIGHT BANS
ABORTIONS AND LEAVES ENFORCEMENT
UP TO PRIVATE CITIZENS VIA CIVIL
SUITS. WITH THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT LIKELY TO OVERTURN
ROE V. WADE BY THE END OF JUNE.
IT'S ESSENTIAL THAT WE IMPROVE
ABORTION CCESS AND STRENGTHEN
PRIVACY PROTECTIONS FOR THOSE
SEEKING SENSITIVE SERVICES.
PEOPLE ALREADY ARE AND WILL
CONTINUE TO COME TO CALIFORNIA
FOR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE.
HOWEVER THE CONCERN IS THAT OUT
OF STATE, PRIVATE CITIZENS AND
ACTORS WILL DEMAND THE MEDICAL
RECORDS OF THOSE WHO SEEK CARE
HERE IN CALIFORNIA. TO PUNISH
THEM FOR EXERCISING THEIR
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN CALIFORNIA
. NO ONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO
MANIPULATE CALIFORNIA'S LEGAL
SYSTEM TO TARGET AND PUNISH
PEOPLE WHO SEEK CARE AND REFUGE
HERE. MAYBE 2091 WILL ENSURE
THAT OUT OF STATE SUBPOENAS,
WHICH SEEK INFORMATION RELATED
TO A PATIENT WHO RECEIVED
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE HERE IN
CALIFORNIA ARE NOT GRANTED. BY
DOING THIS. CALIFORNIA WILL
PROTECT THE MEDICAL PRIVACY OF
THOSE PATIENTS WHO MAY BE
TARGETED BY HOSTILE LAWS AND
OTHER STATES. A B 2091 ALSO
ENSURES THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF
INSURANCE CAN ENFORCE VIOLATIONS
OF THE RELEASE OF MEDICAL
RECORDS RELATED TO SENSITIVE
SERVICES. MAYBE 2091 CONTINUES
TO LEGISLATORS WORK OF
PROTECTING PRIVACY AND
CONFIDENTIALITY OF LGBTQ, PLUS
PEOPLE AND THEIR MEDICAL
INFORMATION. THE LGBTQ PLUS
COMMUNITY IS DIRECTLY IMPACTED
BY LAWS THAT UNDERMINE ABORTION
CARE, WHICH COMPOUND
LONGSTANDING BARRIERS TO
INCLUSIVE CARE AND EXACERBATE
NEGATIVE HEALTH DISPARITIES.
CALIFORNIA MUST PROACTIVELY
PROTECTCONFIDENTIALITY OF
MEDICAL RECORDS OF EVERYONE AS
WE SEE STATES AROUND THE COUNTRY
, PAVING THE WAY TO USE THOSE
RECORDS TO ENFORCE THEIR OWN
STATES. ANTI ABORTION LAWS. AS
WITNESSES TODAY I HAVE LEADS
LISA MATSUBARA WITH PLANNED
PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA, THE CO SPONSOR OF
THE BILL. ALREADY. THANK YOU,
MISS MATSUBARA. GOOD AFTERNOON,
CHAIRPERSON ON BERRIEN MEMBERS
AT LEAST AMOUNT TO BORROW FROM
PLANNED PARENTHOOD AFFILIATES OF
CALIFORNIA, REPRESENTING THE
SEVEN AFFILIATES IN THE STATE
OPERATING OVER 100 HEALTH
CENTERS. AS I MENTIONED IN MY
TESTIMONY EARLIER TODAY, THE
CONSTITUTION CONSTITUTIONAL
PROTECTIONS UNDER ROE VERSUS
WADE ARE LIKELY TO BE ERASED IN
THE COMING WEEKS PROTECTIONS IN
THEIR OWN, CASEY HAVE ACTUALLY
NOT STOPPED ANTI ABORTION
LAWMAKERS FROM SEVERELY
RESTRICTING ACCESS. OR
EFFECTIVELY BANNING ABORTIONS IN
MANY STATES AS ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BAUER-KAHAN JUST MENTIONED. THIS
INCLUDES TEXAS AND OKLAHOMA WHO
HAVE ACT ENACTED LAWS THAT
DEPUTIZE PRIVATE CITIZENS TO
ENFORCE ABORTION BANS.
EMBOLDENED BY THE IMPENDING
SUPREME COURT DECISION TO
OVERTURN ROE, COMPLETELY, STATES
HAVE INTRODUCED MORE AND MORE
RESTRICTIONS AIMED AT HOLDING
ABORTION PROVIDERS, PATIENTS AND
THOSE THAT HELPED THEM
CRIMINALLY AND CIVILLY LIABLE.
IT IS LIKELY THAT IN THE NEXT
FEW WEEKS, FOLKS AND OVER HALF
THE STATES ABOUT 36 MILLION
PEOPLE WILL LOSE ACCESS TO
ABORTION IN THEIR HOME STATE.
THESE BANDS DENY PEOPLE TIMELY
ACCESS TO CARE. HARM PEOPLE WHO
ARE ALREADY FACING SYSTEMIC
BARRIERS IN THE HEALTH SYSTEM IN
FORCE PEOPLE TO FLEE THEIR HOME
STATES TO GET THE CARE THEY NEED
AND DESERVE. FOR PLANNED
PARENTHOOD. PROTECTING PATIENT
CONFIDENTIALITY IS AT THE CORE
OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY OUR
AFFILIATES PATIENTS. I'M SORRY.
I'M SORRY, MODERATOR. SOMEHOW
WE'RE GETTING, UM FEEDBACK. SO
GO AHEAD. MISS MATT'S BORROW.
FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD
PROTECTING PATIENT
CONFIDENTIALITY IS THE IS AT THE
CORE OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY
OUR AFFILIATES. A PATIENT'S
MEDICAL RECORDS SHOULD NEVER BE
USED TO PUNISH SOMEONE FOR
OBTAINING AN ABORTION. A RATE
THAT IS EXPLICITLY PROTECTED
UNDER OUR STATE LAWS. MAYBE 2091
ESTABLISHES SAFEGUARDS IN THE
LAW TO PROTECT THE MEDICAL
RECORDS OF ABORTION PATIENTS TO
ENSURE THIS INFORMATION IS NOT
USED AS EVIDENCE IN AND OUT F
STATE CASE TO PENALIZE A PATIENT
WHO SEEKS CARE IN OUR STATE. IT
WOULD SIMILARLY PROTECT THOSE
WHO PROVIDE ABORTIONS OR ASSIST
PATIENTS TO ACCESS ABORTION CARE
IN CALIFORNIA. WE THANK THIS
COMMITTEE AND TWO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BONTA AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BAUER-KAHAN
TODAY FOR CARRYING THIS
IMPORTANT BILL SO THAT THOSE WHO
SEEK ABORTION CARE IN OUR STATE
CAN BE ASSURED OF
CONFIDENTIALITY AND THEIR
MEDICAL RECORDS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. UM OTHERS IN SUPPORT
HERE IN ROOM 2100. APPROACH THE
MICROPHONE. GOOD AFTERNOON
AGAIN. GENESIS GONZALEZ ON
BEHALF OF LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR,
LENNY KALLAKIS AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OTHERS,
OTHERS IN SUPPORT. MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS, AARON EVANS ON BEHALF
OF NARAL PRO CHOICE CALIFORNIA
AS WELL AS THE CALIFORNIA
CERTIFIED NURSE MIDWIVES
ASSOCIATION AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU ALL RIGHT, SAYING
NO ONE ELSE APPROACHING THE
MICROPHONE. MODERATOR IF YOU
WOULD QUEUE UP THOSE ON THE
PHONE IN SUPPORT OF A B 29 TO 1.
THANK YOU WHO WISH TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT OF A B 2091? PLEASE
PRESS 10 ON YOUR PHONE. WE WILL
START WITH LINE TO 30. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. TOMMY MARTIN ON BEHALF OF
EQUALITY, CALIFORNIA COSPONSOR
OF THE BILL IN STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. NEXT PHASE LINE TO 17
. PLEASE GO AHEAD. THEY'RE
CALLING ON ME NOW. ALREADY
YOU'RE ON MY NAME IS FROM THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL
WORKERS STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE
LINE 1 70, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD
AFTERNOON SHARING MEMBERS. JAMIE
ALLEY, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR WITH
THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL, ROB CONTEST TWO IS
PROUD TO SUPPORT A B 2091. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. HERE NEXT
SEVERAL LINE 1 71, PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HI DADDY WITH OAKLAND
PRIVACY AND SUPPORTERS. 2091.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THAT
IS THAT I HAVE IN QUÊ. ALREADY
THANK YOU. LET'S NOW TURN TO THE
OPPOSITION. MR NELL. I SEE YOU
HERE AND I SEE MR MCQUARRY. MR
MCREYNOLDS IS ALSO HERE NOW.
THANK YOU. YOU KNOW ME BY NOW.
MY NAME IS SUSAN ARNEL. I'M AN
ATTORNEY AND VICE PRESIDENT OF
LEGAL AFFAIRS AT THE RIGHT TO
LIFE LEAGUE, AMERICA'S FIRST PRO
LIFE ORGANIZATION LIKE A B 16 66
A B 2091 ALSO BLATANTLY VIOLATES
THE FULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE
OF THE U. S CONSTITUTION. CHERRY
PICKING WHICH OUT OF STATE
SUBPOENAS, CALIFORNIA WILL
RECOGNIZE THE FULL FAITH AND
CREDIT CLAUSE ENSURES OTHER
STATES RECOGNIZE VALID COURT
ORDERS LIKE RESTRAINING ORDERS,
SUBPOENAS OR OTHER LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS. SECTION FIVE B OF A
B 2091 VIOLATES THE U. S
CONSTITUTION BY FORBIDDING
ISSUANCE OF A CALIFORNIA
SUBPOENA IF THE OUT OF STATE
ACTION QUOTE RELATES TO A
FOREIGN PENAL CIVIL ACTION
CONCERNING ABORTION. THIS IS A
RIDICULOUS ATTEMPT TO SKIRT THE
FULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE.
SOMEHOW THE BILL ANALYSIS DOES
NOT EXPLAIN HOW BUT SOMEHOW A
LAWFUL SUBPOENA DEMANDING
RECORDS FOR USE IN A FOREIGN
COURT, NOT A CALIFORNIA COURT.
COULD BE IGNORED BY CALIFORNIA
LAW. THE BILL ANALYSIS ARGUES
THAT THERE MAY BE A PENAL
EXCEPTION TO JUSTIFY DOING SO.
AND YET IN THE VERY SAME
PARAGRAPH, THE BILL ANALYSIS
ADMITS THAT THE SUPREME COURT
HAS NEVER UPHELD A PENAL
EXCEPTION. NOT EVEN ONCE SINCE
18 92, NOT EVEN IN THE VERY CASE
CITED BY THE BILL ANALYSIS. A B
2091 IS AN ATTEMPT TO BRUSH
ASIDE WELL ESTABLISHED
CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND
REPLACE THEM WITH ILLEGAL
FANTASY OF THEORETICAL PENAL
EXCEPTION THAT HAS NEVER
EXISTED. BUT COULD POSSIBLY
EXIST IN SUPREME COURT
JURISPRUDENCE. THIS IS THE
EQUIVALENT OF A STUBBORN TWO
YEAR OLD REFUSING TO GO TO BED
BY SAYING I DON'T WANT TO AND
YOU CAN'T MAKE ME IT IS
EMBARRASSING. IN ITS COMMITMENT
TO PROTECT THE ABORTION INDUSTRY
AT ALL COSTS. 2091 DISREGARDS
THE CLEAR PROVISIONS OF THE FULL
FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE. IF
ANYTHING, THE BILL ANALYSIS
ITSELF MAKES IT CLEAR. THAT THE
BILL WILL ABSOLUTELY BE STRUCK
DOWN AFTER EXTENSIVE LITIGATION
AT TAXPAYERS EXPENSE. THANK YOU,
MR ARNELLE. ALL RIGHT. MR
MCREYNOLDS.
T. THANKS. SO GOOD AFTERNOON,
AGAIN CHAIR AND HONORABLE
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MATTHEW
MCREYNOLDS, SENIOR STAFF
ATTORNEY PACIFIC JUSTICE
INSTITUTE CENTER FOR PUBLIC
POLICY. JUST WENT OUT OF FEW
OTHER THOUGHTS. IN ADDITION TO
WHAT MR ARNEL HAD TO SAY,
STIRRING WITH THE FULL FAITH AND
CREDIT CLAUSE ISSUE, I THINK
IT'S NOTEWORTHY. SOMETHING THAT
WAS WAS BROUGHT OUT IN THE PRIOR
HEARING ON THE SIMILAR
LEGISLATION FOR A B 16 66 ABOUT
THE PUBLIC POLICY EXCEPTION, OR
PERHAPS WE SHOULD CALL IT THE SO
CALLED EXCEPTIONS. TWO FULL
FAITH AND CREDIT. UM, DURING THE
INTERIM I HAD TO JOG MY MEMORY
AS TO WHERE THAT PHRASE CAME
FROM, AND HIS HOUSE AND ONE OF
THE MOST IMPORTANT PLACES THAT
THAT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED AS IN
THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION,
NEVADA VERSUS HALL. 1979 THERE.
