1. law, govt and politics
2. government
3. legislative

May 4, 2015
Defying citizens’ pleas, Judiciary Committee
approves AB 775
By Lori Arnold
Research Analyst
Ignoring pleas from over 100 citizens (and impassioned
arguments by two Republican lawmakers), the Assembly Judiciary
Committee voted 7-3 last Tuesday (April 28) to force Pregnancy
Resource Centers (PRCs) to promote abortions in their lobbies and
in all print and online advertising.
UPDATE: CFA’s Executive Director Jonathan Keller was in Sacramento and recorded a special Capitol Report detailing
the hearing and interviewing several PRC directors. Visit CFC’s YouTube page to view the 9-minute video.
The proposal, Assembly Bill (AB) 775, now advances to the Assembly Appropriations Committee where it will be heard this
Wednesday (May 6).
In trying to justify the need for the legislation, the bill’s author, David Chiu (D-San Francisco), cited a report claiming that 91
percent of California pregnancy centers visited during a recent undercover investigation presented “misinformation.” The report,
however, was prepared by NARAL Pro-Choice California, the state arm of one of the nation’s largest abortion advocacy organizations.
Assemblyman James Gallagher (R-Chico) took strong exception to enacting legislation based upon what he called a biased report.
“If I were to bring a bill before this committee based on a report from a prolife organization that had done investigations in some of
the public clinics around the state … would you support that? Beause that’s what you are asking me to do.”
Gallagher also pressed Chiu on the constitutionality of forcing operators of private clinics to violate their consciences by referring
patients to abortion clinics.
“There’s already federal case law on point that says you can’t do this,” Gallagher said. “I think that’s a problem for us, as the
judiciary committee, to go ahead and approve legislation that’s going to be unconstitutional as soon as it was passed.”
Obviously frustrated, Chiu insisted that the law was narrowly written to withstand a constitutional challenge. He further tried to
claim AB 775 was merely designed to disseminate information on the full spectrum of care available to California women.
Gallagher continued to push back on Chiu, though, saying the proposed bill creates an uneven playing field.
“If that is the truth, would you take as a friendly amendment something that would require all primary care clinics to provide the full
spectrum of information and care that’s available to them, including the counseling and pre-natal care information that they can get
from these crisis pregnancy resource clinics, information on adoption for those who may want to chose that as an option?”
A defiant Chiu refused to accept Gallagher’s amendment.
Assemblyman Don Wagner (R-Tustin), piggybacking on colleague Gallagher’s concerns about forcing constituents to violate their
conscience, offered his own amendment. Wagner mused that if the bill wasn’t really about abortion, would Chiu agree to simply strike
the four instances of “abortion” from the bill?
Barely hiding his annoyance, Chiu again rejected any amendment.
Wagner continued, calling the bill “heavy-handed” and a “misuse of government.”
“How can we, as a government, force our citizens to violate their conscience, and isn’t that exactly what the First Amendment says
we can’t do, shouldn’t do and, frankly, aren’t true to our Oath of Office if we try to do?”
Wagner went on to say, “The point is they are telling people—in violation of their conscience— that there is this procedure
available that they, rightly or wrongly, believe results in the death of an innocent human being.”
California Family Alliance commends Gallagher and Wagner for their courage in pointing out the hypocrisy of the bill. If you would
like to personally thank them for their stance, you can contacted them at:
James Gallagher (R-Chico)
Sacramento Office (916) 319-2003
Fax (916) 319-2103
District Office (530) 895-4217
[email protected]
Donald P. Wagner (R-Tustin)
Sacramento Office (916) 319-2068
Fax (916) 319-2168
District Office (714) 665-6868
[email protected]
For more information on AB 775, including CFA’s assessment, summary, talking points and a sample letter, see our April 20
Action Alert.
In the meantime, Senate Bill (SB) 128, another anti-life bill that we have been tracking, will get its third hearing on May 11, this
time in the Senate Appropriations Committee. The deadline to have opposition letters to the committee is 4 p.m. today. As you recall,
SB 128 would legalize assisted suicide throughout California. It addition to our fundamental concerns about prematurely ending life, SB
128 is particularly dangerous because it targets society’s most vulnerable—the poor, disabled and terminally ill. For your convenience,
we have included CFA’s summary, talking points, and a sample letter for SB 128, as well as the list of committee members.
The remaining bills we are watching this week and next are included in our regular round-up after the key bill information on SB
128.
Key Bill
SB 128 (Wolk-Vacaville) End of life.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Summary: This bill would enact the End of Life Option Act authorizing an adult who meets certain qualifications, and who has
been determined by his or her attending physician to be suffering from a terminal illness, as defined, to make a request for
medication prescribed pursuant to these provisions for the purpose of ending his or her life. The bill would establish the procedures
for making these requests. The bill would also establish the forms to request aid-in-dying medication and under specified
circumstances an interpreter declaration to be signed subject to penalty of perjury, thereby imposing a crime and state-mandated
local program.
Passed Senate Health Committee, 6-2
Passed Senate Judiciary Committee, as amended, 5-2
Senate Appropriations Committee
Talking Points:
•
SB 