THERE IS A PUBLIC POLICY
EXCEPTION RECOGNIZED BY THE
SUPREME COURT. THE PROBLEM IS
THAT NEVADA VERSUS HALL WAS
OVERRULED BY THE SUPREME COURT
IN 2019 AND DECISION THAT
ACTUALLY FAVORED STATE OF
CALIFORNIA IN THAT PARTICULAR
INSTANCE IN THE FRANCHISE TAX
BOARD. THE POINT HERE I THINK IS
THAT THERE HAVE BEEN THERE'S
BEEN A LARGE BODY OF SUPREME
COURT PRESSED IN THE LAST FEW
DECADES DEALING WITH FULL FAITH.
AND CREDIT. THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS JUST STARTED TO SCRATCH
THE SURFACE OF THAT, AND
UNFORTUNATELY, UM, WAS NOT ABLE
TO ADDRESS THE LAST MANY
PRESIDENTS THE LAST SEVERAL
DECADES THAT HAVE VERY
PARTICULAR BEARING ON ON WHAT
THE COMMITTEE IS WRESTLING WITH
TODAY. ONE OTHER THING I WANTED
TO POINT OUT THAT IS DIFFERENT
FROM A B 16 66. SO WE DISCUSSED
EARLIER. YES, THE DEGREE TO
WHICH A B 2091 TALKS ABOUT NOT
RECOGNIZING SUBPOENAS RELATED TO
OTHER STATES LAWS THAT WOULD
INTERFERE. WITH THE RIGHT TO
ABORTION. THE PROBLEM. UH WITH
THIS, THIS PHRASEOLOGY, IT GOES
WELL BEYOND THE IMPETUS FOR THE
BILL IN TEXAS SENATE BILL EIGHT,
UM OTHER STATES LAWS THAT
INTERFERE WITH ABORTION AND THAT
COULD EVEN AFFECT OUR OWN
NEIGHBORS COULD AFFECT LAWS IN
STATES LIKE NEVADA OR ARIZONA.
THEY MAY NOT GO AS FAR AS OUR
STATE DOES TO EITHER SHIELD. UM
ABORTION PROVIDERS, MR
MCREYNOLDS, IF YOU WOULD WRAP IT
UP, CERTAINLY. SHOW WOULD JUST
URGE THE COMMITTEE TO TAKE A
MUCH CLOSER LOOK AND
RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED A B 2091.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANYONE ELSE HERE IN ROOM 2100,
WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 2091
APPROACHED THE MICROPHONE.
SEEING NO ONE HERE APPROACHING
THE MICROPHONE. LET'S TURN TO
THE PHONE LINES MODERATOR IF YOU
WOULD QUEUE UP THOSE WHO ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 2091. YES.
THANK YOU. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK
IN OPOSITION OF A B 2091,
PLEASE PRESS 10 ON YOUR PHONE.
AND WHEN MOMENT IF WE GET LINE
NUMBERS.
FIRST WE WILL GO TO LINE 2 48,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. YES THIS IS
THERESA BRENNAN, PRESIDENT AND
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE RIGHT
POLITELY AND STRONG OPPOSITION.
ALREADY WE HAVE LINE TO 49.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI. MY NAME IS
JENNY. SHOOT I'M IN STRONG
OPPOSITION TO A B 2091 16 66 AND
22 23. THANK YOU. NEXT, WE WILL
GO TO LINE 2 46, PLEASE, PLEASE
GO AHEAD. LINE 2 46. YOUR LINE
IS OPEN. ALRIGHT NEXT WE WILL GO
TO LINE 2 47, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GREG BURKE FROM THE CALIFORNIA
FAMILY COUNCIL IN OPPOSITION.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU AND LINE TO
46 TO. IT'S JUST SPEAK, PLEASE.
ONE, THEN ZERO. I HAVE FELT LINE
TO 46. PLEASE GO AHEAD. YEAH HI.
MY NAME IS JIM EDMONDS AND
BUSINESS OWNER AND THAT STRONGLY
OPPOSED THE BILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND I HAVE
NO ONE ELSE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT
UM, LET'S BRING IT BACK TO
COMMITTEE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS
SEEING NONE. SENATOR CABALLERO
MOVES THE BILL. ALL RIGHT?
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BARKING AND YOU
CARE CLOTHES ON BEHALF OF
REMOVABLE ANTI RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR ANOTHER. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU, MADAM SECRETARY, IF YOU
WOULD CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION
IS DO YOU PASS BUT FIRST BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
HEALTH. HAMBURG HAMBURG I
GORGEOUS. GORGEOUS. NO,
CABALLERO. CABALLERO DURAZO.
GONZALES. HERTZBERG. JONES.
GLARED I STERN STERN, I
WIECKOWSKI WIENER. YOU HAVE FOR
THE ONE WITH MEMBERS MISSING.
ALRIGHT, WE'LL PUT THAT ON CALL.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT.
SURE, SENATOR STERN. OOPS I'M
SORRY, ASSEMBLY MEMBER JOHN
SAWYER IS BEEN HERE ON A COUPLE
OCCASIONS SO PATIENTLY. YES.
THANK YOU. YEAH IT MIGHT HAVE
BEEN IMPATIENT, BUT HE WAS HERE
NEVERTHELESS. ALRIGHT, FLOOR IS
YOURS. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON
CHAIR MEMBERS TODAY I PRESENT A
B 22 96 BILL THAT WILL EXTEND
THE SUNSET DATE FOR THE
CALIFORNIA REPARATIONS TASK
FORCE TO ALLOW THE TASK FORCE AN
ADDITIONAL YEAR. THOROUGHLY
COMPLETE ITS VITAL WORK. IN 2020
, CALIFORNIA ENACTED A B 31 21
BECOMING THE VERY FIRST STATE IN
THE NATION TO ESTABLISH A
GOVERNMENT BODY TO STUDY
INSTITUTION OF FOURTH HUMAN
SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES.
THAT LAW DIRECTED THE TASK FORCE
TO GATHER AND SYNTHESIZE THE
BREATH OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
OF SLAVERY AND ITS ONGOING
LEGACY IN OUR STATE. THAT CHARGE
IS NOT BEING TAKEN LIGHTLY WITH
WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE
INCREDIBLE TEAM IN THE CIVIL
RIGHTS DIVISION OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THE TASK
FORCE HAS WEIGHED COUNTLESS
SUBMISSIONS FROM HISTORIANS AND
ACADEMICS AND HER DOZENS OF
HOURS OF TESTIMONY. WITH THIS
EVIDENCE, THE TASK FORCE HAS
ISSUED ITS INITIAL REPORT
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND PLANS
TO ISSUE ITS FINAL REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS NEXT YEAR. A B
22 96 WILL PROVIDE THE TASK
FORCE WITH AN EXPANDED TIMELINE
TO THOROUGHLY EXECUTE ITS VAST
SCOPE OF DUTIES AND DEVELOPED
THOUGHTFUL RECOMMENDATIONS WITH
THE CAREFUL SCREEN FEDERATION
THEY DESERVE. AS SECRETARY OF
STATE. SHIRLEY WEBER OFTEN SAYS
400 YEARS OF OPPRESSION WILL NOT
BE SOLVED IN 400 DAYS. THANK
YOU, AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR I VOTE ALREADY. THANK YOU.
UM I SEE THERE'S NO PRIMARY
WITNESSES AND SUPPORT ANYONE
HERE IN ROOM 2100, WHICH TESTIFY
AND SUPPORT PLEASE APPROACH THE
MIC. SO NO. ONE. THE MÀ. 96. YES
THANK YOU. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK
IN SUPPORT OF A B 22 96, PLEASE
PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO ON YOUR
PHONE. ALRIGHT MODERATOR. WHILE
YOU'RE QUEUING THEM UP. I SEE
THAT AT LEAST SOME PERSONS HAVE
APPEARED IN THE HEARING ROOM
WHICH TESTIFY AND SUPPORT IF YOU
WISH TO TESTIFY AND SUPPORT,
PLEASE APPROACH THE MICROPHONE.
YOU DOING A GOOD AFTERNOON, MR
SAWYER. WE'RE HERE TO SUPPORT MY
NAME IS HENRY 30, SOME WITH ALL
OF US SOON ON SACRAMENTO
COMMUNITY HEALERS. THANK YOU
SUPPORT THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE
IN SUPPORT AHEAD. CORONA MCGILL
ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF LEGAL
SERVICES FOR PRISONERS AND
CHILDREN, AND ALL OF US ARE NONE
IN SUPPORT OF MAYBE 20 TO 96.
THANK YOU. HIGHER ROBINSON, UH,
WITH ALL OF US OR NONE,
SACRAMENTO AND WE'RE IN SUPPORT.
MELISSA MOORE WITH LEGAL
SERVICES FOR PRISONERS WITH
CHILDREN. ALL OF US ARE NONE AND
WE'RE IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
ALRIGHT MODERATOR NOW IF WE
COULD TURN TO THOSE ON THE PHONE
LINE THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN,
PLEASE PRESS ONE AND ZERO AND WE
WILL START WITH LYING TO 51.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON
. CHAIR MEMBERS WOULD ALSO ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA ACADEMY
OF CHILD AND ADOLESCENT
PSYCHIATRY IN SUPPORT. MHM.
THANK YOU. AND NEXT WE HAVE LINE
TO 45. PLEASE GO AHEAD. THIS IS
JUST TO BE SURE WE'RE ON THE
RIGHT, BILL. THIS IS YOUR LINE
IS OPEN MODERATOR. THIS IS A B.
OKAY B 22 96. APPARENTLY WE'VE,
UH RIGHT. WE'VE SOMEHOW ACCESS
TO PARTY. RIGHT? WHICH IS MAKES
SEVERAL OF US JEALOUS, RIGHT? SO
THIS IS PHIL. UM, NUMBER 15 A B
22 96 BY SOMEBODY MEMBER JOINT,
JONES SAWYER. ONCE AGAIN IF YOU
WISH TO SPEAK ON A B 2296.
PLEASE PRESS ONE THAN ZERO. AND
I HAVE NO ONE IN Q. ALL RIGHT.
LET'S TURN TO OPPOSITION. ANYONE
HERE, UH, IN THE HEARING ROOM IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 22 96 SEEING
NO ONE APPROACHES MICROPHONE.
LET'S NOW TURN TO THE PHONE
LINES MODERATE IF YOU WOULD
QUEUE UP THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO
A B 22 9 296, PLEASE PRESS ONE,
THEN ZERO. THAT IS ONE, THEN
ZERO ON YOUR PHONE. AND I HAVE
NO ONE IN QUÊ. ALRIGHT BRING IT
BACK TO COMMITTEE QUESTIONS BY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS SEEING NO
QUESTIONS. UM, IS THERE A MOTION
AH, SENATOR CABALLERO MOVES THE
BILL. UH SOME OF THE MEMBER JOHN
SAWYER CARE CLOSE, RESPECTIVELY
. ASTRAY I VOTE. ALL RIGHT.
WELL, THANK YOU FOR WAITING,
WHETHER IT WAS PATIENTLY OR
IMPATIENTLY APPRECIATE IT.
ALRIGHT MADAM SECRETARY, IF YOU
WOULD CALL THE ROLL.
THE MOTION IS DUE PAST BUT FIRST
WE RE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE
ON APPROPRIATIONS HAMBURG. I
BORE GIS CABALLERO CABALLERO, I
DO RUSSELL. GONZALES. HERTZBERG
JONES. LAIRD I STERN AND I
WIECKOWSKI WIENER. YOU HAVE 4 TO
0 WITH MEMBERS MISSING, ALL
RIGHT? WE'LL PUT THAT ON CALL.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT,
WE'RE GOING TO TURN TO, UM
FILLEM NUMBER NINE A. B 21 59 TO
BE PRESENTED BY SENATOR STERN.
UM AFTER THAT, UM WE HAVE FILM
NUMBER 16 BY SOME REMEMBER LEE A
B 2031. UM ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
LEVIN. SOME REMEMBER MAN SHINE
AH, SO REMEMBER TING AND
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S AWARD. THAT'S
THE ORDER. OR WHOEVER SHOWS UP.
ALL RIGHT. SENATOR STERN ON
BEHALF OF AH ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
BRIAN FLOOR'S YOURS. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR CHAIR MEMBERS
PRESENTING A B 21 59 A BILL THAT
WOULD STOP PERMANENT FAMILY
SEPARATION AND THE CHILD WELFARE
SYSTEM. FROM PARENTS WHO ARE
PRETRIAL. IN OUR STATE WE HAVE
OVER 60,000 FOSTER YOUTH, CHILD
PROTECTIVE SERVICES CASES OPEN
AND A CHILD IS PLACED IN FOSTER
CARE. CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES
IS REQUIRED TO ASSESS THE
ELIGIBILITY OF ALL PARENTS ARE
REUNIFICATION SERVICES REQUIRED
TO BEGIN ASSISTING THE PARENT
WITH THE PROCESS FOR UNITING
WITH THEIR CHILD. FOR PARENTS IN
CUSTODY. THIS COULD INCLUDE
INVESTIGATING WHAT SERVICES ARE
AVAILABLE. FOR THEIR PARENTS AT
THE PLACE OF IN CAR
INCARCERATION. SUCH AS A OR
ANGER MANAGEMENT LIFE SKILLS AND
HELPING THE PARENT ENROLLING
THOSE COURSES OR MAILING A
PARENT SPECIALIZED INSTRUCTION
MATERIALS, WHICH THEY CAN
COMPLETE MAIL BACK. WITHIN 60
DAYS OF THE FILING OF A CHILD
WELFARE CASE, THE JUVENILE
DEPENDENCY COURT MUST DECIDE
WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO ORDER
THE PARENT INTO REUNIFICATION
SERVICES OR IF THE SHOULD BE
BYPASSED BECAUSE THEY FIT INTO
ONE OF THE CRITERIA TO BE DENIED
REUNIFICATION. IF BOTH PARENTS
ARE BYPASSED, THE COURT WAS SET
A HEARING TO MAKE A PERMANENT
PLAN FOR THE CHILD, WHICH COULD
LEAD DETERMINATION OF PARENTAL
RIGHTS. THE PROBLEM IS BILL
FIXES A PROVISION THAT CURRENTLY
STATES THAT IF YOU ARE A PARENT
WHO IS INCARCERATED BUT NOT
CONVICTED OF A CRIME AGAIN, NOT
CONVICTED OF A CRIME, YOU COULD
STILL BE BYPASSED FOR FAMILY
REUNIFICATION SERVICES SIMPLY
BECAUSE YOU'RE IN CUSTODY AT THE
TIME. TO GIVE TESTIMONY TODAY
I'M JOINED BY JULIE HANNIGAN AND
TERNI WITH DEPENDENCY LEGAL
SERVICES, AND STEPHANIE JEFFCOAT
, AN ORGANIZER WITH ALL OF US OR
NONE THE BILL YET THE BILL ALSO
HAS NO OPPOSITION SO I'D
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
ALRIGHT MISS JEFFCOAT FLOOR IS
YOURS. ARE YOU ON THE PHONE? YES
I'M HERE. ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS
. WE ARE ALL AWARE THAT MASS
INCARCERATION HAS BEEN SOMETHING
THAT HAS PLAGUED OUR COMMUNITIES
FOR DECADES. THROUGHOUT THE
YEARS WE HAVE SEEN FAMILIES TORN
APART. THEY FIRST STARTED WITH
OUR BLACK AND BROWN MEN BEING
RIPPED OUT OF OUR COMMUNITIES,
AND IN THE YEARS TO FOLLOW, WE
STARTED SEEING OUR WOMEN BECOME
THE FASTEST GROWING INCARCERATED
POPULATION. WE KNOW THE HARMFUL
EFFECTS AND TRAUMA THAT CAN HAVE
ON A CHILD BEING SEPARATED FROM
THEIR BIOLOGICAL PARENT. AND
BEING FORCED TO LIVE WITH
STRANGERS OR OTHER FAMILY
MEMBERS. WHEN A CHILD IS TAKEN
INTO CUSTODY OF CHILDREN
PROTECTIVE SERVICES, THE PARENT
IS GIVEN A REUNIFICATION PLAN
AND A TIMELINE TO COMPLETE IT.
OFTENTIMES THESE TIMELINES ARE
STRICT AND HARD TO COMPLETE
WITHOUT THE RIGHT SUPPORT.
CURRENTLY THE COURTS ARE ABLE TO
USE WIG SECTION 3 61.5 TO BYPASS
PARENTS WHO ARE INCARCERATED
EVEN BEFORE THEY HAVE BEEN
CONVICTED OF A CRIME. WE KNOW
THAT SOMETIMES A PERSON CAN BE
IN CUSTODY AND FIGHTING THEIR
CASE. SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY CANNOT
AFFORD TO BE BAILED OUT. I KNOW
PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN
INCARCERATED FOR OVER A YEAR AND
ARE STILL AWAITING TRIAL. IN
CASES LIKE THAT WE'RE A PERSON
IS TECHNICALLY INNOCENT UNTIL
PROVEN GUILTY. THEY SHOULD NOT
BE ABLE TO BE BYPASSED JUST ON
THE GROUND THAT THEY ARE UNABLE
TO AFFORD BAIL, UNLIKE THEIR
COUNTERPARTS WHO ARE WEALTHIER
DURING MY LAST TIME OF
INCARCERATION, WHICH WAS ONLY
SIX MONTHS MY DAUGHTER WAS
ADOPTED. HAD I BEEN ABLE TO BAIL
OUT I WOULD HAVE HAD A BETTER
CHANCE OF BEING ABLE TO COMPLETE
MY REUNIFICATION PLAN. SINCE MY
RELIEF, I HAVE COMPLETELY TURNED
MY LIFE AROUND. I WORKED AT A
NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION HELPING
OTHER FORMERLY INCARCERATED
PEOPLE. I HAVE MY OTHER THREE
CHILDREN BACK IN MY LIFE. I HAVE
JUST GRADUATED WITH FIVE
ASSOCIATE DEGREES. AND HAVE
DECIDED TO GO TO LAW SCHOOL TO
HELP OTHER PARENTS NOT HAVE TO
EXPERIENCE THE SAME TRAUMA YET.
STILL I HAVE NOT BEEN AFFORDED
THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE MY
DAUGHTER BACK IN MY LIFE. A B 21
59 WILL ALLOW FOR PARENTS WHO
ARE INCARCERATED WHO HAVE NOT
BEEN CONVICTED TO HAVE A CHANCE
OF REUNIFIED WITH THEIR
CHILDREN. MAKING THE DECISION TO
PERMANENTLY SEVER THE BOND
BETWEEN A CHILD AND A PARENT IS
ONE OF THE MOST INTRUSIVE
VIOLATIONS OF FAMILY CAN
EXPERIENCE. SAYING THAT APART A
PARENT SHOULD NEVER HAVE THE
RIGHT TO SEE THEIR CHILD AGAIN,
NO MATTER HOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES
MAY CHANGE IS SAYING THAT WE ARE
A COUNTRY THAT IS NOT BELIEVE IN
SECOND CHANCES. A B 21 59,
GIVING FAMILIES THE OPPORTUNITY
TO INTERRUPT THE GENERALIZATION
OF TRAUMA OF FAMILY SEPARATION
AND MASS INCARCERATION. FOR
THESE REASONS, I REQUESTED A
VOTE TODAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU, MR JEFFCOAT. UM MISS
HANNIGAN. IF YOU'RE ON THE
PHONE, PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF.
YES THANK YOU TO THE COMMITTEE
CHAIR, ITS MEMBERS AND HONORED
GUESTS. MY NAME IS JULIE
HANNIGAN AND I AM POLICY
DIRECTOR FOR DEPENDENCY LEGAL.
WHILE PREPARING TO ADDRESS THIS
COMMITTEE. I SPOKE TO ONE OF OUR
CONTRACT ATTORNEYS WHO TOLD ME
ABOUT HIS CLIENT AIRBOAT.
SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, AMBER
THOUGHT SHE WAS GOING ON A DATE
WITH HER BOYFRIEND. SHE KNEW
THIS MAN AS HE WAS THE FATHER OF
HER TWO CHILDREN, BUT SHE DID
NOT KNOW THAT ON THIS PARTICULAR
DAY HER BOYFRIEND WAS GOING TO
COMMIT SERIOUS FELONY. GIVEN
THAT AMBER WAS IN THE CAR, SHE,
TOO, WAS CHARGED WITH THE SAME
FELONY CRIMINAL COURT IS HOLDING
HER WITHOUT FAIL, AND CPS HAS
REMOVED BOTH HER CHILDREN. AS WE
SIT HERE TODAY, AMBER IS
INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.
CRIMINAL CHARGES ARE PENDING AND
MAY NOT BE RESOLVED FOR MONTHS.
AMBER IS ALSO A PERSON OF COLOR
AS MANY OF THE CLIENTS THAT WE
SERVE. HOWEVER NO MATTER THE
OUTCOME OF WHAT HAPPENS IN
CRIMINAL COURT. A JUVENILE
DEPENDENCY JUDGE HAS ALREADY
TOLD AMBER THAT SHE WILL NOT BE
GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET OUR
KIDS BACK BECAUSE SHE WAS
INCARCERATED. CURRENT LAW
PROVIDES GPS IN THE COURT HAVE
THE ABILITY TO MAKE THIS
DECISION AND I THINK SO WITH
GREAT FREQUENCY. THIS WILL,
HOWEVER, WILL ENSURE THAT COURTS
CANNOT DENY FAMILIES THE
OPPORTUNITY TO UNIFY. UNLESS OR
UNTIL THE PARENT IS CONVICTED OF
THE CRIME FOR WHICH THEY ARE IN
CARSON. FOR AMBER. THIS BILL
WILL BE TOO LATE. THE COURT HAS
ALREADY STUDIED HEARING IN JULY
TO TERMINATE HER PARENTAL
RIGHTS. IF CHARGES ARE DROPPED
OR NEGOTIATED. AN AMBER IS
RELEASED BEFORE THEN SHE WILL
STILL HAVE TO PROVE WHY IT'S IN
HER CHILDREN'S BEST INTEREST TO
BE GIVEN EVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO
BRING IN A FIGHT. AND HONESTLY,
IT'S LIKELY THAT OUR COURTS WILL
DENY HER HEARING. UM, BEFORE YOU
SAYING NO. THE CHARGES ARE
DROPPED, OR SHE HAS RELEASED IN
AUGUST OR AFTERWARDS FOR
CHILDREN WILL ALREADY HAVE BEEN
FREED FOR ADOPTION, AND SHE WILL
HAVE NO LEGAL RECENT COURT. ARE
CALIFORNIA STATE SUPREME COURT
ONCE WROTE TO JAIL. WE JUST WRAP
IT UP. MHM. UM. AT 80 2018 21 59
WILL GO A LONG WAY, GIVING
FAMILIES A FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE DIFFERENCE
IS DESIGNED TO HELP THEM. WE ARE
ASKING FOR YOUR VOTE TODAY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
ALRIGHT OTHERS AND SUPPORT HERE
IN THE HEARING ROOM. IF YOU
APPROACH THE MICROPHONE, PROVIDE
YOUR NAME YOUR AFFILIATION YOUR
POSITION. YES, HEAD ANYMORE. GIL
OUR POLICY ANALYSTS WITH LEGAL
SERVICES FOR PRISONERS WITH
CHILDREN, ALSO A PROUD MEMBER OF
ALL OF US ARE KNOWN IN STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
REBECCA MARCUS, REPRESENTING THE
CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY INSTITUTE AT
THE U. S D. SCHOOL OF LAW AND
SUPPORT. THANK THANK YOU. HENRY
ORTIZ WITH LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN AND ALL
OF US OR NONE AND STRONG SUPPORT
OUT OF SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LITTLE
MORE WITH LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN AND
STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT. MATTER IF YOU WOULD QUEUE
UP THOSE ON THE PHONE SUPPORT OF
A B 21 59, WE'D BE GRATEFUL.
THANK YOU TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF
A B. 20 I'M SORRY, 21 59. 21 59,
PLEASE PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO. WE
WILL START WITH LINE TO 45.
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HI, SAMMY.
YEAH. GET AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS
PIANO LEWIS. I AM A PRIVACY
FELLOW AT LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRIMITIVE, WITH CHILDREN CALLING
IN STRONG SUPPORT OF A V 21 59.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WE
HAVE LINED TO 56. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. HELLO MY NAME IS MARVIN
GALGIANI WITH LEGAL SERVICES FOR
PRISONERS WITH CHILDREN AND I
SUPPORT THIS, BILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. NEXT HIS LINE 1 75,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HELLO. MY NAME
IS BRIAN PAN. I'M AN ATTORNEY
WITH THE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION
A NEW WAY APPLIED FOR ENTRY
PROJECT IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THAT
IS ALL THAT I HAVE IN QUÊ.
ALRIGHT LET'S NOW TURN TO
OPPOSITION. I HAVE NO KNOWN
OPPOSITION WITNESSES. UH IF
YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION TO A B 21
59 IF YOU'D APPROACHED THE
MICROPHONE, SAYING NO ONE HERE
IN ROOM, 2100 APPROACHED THE
MICROPHONE. LET'S TURN TO THE
PHONE LINE MODERATOR, PLEASE
QUEUE UP THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO
A B 21 59. TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION OF A B 21 59, PLEASE
PRESS ONE, THEN ZERO AND YOUR
PHONE. PLEASE PRESS ONE AND
ZERO. AND I HAVE NO ONE IN Q.
ALRIGHT THANKS. LET'S BRING IT
BACK TO COMMITTEE QUESTIONS BY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS THEIR MOTION.
SENATOR GRASSO MOVES THE BILL.
ALRIGHT, CLOSE SENATOR STERN ON
BEHALF OF ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BRIAN
TO PRESENT THIS BILL TODAY.
STILL PLENTY OF. THE COURTS CAN
CONSIDER IN TERMS OF BYPASSING
FAMILY REUNIFICATION SERVICES,
BUT SOLELY PURPOSES OF
INCARCERATION SHOULD NOT BE ONE
OF THEM. HOPEFULLY WE CAN
REUNITE A LOT OF FAMILIES AND DO
SOME JUSTICE IN THE MEANTIME AND
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR I VOTE.
ALRIGHTY, MADAM SECRETARY, IF
YOU WOULD CALL THE ROLL THE
MOTION IS DEEP PAST. BUT FIRST
WE RE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE
ON HUMAN SERVICES. HAMBURG
CYBORG GIS, CABALLERO. WE'RE
JUST NO CABALLERO. TRASO.
KANSEN SO I GONZALEZ. HERTZBERG.
JONES. CLEARED BY STERN STERN. I
WIECKOWSKI WIENER. YOU HAVE FORD
ONE WITH MEMBERS MISSING.
ALRIGHT WE'LL PUT THAT ON CALL.
OKAY NEXT, UM, I SEE SOMEBODY
MEMBER MAIENSCHEIN IS NOW AT THE
PODIUM AND POSSESSION IS 9/10 OF
THE LAW. SO LET'S SEE ITEM
NUMBER 20 A B 27 66 THANK YOU SO
MUCH MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
CURRENT LAW ALLOWS THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND
SPECIFIED COUNTY COUNCILS AND
CITY ATTORNEYS TO BRING ACTIONS
UNDER THE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW
TO PROTECT CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS.
CURRENT LAW ALSO ALLOWS THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL AND DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS TO ISSUE PRE
LITIGATION SUBPOENAS FOR
DOCUMENTS OR TESTIMONY TO
CONFIDENTIALLY INVESTIGATE
WHETHER A VIOLATION HAS OCCURRED
DESPITE HAVING THE EXACT SAME
AUTHORITY TO FILE UCL ACTION,
CITY ATTORNEYS AND COUNTY
COUNCILS. DO NOT HAVE THE SAME
ABILITY TO FILE PRE LITIGATION
SUBPOENAS. 27 66 WILL ADDRESS
THIS ANOMALY BY PROVIDING THESE
COUNTY COUNCILS AND CITY
ATTORNEYS THE SAME INVESTIGATIVE
TOOLS AS THEIR DISTRICT ATTORNEY
COUNTERPARTS FOR UCL ACTIONS.
THE BILL WILL BOLSTER COMMUNITY
CONSUMER PROTECTION AND HELP TO
EXPEDITE UCL INVESTIGATIONS. A B
27 66 ALSO PROVIDES ADEQUATE
PROTECTION TO SUBPOENAED
ENTITIES, INCLUDING
CONFIDENTIALITY PROTECTIONS. THE
AMENDMENTS THAT I AM ACCEPTING
TODAY AS DETAILED IN THE
ANALYSIS AT INCREASED
PROTECTIONS BY ALLOWING THE
SUBPOENAED ENTITY TO FILE A
MOTION TO QUASH THE SUBPOENA. I
HAVE NO NEGOTIATED THIS
AMENDMENT VERY CLOSELY WITH
STAKEHOLDERS AND NEARLY ALL
GROUPS HAVE REMOVED THEIR
OPPOSITION. I WANT TO THANK
MEMBERS OF THE OPPOSITION WHO
ARE HERE TODAY WHO WE WORKED FOR
A VERY LONG TIME WITH ON THIS
AND WITH ME TO TESTIFY ON THE
PHONE IS MARKING CORN THAT
SENIOR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY
ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF SAN
DIEGO AND MICHAEL BOSTROM, THE
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE
CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ALRIGHT. MR
AND CORN. YOU'RE AVAILABLE. YES
MR CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MARK AND
CORNE AND I'M THE SENIOR CHIEF
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO. I'M THE HEAD
OF OUR OFFICES. AFFIRMATIVE
CIVIL ENFORCEMENT DIVISION. AND
HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR
PROSECUTING UNFAIR COMPETITION
CASES. SANTIAGO CITY ATTORNEY
MARA ELLIOT ASKED ME TO APPEAR
ON HER BEHALF TODAY, AND SHE
THINKS THIS COMMITTEE FOR ITS
ENGAGEMENT ON THESE ISSUES. MY
OFFICE IS THE PRINCIPAL CONSUMER
PROTECTION AGENCY FOR THE EIGHTH
LARGEST CITY IN AMERICA. THAT'S
MAJORITY OF OUR CASES INVOLVE
MATTERS OF LOCAL CONCERN CARS
THAT ARE TOWED DESPITE BEING
LEGALLY PARKED CONTRACTORS WHO
DON'T FINISH THE JOB DESPITE
BEING FULLY PAID AND LANDLORDS
WHO ILLEGALLY EVICTED TENANTS.
MOST OF THE TIME. THE FACTS ARE
CLEAR, BUT SOMETIMES WE HIT A
WALL WHEN WE NEED ADDITIONAL
FACTS THAT CAN ONLY BE OBTAINED
BY SUBPOENA. ONE MATTER THAT WE
ARE CURRENTLY INVESTIGATING AS A
PRIME EXAMPLE, CONTRACTOR IN OUR
AREA, HAS BEEN EMPLOYING
UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS BUT HASN'T
PAID THEM THE WAGES THEY EARNED.
THEY'VE GIVEN US SOME DETAILS,
BUT ARE UNDERSTANDABLY RELUCTANT
TO MAKE A SWORN STATEMENT OR TO
AGREE TO TESTIFY IN COURT DUE TO
THEIR PRECARIOUS IMMIGRATION
STATUS. WE NEED THE BUSINESS
RECORDS OF THE CONTRACTOR TO
EVALUATE THE WORKERS CLAIMS, BUT
WE CAN'T GET THE RECORDS THROUGH
REGULAR DISCOVERY CHANNELS
BECAUSE WE DON'T YET HAVE ENOUGH
PROOF TO FILE A LAWSUIT. AND
WITHOUT AN ACTIVE LAWSUIT. WE
CAN'T MAKE A DEMAND FOR
DOCUMENTS. A PRE FILING SUBPOENA
WOULD ENABLE US TO SUPPORT OR
CONTRADICT THE WORKERS
ALLEGATIONS AND CARRY OUT THE
RESPONSIBILITY TO ENFORCE THE
UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW WITH
WHICH THIS LEGISLATURE HAS
CHARGED MY OFFICE. MAYBE 2766 IS
AN IMPORTANT TOOL TO PROTECT
CONSUMERS, THE ENVIRONMENT AND
WORKERS IN CALIFORNIA WE URGE
AND I VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR AND CORN, MR BOSTROM.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR CHAIR AND
FELLOW MEMBERS. MY NAME IS MIKE
BOSTROM, AND I'M, A SENIOR
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY UNDER
LOS ANGELES CITY ATTORNEY MIKE
FEAR. MR FEARS BEHALF. I'M HERE
TODAY TO URGE YOUR I VOTE ON
THIS BILL. OUR OFFICES USED THE
UNFAIR COMPETITION LAWS TO
PROTECT CONSUMERS AND REMEDY
VIOLATIONS AND A BROAD RANGE OF
AREAS. YOUR NAME? JUST A FEW.
WE'VE BROUGHT AN ENFORCEMENT
ACTION AGAINST THE LARGEST
PURVEYOR OF GHOST GUN KITS AND
COMPONENTS. WE HAVE PURSUED
BUSINESSES MARKETING FRAUDULENT
COVID TESTS, AND WE BROUGHT
SEVERAL ACTIONS TO PROTECT
WORKERS' RIGHTS. PRE LITIGATION
SUBPOENA POWER ALREADY BROADLY
GRANTED TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
, AND EVERY DISTRICT ATTORNEY IN
THE STATE WOULD ENHANCE OUR
ABILITY TO PROTECT CONSUMERS AND
ENSURE FAIR COMPETITION. WE
WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE AUTHOR
FOR INITIATING THIS BILL AND FOR
BRINGING TOGETHER THE SPONSORS
AND THE OPPOSITION TO ARRIVE AT
A COMPROMISE THAT IS REFLECTED
IN THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
BEFORE YOU TODAY. WITH THESE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, THIS BILL
APPROPRIATELY BALANCES THE
INTERESTS. OF CALIFORNIA
CONSUMERS AND EMPLOYEES WITH THE
INTERESTS OF CALIFORNIA
BUSINESSES. WE URGE YOUR I VOTE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR
BACKSTROM. OTHERS AND SUPPORT
THAT ARE HERE IN ROOM. 2100 IF
YOU APPROACH THE MICROPHONE,
PROVIDE YOUR NAME YOUR
AFFILIATION YOUR POSITION. MR
CHAIRMAN, REMEMBERS MICHAEL
RIGHT AGAIN ON BEHALF OF THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SANTA
CLARA COUNTY CO SPONSORING
SUPPORT, AND I'VE BEEN ASKED BY
FAITH CONNOLLY TO INDICATE THE
SUPPORT OF THE COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES WILL COSPONSOR. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. OTHERS MODERATED
. A FEW WOULD QUEUE UP THOSE IN
SUPPORT OF A B 27 66. DEFINITELY
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU ARE
IN SUPPORT OF A B 27 66 IT IS
ONE THEN ZERO ON YOUR PHONE. AND
ONCE AGAIN THAT IS FOR SUPPORT
BABIES. 27 6 MODERATE WHERE
YOU'RE QUEUING UP, FOLKS BELIEVE
SOME OF THE MANSION. YOU ACCEPT
THE AMENDMENTS. CORRECT ALL
RIGHT, GREAT. THANKS. ALRIGHT,
MODERATOR, GO AHEAD. GET THE
THERE, GIVING THEIR LINE NUMBERS
TO BE JUST ONE SECOND. AND JUST
REMINDERS FOR SUPPORT. ONE N
ZERO OKAY, AND THEN WE WILL
START WITH HERE. LINE NUMBER 66
PEOPLE HAD. LINE NUMBER 2 66.
YOU MIGHT HAVE A NUDE. I'M NOT
SURE. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL GO TO
THE NEXT IN LINE HERE. WE WILL
GO TO LONG LINE NUMBER 2 64 64.
HELLO. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE
CAN. THANK YOU. THIS IS ANTHONY
LIU WITH THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF
LEGISLATIVE SPHERE. UM ON BEHALF
OF A G ROB BONTA, WHO SUPPORTS
THIS STILL A B 27 66. THANK YOU.
HEY, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY MORE.
YOU MR CARE? ALRIGHT, LET'S GO
TO OPPOSITION. ANYONE IN
OPPOSITION? I KNOW OF NOKNOWN
WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION. UM I
SEE. MISS HUFF SEEMS TO OWE TO
TESTIFY. GO AHEAD NOT TO TESTIFY
JUST TO SAY THANKS AS HE JOCK
LED THE POSE UNLESS AMENDED
COALITION AND THE AUTHOR WORKED
WITH US. PAINSTAKINGLY SO DID
DID A GREAT JOB WITH US AND
APPRECIATE IT. SO THE MAJORITY
OF OU A COALITION IS REMOVED
OPPOSITION SO I JUST WANTED TO
SAY THANK YOU. ALRIGHT ANYONE
ELSE IN THE ROOM THAT WANTS TO
SAY THANK YOU TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MAIENSCHEIN? NO
ONE ELSE WANTS TO SAY THANK YOU
TO YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
MAIENSCHEIN. AH ALL RIGHT ON ON
ON THE PHONE WITH THOSE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, THERE
WE GO, SENATOR, SENATOR D ROSS.
SO ANSWER VOICE NOTE THAT IN THE
RECORD IN THE RECORD, ALL RIGHT?
UM OKAY. SO UH, ANYONE ELSE WHO
WISHES TO THANK ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
MAIENSCHEIN OR AN OPPOSITION
EITHER, OR MATTER IF YOU WOULD
QUEUE UP THOSE ON THE PHONE. IF
YOU ARE AN OPPOSITION OF A B
2766 IS 10 ON YOUR PHONE. AND
ONCE AGAIN OPPOSITION ONE, THEN
ZERO. AND WE HAVE THE LINE
NUMBER 66 CUTE UP HERE. HOLD ON.
YOU MAY GO AHEAD TO 66. HELLO,
KING HUMAN WE CAN. OH THAT WAS
ME. HI READY WITH OAKLAND
PRIVACY AND SUPPORT OF 27 66.
RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE
DO NOT HAVE ANY MAREQUE. YOU MR
CARE? ALRIGHT LET'S BRING IT
BACK COMMITTEE QUESTIONS BY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS SAYING NONE.
SENATOR DURAZO MOVES THE BILL.
ALRIGHT UH, SOME OF THEM WERE
MENTIONED. YOU CARE TO CLOSE.
WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR
CHAIR. AND THANKS FOR THE KIND
WORDS I THOUGHT I HEARD MR LAIRD
AND MR STERN ALSO MUMBLING.
THANK YOU, BUT I WANT TO KNOW I
DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE. SO
ALRIGHT. JUST HEARD IT. BUT OKAY
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AND I VOTE.
ALRIGHT, MADAM SECRETARY, IF YOU
WOULD CALL THE ROLL. I SEE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S LEVIN STANDING
READY TO GO. WE NEED. YEAH, HE'S
SQUATTING, ACTUALLY. BUT MANY
MEANT SO THE MOTION IS TO PASS
AS AMENDED. HAMBURG I BORE GIS.
CABALLERO. TO RUSTLE GONZALES.
HERTZBERG. JONES WEIRD. I STERN
STERN. I WIECKOWSKI WIENER. YOU
HAVE 4 TO 0. ALRIGHT. WE'LL PUT
THAT ON CALL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS. SOME OF
THE MEMBER LEVINE. ITEM NUMBER
18. MAYBE 1917 THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. MR CHAIR AND SENATORS.
MAYBE 1917 WANTED SURE THAT
PERSONAL INFORMATION COLLECTED
THROUGH CONTACT TRACING CANNOT
BE USED FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT
PURPOSES. SINCE THE BEGINNING OF
THE COVID 19 PANDEMIC. THERE
HAVE BEEN OVER NINE MILLION
CASES OF COVID 19 IN CALIFORNIA
AND OVER 88,000 PEOPLE HAVE DIED
AS A RESULT OF THE VIRUS. ONE OF
THE STRATEGIES USED TO LIMIT THE
TRANSMISSION OF COVID 19 HAS
BEEN THE USE OF CONTACT TRACING
WHICH IDENTIFIES INDIVIDUALS WHO
TEST POSITIVE FOR COVID AND THE
INDIVIDUALS THEY MAY HAVE BEEN
IN CLOSE CONTACT WITH MEASURES
MUST BE TAKEN TO PROTECT
CALIFORNIANS PERSONAL
INFORMATION AND BUILD PUBLIC
TRUST THAT CONTACT TRACING
INFORMATION. WILL NOT BE USED
INAPPROPRIATELY BY LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. THIS IS
ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT IN MINORITY
AND IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES WHO
HAVE BEEN DISPROPORTIONATELY
IMPACTED BY COVID. REPORTS OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS BEING
USED TO CONDUCT CONTACT TRACING
IS NOT ONLY A POOR USE OF PUBLIC
RESOURCES, IT IS INAPPROPRIATE
AND ERODES PUBLIC TRUST IN OUR
EFFORTS TO CONTROL THIS AND
FUTURE PANDEMICS. THROUGH THE
USE OF CONTACT TRACING A B 1917
WILL INCREASE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE
IN FUTURE CONTACT, TRACING
EFFORTS AND ENSURE THAT CONTACT
TRACING DATA IS USED ONLY FOR
PUBLIC HEALTH PURPOSES. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK I VOTE AND WITH
ME TODAY IS YADI JANTZ FROM
OAKLAND. PRIVACY, OKAY? AH YEAH.
THE ANSWER IF YOU'RE AVAILABLE
ON THE PHONE IF YOU WOULD
PRESENT YOURSELF.
WELL, WHILE WE'RE WAITING, WHY
DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND TAKE
OTHERS IN SUPPORT? WHO MAY BE IN
THE HEARING ROOM IF YOU'RE IN
SUPPORT OF A B 1917 AND YOUR IN
ROOM 2100, PLEASE APPROACH THE
MICROPHONE. SEEING NO ONE.
ALRIGHT LET'S GO TO THE PHONE
AND THEN, UH, IF YOUR ACCOUNT'S
PRESENTS THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND
GO BACK. THAT SEPARATE YOU. ALL
RIGHT. THANK YOU. SEVEN MEMBER
LEVIN. ALRIGHT. MODERATOR IF YOU
WOULD QUEUE UP THOSE IN SUPPORT
OF A B 1917 LADIES AND GENTLEMEN
, IF YOU ARE IN SUPPORT OF A B
1917 IT'S ONE AND ZERO ON YOUR
PHONE. ONCE AGAIN THAT SUPPORT
IS 10. OKAY WE HAVE SOMEBODY
QUEUING UP HERE. THAT'LL BE JUST
A MOMENT.
THEY'RE GETTING THEIR LINE
NUMBER. IN SUPPORT IS 10. NEXT
WEEK. WE'LL GO TO LINE NUMBER
71, PLEASE GO AHEAD. THIS IS
GEORGE BROWN DO ON BEHALF OF
ASIA, YOU CALIFORNIA ACTION IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY
MORE IN QUÊ. MR. CHAIR ALRIGHT,
WELL TURNED OPPOSITION OF
EUROPEANS PRESENTS, THEN WE'LL
GO BACK. UH THOSE THOSE THAT I
DON'T HEAR YOU ARE OKAY. GO
AHEAD. HI MEMBERS OF THE SENATE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
JERRY YANG AND I AM THE PRIVACY
RIGHTS FELLOW AT OAKLAND PRIVACY
AS CITIZENS COALITION THAT WORKS
REGIONALLY TO DEFEND THE RIGHTS
TO PRIVACY AND BASED IN THE
AREA. 18 19 SEVENTIES CENTERS.
PUBLIC HOUSING CALIFORNIA'S
RESPONSE TO COMMUNICABLE
DISEASES, ENSURING THAT ALL
CALIFORNIA'S C PARTICIPATING
CRITICAL CONTACT MAKING EFFORTS.
IT IS IN LINE WITH OTHER
LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES. PUBLIC
HEALTH RESPONSES FROM THE POLICE
TO NON LAW ENFORCEMENT ENTITY.
CONTACT TRACING INFORMATION CAN
INCLUDE WHO A PERSON WAS WITH
WHEN AND WHERE. WHEN THAT
INFORMATION IS COLLECTED BY
POLICE CAN NEGATIVELY IMPACT
URGENT PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS
BECAUSE PEOPLE MAY SHARE LESS OF
THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION. IF,
FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE IMPLICATE
THEM IN THE CRIME OR RISK
LABELING THEM AS AN ASSOCIATION
OF THIS SUPPOSED GANG MEMBERS,
DEGREE OF DISTRESS FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND MANY COMMUNITIES
REMAIN, PARTICULARLY IMMIGRANTS
AND THOSE WHO ARE MOST IMPACTED
BY POLICE VIOLENCE. ENSURING
CONTACT TRACING IS CONDUCTED BY
PUBLIC HEALTH PROFESSIONAL IS
IMPORTANT FOR ENSURING THAT
COMMUNITIES FEEL COMFORTABLE
TALKING HONESTLY, WITH CONTRACT
PAPERS. I THINK A B 1970 STATES
CARD. SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKELY TO
WITHHOLD INFORMATION THAT IS
NECESSARY TO CONTAIN THE
COMMUNICABLE DISEASE OUTBREAK.
CONTACT TEACHING IS AN
INAPPROPRIATE FUNCTION FOR
POLICE. ANY BAR ON THE
ENTANGLEMENT OF THE POLICE AND
PUBLIC HEALTH PRACTICE NECESSARY
TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE WILL FULLY
COOPERATE WITH CRUCIAL CONTACT.
TRACING EFFORTS. 18 1917 ENSURES
THAT PUBLIC HEALTH RESPONSES TO
COMMUNICABLE DISEASES ARE
HANDLED BY THE PEOPLE THAT
PREPARED TO DO SO. FOR THESE
REASONS, WE ASK YOU FOR YOUR
SUPPORT FOR A B 1917. THANK YOU.
ALRIGHTY. THANK YOU. UM, ANYONE
ELSE IN SUPPORT? OPPOSITION. I
BELIEVE WE WENT TO OPPOSITION.
UH ANYONE ON THE PHONE LINE IN
OPPOSITION TO A B 1917? IF YOU
WERE IN OPPOSITION OF BABY 1917
. IT IS ONE THAN ZERO ON YOUR
PHONE. ONCE AGAIN OPPOSITION ONE
THAN ZERO. THEY WE DO NOT HAVE
ANYBODY QUEUING UP AS HIS NOW MR
CHAIR. ALREADY THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT, BRING IT BACK TO
COMMITTEE QUESTIONS BY COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. YES, SENATOR STERN.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. UM JUST ONE
QUESTION. I APPRECIATE YOU
BRINGING THE MEASURE BACK. I
THINK SIMILAR MEASURE AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE PENDANT THIRD
TIME. SO THE ONE SCENARIO THE
FIRST COUPLE OF TIMES THAT IT
CAME THROUGH. I HAD A CONCERN
ABOUT WAS IF THERE'S SORT OF A
CRISIS OUTBREAK SITUATION. SE
ANA /C CAMPUS OR CSU CAMPUS. UM
WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A
RAPID NOTIFICATION PROCESS.
RIGHT? YOU WANT TO VISIT EVERY
ON CAMPUS DORM OR THIS
PARTICULAR DORM HAD ITS OWN
OUTBREAK AND AN ISSUE AND THEY
NEED TO BE NOTIFIED. SO LONG AS
THAT. IF THE IF THE CAMPUS
PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT ENGAGED
ALL HANDS ON DECK, INCLUDING S
CAMPUS POLICE IN THE
NOTIFICATION PROCESS. THAT
WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE
CONTACTED. BARRED I MEAN, THAT'S
SORT OF HOW I READ THE LANGUAGE
BECAUSE I APPRECIATE I LIKE THE
BILL AND THE OVERALL INTENT TO
SAY. LAW ENFORCEMENT SHOULDN'T
BE INVOLVED WITH IDENTIFICATION
WITH MONITORING WITH SORT OF THE
DATA ACCESS, BUT I JUST WANT TO
BE CLEAR THAT IN AN EMERGENCY
SITUATION, ESPECIALLY
NOTIFICATION OF PEOPLE. WOULD BE
MAYBE A DIFFERENT FUNCTION. YEAH
YOU KNOW, IT'S INTERESTING. I
MEAN, THIS IS THE THIRD TIME
THAT WE'VE DONE THIS BILL. UM
THIS. THIS PANDEMIC FLOWN BY
HASN'T YET BUT AND YOU SEE, HAD
RAISED ISSUES WITH THE FIRST
VERSION OF THIS BILL. THEY DON'T
HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THIS
VERSION OF THE BILL. UM SO I
HAVEN'T YOU KNOW, RUN THE TRAPS
DOWN. THE MARTIAL LAW SCENARIO
THAT I THINK YOU'RE KIND OF
THINKING WHERE YOU KNOW THE SKY
IS FALLING, AND WE JUST NEED TO
HAVE EVERYONE ENGAGING IN THIS
TYPE OF THING. BUT I DON'T THINK
THAT THAT IS ACTUALLY PART OF
THE CONTACT TRACING PROCESS. SO
I APPRECIATE THAT CONCERN. THANK
YOU. I'M HAPPY TO MOVE THE BILL
AT THE SENATOR STERN MOVES THE
BUILT OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS
SEEING NONE. ALL RIGHT, MADAM
SECRETARY KERRY CLOSE THERE'S NO
OPPOSITION OURSELVES FASTER AND
I VOTE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
MADAM SECRETARY, IF YOU WOULD
CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION IS DUE
PAST BUT FIRST WE RE REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
UMBERG. HI, GORGEOUS. OR JUST
KNOW CABALLERO. SO GONZALEZ
HERTZBERG. JONES. LEERED, DICE
TURN. STERN. I WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI. AYE, WIENER. YOU
HAVE 5 TO 1 WITH MEMBERS
MISSING. ALRIGHT. WE'LL PUT THAT
ON CALL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. WE'RE GONNA TAKE A
BRIEF PAUSE HERE IN PLACE.
ALRIGHT UM ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
WARD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND
YOU'VE BEEN IN AND OUT TODAY SO
I AM GRATEFUL FOR YOUR UM FOR
YOUR PRESENCE AND YOUR PRESENCE
ONCE MORE, UM, FOR THOSE OF YOU
WHO MAY BE LISTENING ON THE
PHONE, I REMEMBER 29 A B 25 59
BY SOME MEMBER WARD. CONSIDERING
REASONABLE TENANT SCREENING
REPORTS. WE'RE GOING TO PUT THAT
OVER FOR A WEEK. UM AND THEN,
BUT BUT ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WARD IS
GOING TO PRESENT ITEM NUMBER 28
A B 15 60. EXCUSE ME, 15 94. BY,
UM SOME OF THE MEMBER TING. IS
THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
ALRIGHT. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
SENATORS. I DO RISE TODAY TO
PRESENT EVERY 15 1994 ON BEHALF
OF ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S KING, OF
WHICH I AM ALSO A JOINT AUTHOR.
JUST THIS YEAR THE COUNTRY HAS
FACED OVER 200 MASS SHOOTINGS,
ONE OF WHICH WAS A BLOCK AWAY
FROM THIS BUILDING. MILLIONS OF
PEOPLE WERE IMPACTED BY THE
UNSETTLING SHOOTING THAT TOOK
THE LIVES OF 19 INNOCENT
CHILDREN HOLIDAY. CALIFORNIA
NEEDS TO LEAD THE WAY AND
SENDING A MESSAGE TO THE GUN
INDUSTRY THAT THEY ARE LIABLE
FOR THE PRODUCTS THAT THEY SELL
PRODUCTS THAT ARE CREATED TO
CAUSE HARM. ALMOST EVERY
INDUSTRY IN THE U. S. HAS HELD
LIABLE FOR WHAT ITS PRODUCTS DO,
BUT THE GUN INDUSTRY IS NOT HELD
TO THE SAME STANDARD. WITH
RIGHTS COME RESPONSIBILITIES. IT
IS TIME TO HOLD THIS KIND OF
INDUSTRY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
CARNAGE IN FEAR THAT OUR STREETS
IN OUR COMMUNITIES FACE 15 94
ESTABLISHES THE FIREARM INDUSTRY
ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, ALLOWING THE
CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL,
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND SURVIVORS
OF GUN VIOLENCE TO PURSUE LEGAL
ACTION IN CALIFORNIA COURTS
AGAINST IRRESPONSIBLE RECKLESS
AND NEGLIGENT GUN MANUFACTURERS
, IMPORTERS AND DEALERS LAST
MONTH, U. S DISTRICT JUDGE MADE
D'AGOSTINO DISMISSED A LAWSUIT
FROM GUN INDUSTRY GROUPS THAT
CHALLENGE NEW YORK'S LAW FROM
2021 PERMITTING CIVIL SUITS
AGAINST GUN MANUFACTURERS AND
SELLERS. FINANCIAL REPERCUSSIONS
MAY FINALLY PUSHED THE FIREARMS
INDUSTRY AND DEALERS TO BE MORE
RESPONSIBLE BY IMPROVING THEIR
PRACTICES AND OBEYING CALIFORNIA
. STRICT GUN LAWS. WITH THAT WE
HAVE WITNESSES THAT ARE CALLING
IN, OR E FREILICH WITH GIFFORDS.
LAUREN LEAVE WITH BRADY AND
WOMEN AGAINST GUN VIOLENCE OR
ALRIGHT. MARCUS MIGHT ALSO BE
HERE IN THE ROOM. IF SHE WISHES
TO SPEAK. ALL RIGHT, WELL, LET'S
START WITH THE PHONE. UM LAUREN
LIEBE OR ARI FREILICH. IF EITHER
OF YOU ARE AVAILABLE, PLEASE
IDENTIFY YOURSELVES. YES, I. MY
NAME IS ARI FREILICH. I'M STEVE,
POLICY DIRECTOR FOR GIFFORDS.
THE GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
ORGANIZATION LED BY FORMER
CONGRESSWOMAN DONNA AND GUN
VIOLENCE SURVIVOR GABBY GIFFORDS
, VERY HAPPY AND PROUD TO SPEAK
TODAY AND SUPPORT THE FARM
INDUSTRY RESPONSIBILITY ACT. WE
BELIEVE QUITE SIMPLY THAT THE
FIRE MINISTRY HAS A
RESPONSIBILITY LIKE ANY OTHER TO
TAKE REASONABLE PRECAUTIONS TO
PROTECT HUMAN LIFE, PREVENT
UNNECESSARY HARM AND SUFFERING.
WHEN INDUSTRY MEMBERS FAILED TO
TAKE REASONABLE PRECAUTIONS.
THEY SHOULD BE HELD FAIRLY AND
JUSTLY ACCOUNTABLE IN COURT,
JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY,
THE MORE NO LESS. TO THOSE THEY
WRONGFULLY HARMED. UNFORTUNATELY
GUN INDUSTRY TODAY HAS OFTEN
BEEN EXEMPTED FROM ANY LEVELS OF
REGULATION, OVERSIGHT AND
ACCOUNTABILITY THAT OTHERWISE
PROMOTE SAFER PRACTICES AND
AVERT HARM. THESE COMMUNITIES
HAVE SHIELDED THIS PROFITABLE
INDUSTRY, PACING BASIC FINANCIAL
INCENTIVES TO DO BETTER. THEY'VE
OFTEN LEFT VICTIMS OF GUN
VIOLENCE WITHOUT ANY MEASURE OF
COMPENSATION OR JUSTICE. AND
THEY PROVIDED AN UNFAIR BUSINESS
ADVANTAGE TO THE MOST
AGGRESSIVELY IRRESPONSIBLE
FOREIGN MINISTRY MEMBERS OVER
MORE RESPONSIBLE COMPETITORS.
THE GOOD NEWS THAT STATES CAN
ACT AS THIS BILL PROPOSES TO
PROMOTE ACCOUNTABILITY AND LIMIT
THE REACH OF THE FEDERAL GUN
INDUSTRY COMMUNITY LAW. WHICH
SPECIFICALLY PRESERVES A ROLE
FOR STATES TO PRESCRIBE AND
ENFORCE STANDARDS OF CONDUCT FOR
THE GUN INDUSTRY, PARTICULARLY
REGARDING CASES WERE PLAINTIFFS
CAN PROVE THEY WERE HARMED BY A
GUN INDUSTRY MEMBERS VIOLATION
OF STATE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE
SALES OR MARKETING. OF A FIREARM
OR RELATED PRODUCTS. CONSISTENT
WITH THE FEDERAL LAW THAT WOULD
CODIFY A FARM INDUSTRY STANDARD
OF CONDUCT AND CALIFORNIA CIVIL
CODE REQUIRING FOREIGN MINISTRY
MEMBERS TO TAKE REASONABLE
PRECAUTIONS TO PREVENT SPECIFIED
HARMS. I WOULD EXPRESSLY CLARIFY
THAT THE STANDARD OF CONDUCT
INCORPORATE SOME OTHER CONSUMER
SAFETY AND FAIR BUSINESS
PRACTICES LAWS. CALIFORNIA'S
LAWS PROHIBITING FALSE
ADVERTISING. PEREIRA PROACTIVELY
PROHIBIT FAR MINISTRY DEFENDANTS
FROM PRODUCING OR SELLING
FIREARMS, LIKE THE NEXT BUMP
STOCK DEVICES THAT ARE
ABNORMALLY DANGEROUS AND LIKELY
TO CAUSE AN UNREASONABLE RISK OF
HARM TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND
SAFETY. AND FINALLY WOULD
AUTHORIZE PEOPLE HARMED BY FIRE
MINISTRY MEMBERS VIOLATION OF
THIS STANDARD OF CONDUCT AND
DESIGNATED OFFICIALS ACTING ON
BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE TO SEEK
FAIR JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
FOR THAT HARM IN THE COURT. THIS
BUILDING FROM A SAFER AND MORE
RESPONSIBLE INDUSTRY PRACTICES
AND ENSURE WE'RE DOING ALL WE
CAN TO OPEN COURTROOM DOORS. THE
VICTIMS ACCESS TO JUSTICE TOP
EARLY FOR ORGANIZATION AND WE
STRONGLY URGE YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU, MR FREILICH. ALRIGHT
LAUREN LIEB. CHAIR AMBERG AND
DISTINGUISHED MEMBERS OF THE
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY. MY NAME IS
LAUREN LI. OH, WE LOST HIM
ASLEEP. HELLO. CAN YOU? YOU
CAN'T HEAR ME. YES, WE HEAR YOU
NOW. OKAY MY NAME IS LAUREN LI
AND GRASSROOTS GUN VIOLENCE
PREVENTION ACTIVISTS FOR MORE
THAN 20 YEARS. MY ACTIVISM BEGAN
, AS IT DOES FOR SO MANY PEOPLE
IN RESPONSE TO MY FAMILY'S
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH GUN
VIOLENCE. IN THE SUMMER OF 1999
, THE HEAVILY ARMED NEO ATTACK
THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN A
SUBURB OF LOS ANGELES. HE
ENTERED THE BUILDING WITH
MULTIPLE FIREARMS AND HIGH
CAPACITY MAGAZINES AND BEGIN
SHOOTING. HIS BARRAGE OF BULLETS
LASTED LESS THAN A MINUTE,
DURING WHICH TIME HE FIRED ABOUT
70 ROUNDS AND MULTIPLE PEOPLE
WERE SHOT. HE WAS EXPECTING TO
SEND A MESSAGE BY MASSACRING AN
ASSEMBLY OF JEWISH ADULT.
INSTEAD HE ENCOUNTERED SMALL
CHILDREN WHO ARE ATTENDING
SUMMER DAY CANCER. MY SIX YEAR
OLD SON WAS ONE OF THE CHILDREN
IN THE LINE OF FIRE. HE WAS HIT
MULTIPLE TIMES, AND MY EIGHT
YEAR OLD SON WAS ONE OF 200
OTHER CHILDREN WHO WITNESSED THE
CHAOS AND TERROR THAT DAY. AFTER
LEAVING THE JCC, THE SHOOTER
MURDERED JOSEPH A. LET Ó
FILIPINO AMERICAN POSTER WORKER
WHO WAS ON HIS ROUTE DELIVERING
MAIL. MY SON SURVIVED HIS
PHYSICAL WOUNDS. BUT FROM BOTH
OF MY CHILDREN, MY FAMILY AND MY
COMMUNITY, THE EMOTIONAL SCARS
WILL LAST A LIFETIME. OUR
EXPERIENCE. THIS EXPERIENCE IS
UNIQUELY AMERICAN. AFTER THE
SHOOTING, WE JOINED WITH OTHER
FAMILIES TO SUE THE GUN
MANUFACTURERS THAT ENGAGED IN
DANGEROUS AND IRRESPONSIBLE
BUSINESS PRACTICES RELATED TO
THE MANUFACTURER, MARKETING AND
DISTRIBUTION OF THE SHOOTERS,
FIREARMS. WE FILED OUR SUIT IN
2000, BUT THE GUN INDUSTRY
FOUGHT US FOR FIVE YEARS AND ALL
THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT
TO STOP THE CASE FROM GOING TO
TRIAL. THE SUPREME COURT RULED
TO ALLOW THE CASE TO MOVE
FORWARD. BUT LITTLE DID WE KNOW
THAT CONGRESS HAD ALSO BEEN
LOOKING AT FIREARM INDUSTRY
LAWSUITS LIKE OURS. THAT SAME
YEAR IN 2000 AND FIVE CONGRESS
PASSED THE PROTECTION OF LAWFUL
COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT, OR PLACA.
NOT ONLY DID PLAKA PROTECT THE
INDUSTRY FROM NEW LAWSUITS, BUT
IT IMPACTED CASES LIKE OURS THAT
HAD ALREADY AHEAD AND WRAP UP.
OKAY? IT'S NOT EQUAL JUSTICE
WHEN PEOPLE HARMED BY THE GUN
INDUSTRY CAN'T DO IN COURT, AND
WE APPRECIATE ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
KING FOR HIS DEDICATED WORK AND
URGED SUPPORT OF ABBY 15 94.
THANK YOU, MA'AM. OKAY. UM
OTHERS IN SUPPORT HERE IN THE
HEARING ROOM HAD APPROACHED THE
MICROPHONE. PROVIDE YOUR NAME,
YOUR AFFILIATION AND YOUR
POSITION. GOOD AFTERNOON. SHE
REMEMBERS REBECCA MARCUS ON
BEHALF OF ONE OF THE BILL'S
SPONSORS. BRADY, CALIFORNIA
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HELLO I'M
EMILY ALL FROM DAVIS. AND I'M A
MOMS DEMAND ACTION, VOLUNTEER
AND I SUPPORT THIS, BILL. THANK
YOU. HI CRYSTAL OPAL OTTO, MY
MOM'S RAN ACTION VOLUNTEER FROM
ALAMEDA AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
CASSANDRA WEB STONE MOMS DEMAND
ACTION VOLUNTEER FROM FOLSOM AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. ALRIGHT
OTHERS IN SUPPORT, MODERATE IF
YOU WOULD QUEUE THEM UP THOSE IN
SUPPORT OF A B 15 94 ON THE
PHONE. THANK YOU FOR THOSE IN
SUPPORT. PRESS LONDON ZERO WE
FIRST GO TO LINE 2 75 1 MOMENT,
PLEASE. AND GO AHEAD TO 75.
NIELSEN MARKS MORE ON BEHALF OF
THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. NEXT IS 2
37. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. HELLO
REMEMBERS. NICOLE OPINION IS ON
BEHALF OF EVERY TOWN FOR GUN
SAFETY AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
NEXT IS ONE. UH PARDON ME. NEXT
IS TWO THIRDS TO 17. PLEASE GO
AHEAD. AFTERNOON DYLAN FROM THE
NATIONALIST ASSOCIATION OF
SOCIAL WORKERS, CALIFORNIA
CHAPTER. I AM IN SUPPORT OF 15
94. THANK YOU. NEXT IS TO 76 GO
AHEAD, PLEASE. HELLO MY NAME'S
JULIETTE ML. OH, UH, APPALLING
ON BEHALF OF WOMEN FOR AMERICAN
VALUES AND ETHICS WAVE, AND WE
STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS, BILL.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WE GO
TO 1 87. THIS IS CLAIRE SIMPSON
FROM OPEN IN CALIFORNIA. I AM A
GUN VIOLENCE SURVIVOR AND A
VOLUNTEER WITH MOMS DEMAND
ACTION, AND I'M CALLING TO
STRONGLY SUPPORT MAYBE 15 94.
THANK YOU. NEXT WE GO TO 1 70,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. HEY! GOOD
AFTERNOON, CARRYING MEMBERS NAME
ALI, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR WITH
THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL ROB CONTEST WHO IS A
PROUD POST SPONSORS. 15 94.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU AND NO
FURTHER LINES. YOU MAY PROCEED.
ALRIGHT LET'S GO TO OPPOSITION.
AH! OPPOSITION TO A B 15 94
NOTE. NICK VIA. IF MR VISAS
EITHER HERE OR ON THE PHONE, MR
VIA YES. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE. AGAIN
MY NAME IS PHILIP, REPRESENTING
THE CALIFORNIA RIFLE AND PISTOL
ASSOCIATION. UM. CRP S ALREADY
SUBMITTED A VERY LENGTHY AND
DETAILED AND VERY COMPELLING
LETTER IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO
ÁP 15 94, SO I DON'T WANT TO BE
LABOR THAT I WOULD LIKE TO
MENTION AH! THAT PUBLIC LAW THAT
EARLIER WITNESS WASN'T ABLE TO
FINISH AND THAT WAS THE FEDERAL
LAW THAT PREVENTS FIREARM MEANT
BEING SUED. PROTECTION OF LAWFUL
COMMERCE. ACTEAL ONE O 9-90 TO
PROTECT MANUFACTURERS AND
DEALERS FROM BEING SUED WEN A
FIREARM IS USED IN A CRIME. THE
ACT WAS PASSED BY THE US SET
2000 AND FIVE AND PROHIBITS
VICTIMS OF A PERSON. MISUSING
FIREARMS PRODUCTS FROM SEEKING
DAMAGES OR INJUNCTIVE OR
BELIEFS. RULING DETERMINED
BUSINESSES IN THE UNITED STATES
THAT ARE LEGALLY ENGAGING IN
COMMERCE CANNOT AND SHOULD NOT
BE LIABLE FOR THE CRIMINAL
ACTIONS OF OTHERS DECIDE TO ACT
OUTSIDE OF THE CONTROL OF A
COMPANY OR MISUSE OF THEIR
PRODUCT, SPECIFICALLY THE RULING
STATE AND I QUOTE THE
POSSIBILITY OF IMPOSING
FOR HARM THAT IS SOLELY CAUSED
BY OTHERS IS AN ABUSE OF THE
LEGAL SYSTEM ERODES PUBLIC
CONFIDENCE IN OUR NATION'S LAWS.
THREATENS THE DOMINATION. OF A
BASIC CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND
CIVIL LIBERTY INVITES THE
DISASSEMBLY AND DESTABILIZATION
OF OTHER DISTRICT ECONOMIC
SECTORS LAWFULLY COMPETING IN
THE FREE ENTERPRISE OF THE
UNITED STATES. CONSTITUTES AN
UNREASONABLE BURDEN ON
INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE
OF THE UNITED STATES. UNQUOTE. P
R PA. THE SAFETY OF CALIFORNIA'S
IS REALLY AT THE VERY FOUNDATION
OF ORGANIZATION. IT'S BEEN OUR
CONSISTENT GOAL TO WORK TOWARDS
COMMON SENSE SOLUTIONS REGARDING
THOSE ISSUES OF CRIME. IN
RESPONSIBLE FIREARM OWNERSHIP.
THIS CAN BE DONE, HOWEVER,
WITHOUT SACRIFICING OUR
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND THE
ABILITY OF LAW ABIDING UM, LAW
ABIDING PEOPLE TO PROTECT THEIR
FAMILIES AND ENJOY COMPETITIVE
SHOOTING THIS WE THANK YOU AGAIN
, AND WE HEARD YOU, UH, NO. VOTE
ON. MAYBE 15 94 ALREADY. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR PHILIP.
ALRIGHT. UM OTHERS IN OPPOSITION
HERE IN ROOM 2100, SAYING NO ONE
APPROACHES THE MICROPHONE ON THE
PHONE MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD
QUEUE UP THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO
HB 15 94. THANK YOU, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN, ONCE AGAIN IF YOU ARE
AN OPPOSITION PRESS 10. AND WE
WILL FIRST GO TO LINE 2 38,
PLEASE GO AHEAD. MR CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS SAM PAREDES,
REPRESENTING GUN OWNERS OF
CALIFORNIA AND ON BEHALF OF THE
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION AND
THE NATIONAL SHOOTING SPORTS
FOUNDATION IN STRONG OPPOSITION
TO THIS BILL. NEXT WE GO TO 78
GO AHEAD, PLEASE. HI I MISSED
WHEN I WHEN I WAS SUPPOSED TO
CALL IN FOR SUPPORT. THIS IS
PETER STEIN FROM WOMEN FOR
AMERICAN VALUES AND ETHICS AND
STRONG SUPPORT. NEXT WE GO TO
68, PLEASE GO AHEAD. HEIGHT
HEATHER COLA, MAC AND I OPPOSE
15 94. AND NO FURTHER QUESTIONS
. YOU MAY CONTINUE ALREADY BRING
IT BACK TO COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS SEEING NO
QUESTIONS. NO COMMENTS. IS THERE
A MOTION SENATOR STERN MOVES THE
BILL. ALL RIGHT, UM WOULD YOU
CARE TO CLOSE ON BEHALF OF SOME
OF THE MEMBER TING? THANK YOU,
MR. UH MR CHAIR AND SENATORS.
THIS IS ONE OF THE BILLS AMONG
THE PACKAGE OF GUN VIOLENCE
PREVENTION LEGISLATION, WHICH
HOPED TO BE HEADING TO THE
GOVERNOR'S DESK LATER THIS
MONTH. I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
FOR I VOTE. THANK YOU. ALL
RIGHT, MADAM SECRETARY, IF YOU
WOULD CALL THE ROLL THE MOTION
IS DUE PAST BUT FIRST WE RE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS UMBERG. HAMBURG.
I BORE GIS. OR JUST KNOW OF A
EURO HUESO. GRASSO. I GONZALES.
HERTZBERG HERZBERG, I. JONES.
CLEARED BY STERN STERN. I
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI. AYE
WIENER. WIENER? AYE. YOU HAVE 7
TO 1 WITH MEMBERS MISSING.
ALRIGHT. WE'LL PUT THAT ON CALL.
ALL RIGHT, UM NEXT. WE HAVE THE
VERY LAST BILL FOR TODAY.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S EARLY YOU'VE
BEEN IN AND OUT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. SO I TOLD COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. I THOUGHT WE WOULD BE
HERE TILL SIX O'CLOCK TONIGHT.
AND SINCE IT'S THE LAST BILL,
YOU HAVE ONE HOUR AND 55 MINUTES
. I WILL TALK VERY SLOWLY, ALL
RIGHT. SEE, THERE'S BEEN A
THERE'S BEEN A REVOLT HERE, SO
MAYBE NOT. MAYBE NOT THAT LONG.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR MEMBERS
TODAY. I'M I'M PRESENTING A B
2031. I'LL BE ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS, AND I
APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE'S WORK
ON THIS. THE AMENDMENTS
CLARIFIED THAT A RESIDENT CAN
BRING AN INTERPRETER AS WELL AS
ANOTHER REPRESENTATIVE TO A
MEETING WITH PARK MANAGEMENT.
THIS BILL WILL ENSURE THAT
RESIDENTS CAN BRING A
REPRESENTATIVE TO MEETINGS WITH
PARK MANAGEMENT. CURRENTLY PARK
MANAGEMENT HAS BEEN INTERPRETING
STATURE TO MEAN THAT THEY CAN
ONLY ALLOW RESIDENTS OR THEIR
REPRESENTATIVES TO MEET WITH
PARK MANDARIN, BUT NOT BOTH.
SIMULTANEOUSLY THIS RESULTS IN
WASTED TIME AND INEFFECTIVE
MEETINGS WHEN THE RESIDENT NEEDS
THE HELP OF AN INTERPRETER OR
THE SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE OF AN
ADVOCATE OR ATTORNEY TO NAVIGATE
COMPLEX ISSUES. THIS BILL WILL
CLARIFY THAT BOTH RESIDENTS AND
THEIR REPRESENTATIVES CAN MEET
THE PARK MANAGEMENT ABOUT
SPECIFIED ISSUES SUCH AS
MAINTENANCE STANDARDS OR
RESIDENT CONCERNS ABOUT MOBILE
HOME PARK RULES. ESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR I VOTE. AND WITH ME
TESTIFYING, I BELIEVE ON THE
PHONE WILL BE MARTHA O'CONNELL
FROM DISMAL STANDING. WHO'S
BRUCE STANTON IS THE LEGAL
COUNSEL FOR DISMAL. BOTH ARE
ALSO AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, MISS O'CONNELL, YOU'RE
AVAILABLE. OR MR STANTON,
EITHER. IF EITHER OF YOU ARE
AVAILABLE ON THE PHONE, PLEASE
IDENTIFY YOURSELVES. CENTER
LAYERED WISHES TO ADVISED THAT
YOU MAY BE AS BRIEF AS THE
AUTHOR. THIS IS BRUCE STANTON. I
WAS ACTUALLY GONNA JUST LEND
SUPPORT TO MS O'CONNELL'S
HELPFUL FOR QUESTIONS, OKAY?
MISS O'CONNELL, ARE YOU
AVAILABLE? IF SHE'S NOT
AVAILABLE, WE CAN COME BACK TO
HER. LET'S DO THIS. LET'S TAKE
OTHERS AND SUPPORT HERE IN ROOM
2100 SEEING NO ONE APPROACHED
THE MICROPHONE, LET'S GO TO THE
PHONES AND MISS O'CONNELL
PRESENTS HERSELF WILL COME BACK
TO HER IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE USE
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S EARLY ALRIGHT.
I SEE AHEAD. NOT OKAY. MODERATOR
IF YOU WOULD QUEUE UP THOSE IN
SUPPORT OF A B 2031.
MATTER. IS THERE ANYONE IN
SUPPORT ON THE PHONE LINE A. B
2031. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ONCE
AGAIN PRESS 10. NO ONE IS
QUEUING UP, SIR. ALRIGHT UH,
WELL NOW TURNED OPPOSITION ONCE
AGAIN IF MISS O'CONNELL PRESENTS
HERSELF WILL TAKE HER TESTIMONY.
UM ANYONE. I SEE THERE'S NO
PRIMARY WITNESSES AND OPPOSITION
. UM AND I SEE NO ONE
APPROACHING THE MICROPHONE HERE
IN ROOM 2100 AND OPPOSITION TO A
B 2031. MODERATOR IF YOU WOULD
QUEUE UP THOSE ON THE PHONE LINE
IN OPPOSITION TO A B 2031 THANK
YOU. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ONCE
AGAIN PRESS 10, IF YOU ARE AN
OPPOSITION. AND NO ONE HAS
QUEUED UP, SIR. ALRIGHT, IT'S
MISS O'CONNELL AVAILABLE. I DO
NOT SHOW HER LINE CONNECTED. I'M
SORRY. I'VE BEEN WAITING TO THE
LINE TO BE MUTED. YOU HEAR ME,
PLEASE? YES, WE CAN GO AHEAD,
MISS O'CONNELL. GOOD AFTERNOON
CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS,
MARTHA O'CONNELL ON BEHALF OF
THE GOLDEN STATE MANUFACTURED
HOMEOWNERS LEAGUE IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL. I AM A SENIOR BEING IN
A MOBILE HOME PARK AND SAN JOSE.
AS A GSM. OH, WELL REGIONAL
MANAGER. I AM CONSISTENTLY
WORKING TO HELP SOLVE PROBLEMS
IT MY PARKS AND SCROUNGING
PARTS. MAYBE 2031. PROPOSES TO
AMEND THE MOBILE HOME RESIDENCY
LAW TO PROMOTE IMPROVED
COMMUNICATION AND PROBLEM
SOLVING BETWEEN MOBILE HOMES.
HOMEOWNERS. MOBILE HOME PARK
MANAGEMENT. MANY PARK OWNERS ARE
INTERPRETING CIVIL CODES.
798.532 LITERALLY. ALLOWING
EITHER A MOBILE HOME RESIDENT OR
THEIR REPRESENTATIVES TO MEET
WITH PARK MANAGEMENT. BUT NOT
BOTH. THIS LAW WAS MEANT TO
BREAK A VEHICLE FOR RESOLVING
GRIEVANCES. WHEN PEOPLE SEEK
REDRESS, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO
DO SO ALONE. BUT SHOULD THEY
NEED ASSISTANCE? STATE LAWS
COMMONLY ALLOW THEM TO UTILIZE
THE ASSISTANCE OF AND BE JOINED
BY QUALIFIED ADVOCATES OR
REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE SAKE OF
RESOLVING PROBLEMS. THIS BILL
PROPOSES TO ALIGN ITSELF WITH
THOSE CURRENT CALIFORNIA
GOVERNANCE VALUES. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR CONSIDERATION. WARD.
ALRIGHTY THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MISS O'CONNELL. ALRIGHT, LET'S
TURN TO COMMITTEE. I BELIEVE
WE'VE TAKEN ALL THE SUPPORTING
OPPOSITION QUESTIONS BY
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. SEEING NONE.
IS THERE A MOTION SENATOR DURAZO
MOVES THE BILL. ALL RIGHT? UM
SOME OF THEM WERE LEADING CARE
TO CLOSE ITS RIGHTFUL MASTER. I
VOTE ALRIGHT, GREAT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, ALRIGHT. MADAM
SECRETARY, IF YOU WOULD CALL THE
ROLE, AND I BELIEVE WE ARE
COMPLETE, SO WE'RE GOING TO CALL
THE ROLL ON THIS BILL, AND THEN
WE'RE GONNA GO, SENATOR
GONZALEZ, WE'RE WAITING FOR
SENATOR GONZALEZ ALSO ALRIGHT,
BUT WE'LL WE'LL GO THROUGH THE
ROLL TWICE. SO GO AHEAD. MADAM
SECRETARY, IF YOU WOULD CALL THE
ROLL ON A B 2031 THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS AS AMENDED. HAMBURG
HAMBURG GORGEOUS GORGEOUS. I
CABALLERO ZERO. I DURAZO. SO I
GONZALEZ. HERTZBERG HERZBERG, I.
JONES. JONES. I LAIRD GLARED. I
STERN STERN. I WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI. AYE, WIENER. WIENER
I YOU HAVE 10 TO 0 WITH ONE
MEMBER. ALRIGHT LET'S PUT IT
BACK ON CALL. LET'S START AT THE
TOP AND GO THROUGH THE LIST. ONE
TIME. UM, AND WHEN SENATOR
GONZALEZ PRESENTS HERSELF WILL
WILL GO AGAIN. ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR WITH THE CHAIR VOTING I
GORGEOUS. GORGEOUS. I HERTZBERG. PITTSBURGH I, JONES JONES. I
LAYERED LAIRD. I WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI. AYE. YOU HAVE 11 TO
0 ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
ALRIGHT, CONSENT COUNTER IS
ADOPTED. FILE ITEM NUMBER 1 22
23 NEEDS A MOTION. UM SENATOR
WIENER MOOSE VILLE. BILLS HEARD
BY SUBCOMMITTEE. THE MOTION IS
DUE PAST BUT FIRST BE RE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
HEALTH HAMBURG. HAMBURG. I BORE
GIS. GORGEOUS. NO, CABALLERO.
COUPLE OF YEAR OLD DURAZO
GONZALEZ. HARTSBURG. HERTZBERG
I, JONES JONES? NO, LAIRD LAIRD.
I STERN STERN. I WIECKOWSKI.
WIECKOWSKI AYE. WIENER WIENER I
YOU HAVE 8 TO 2 WITH ONE MEMBER
MISSING BACK ON CALL. FILE ITEM
NUMBER TWO A B 2777 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS NEEDS
EMOTION. M
E BILL. THE MOTION IS DUE PASS
BUT FIRST AMEND AND BE REFERRED
TO THE COMMITTEE ON
APPROPRIATIONS UMBERG. HAMBURG.
I BURGESS GORGEOUS. NO,
CABALLERO. CABALLERO. I DO
RUSSELL. SO I GONZALES.
HERTZBERG HERZBERG, I, JONES
JONES. NO, LAIRD, I STERN.
STERN. I WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI.
AYE, WIENER. WIENER? AYE. YOU
HAVE 8 TO 2 WITH ONE MEMBER
MISSING, ALL RIGHT BACK ON CALL.
FILE ITEM NUMBER FOUR A B 16 66.
WITH THE CHAIR VOTING, AYE.
GORGEOUS. GORGEOUS. NO.
HERTZBERG HERZBERG, I. JONES.
JONES NO. LAIRD CLEARED. I
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI. AYE. YOU
HAVE. 922 WITH EVERYONE PRESENT
IS OUT. FILE ITEM NUMBER FIVE A
B 25 71. WITH THE CHAIR VOTING,
AYE. PORCHES. TO RUSSELL. LARA.
SO I GONZALEZ FIND THEM FIVE.
HMM. GONZALES. I HERTZBERG
HARTSBURG. AYE, WIECKOWSKI.
WIECKOWSKI. AYE, WIENER. WIENER?
AYE. YOU HAVE 9 TO 1 WITH
EVERYONE VOTED. ALRIGHT, BILLS
OUT. FILE ITEM NUMBER EIGHT A. B
2091 WITH THE CHAIR VOTING I TO
RUSSELL. SO I GONZALES. GONZALEZ
I HERZBERG HERZBERG. I JONES
JONES. NO WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI
. AYE, WIENER WIENER, I YOU HAVE
9 TO 2 WITH EVERYONE VOTING.
BILLS OUT. FILE ITEM NUMBER 9 18
21 59 WITH THE CHAIR VOTING I
CABALLERO. FILE ITEM NUMBER
NINE. CABALLERO I, GONZALEZ
GONZALEZ. I HERTZBERG HERTZBERG,
I JONES. JONES. NO WIECKOWSKI.
WIECKOWSKI AYE. WIENER WIENER, I
YOU HAVE 92 WITH EVERYONE. VOTED
OUT. FILE ITEM NUMBER 10 ABC, 7
48 BY SIMILAR MEMBER CABALLERO
NEEDS A MOTION. A REAL KOREA.
I'M SORRY, SENATOR LAIRD MOVES
THE BILL O SER, COVER YOUR OWN
MOVES. THE BILL. IT'S CERTAINLY
YEAH AS WELL AS SENATOR
CABALLERO. BOTH OF THEM DID UM
THE MOTION IS DUE PAST BUT FIRST
AMEND AND RE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
HAMBURG. HAMBURG. I BORE GIS.
GORGEOUS I CABALLERO COUPLE
YEARS OLD. I DO NOT SO I
GONZALES GONZALES. I HERTZBERG.
HERTZBERG JONES JONES, I LAIRD
EYES STERN. STERN. I WIECKOWSKI
WIECKOWSKI. AYE, WIENER. WIENER
I YOU HAVE 11 TO 0 BILLS OUT.
FILE ITEM NUMBER 14 MAYBE 23 09
BY ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S FRIEDMAN
NEEDS A MOTION. SENATOR ROSS
RAMOS BILL. THE MOTION IS DUE
PAST BUT FIRST AMEND AND
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
HUMAN SERVICES UMBERG. UM, I
BURGESS. GORGEOUS I CABALLERO
CABALLERO, I DURAZO Hí
GONZALES. GONZALEZ I HERZBERG
HERZBERG. I JONES JONES. I LAIRD
LAYERED I STERN STERN. I
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI. AYE,
WIENER. WIENER. I HAVE 11 TO 0.
BILLS OUT. FILE ITEM NUMBER 15,
MAYBE 20 TO 96 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S JOHN SWEAR WITH
DORIS. OH, H
NZALEZ. I HERTZBERG HERTZBERG,
I JONES. WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI.
AYE WIENER. WIENER I YOU HAVE 9
TO 0 WITH ALL MEMBERS BEING
PRESENT. FILE ITEM NUMBER 16 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S EARLY A B 2031
WITH THE CHAIR VOTING I
GONZALES. GONZALEZ I THAT'S 11
TO 0 BILLS OUT. FILE ITEM NUMBER
18, MAYBE 1917 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S LEVINE. WITH
THE CHAIR VOTING. I COPY EURO
COMING YEAR OLD I GONZALES.
GONZALEZ. I HERZBERG HERZBERG. I
JONES JONES, NO WIENER. WIENER,
I YOU HAVE 9 TO 2. GOES OUT.
FILE ITEM NUMBER 28 27 66 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MAIENSCHEIN
WITH THE CHAIR VOTING I
GORGEOUS. OR JUST KNOW CABALLERO
CABALLERO? AYE. GONZALES.
GONZALEZ. I HERTZBERG
PITTSBURGH, I JONES. JONES NO
WIECKOWSKI WIECKOWSKI. AYE,
WIENER. WIENER? AYE. YOU HAVE 9
TO 2, WITH ALL MEMBERS HAVING
VOTED BILLS OUT. FILE ITEM
NUMBER 27 A B 17 11 BY SOME
REMEMBER SEYARTO THE MOTION. WE
NEED A MOTION. SENATOR JONES.
MOST BILL. THE MOTION IS TO PASS
. BUT FIRST WE RE REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
HAMBURG. HAMBURG. I BORE GIS.
GORGEOUS. I CABALLERO TO
RUSSELL. GONZALES. HERTZBERG.
JONES. JONES. I LAIRD. STERN.
WIECKOWSKI. AYE WIECKOWSKI I
WINNER. WIENER I YOU HAVE 5 TO
0. CALL THE ROLL. CLUB HERO.
BROSSEAU. GONZALES. HERTZBERG.
HERTZBERG? AYE, LAIRD. STERN.
YOU HAVE 60 0. ALRIGHT, BILLS
OUT. OKAY? YEAH. UH, OKAY. FILE
ITEM NUMBER 28 MAYBE 15 94 BY
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S TING WITH THE
CHAIR VOTING, AYE. CABALLERO.
GONZALEZ. GONZALES. I JONES.
JONES. NO. YOU HAVE 8 TO 2.
BUILT IS OUT. THAT'S IT. I
THINK, MADAM SECRETARY. ALL
FINAL ON 29 IF YOU DIDN'T.
ALRIGHT ON FILM NUMBER 29 HAS
BEEN PULLED THIS WEEK. FOUND
29TH PULLED SO WE'LL GO AHEAD
AND CALL THE ROLL ONE MORE TIME.
UM ON THE BILLS THAT SENATOR
GONZALEZ WAS NOT HERE TO VOTE
UPON.
FILE IN, UM, NUMBER ONE, MAYBE
22 23 GONZALEZ. GONZALEZ, I YOU
HAVE 92. SENATOR. FILE ITEM
NUMBER TWO A B 27 77 BY ASSEMBLY
. I'M ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S WICKS.
GONZALEZ. GONZALES I YOU HAVE 9
TO 2. I THINK THAT'S I THINK
THAT'S IT. YEAH. ALRIGHT, WE'RE
DONE. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL BE BACK
NEXT TUESDY. OKAY. DRINK YOUR
RED BULL. THANK YOU ALL. DHCS.
YEAH. HOW ABOUT THAT, HUH? I
KNOW.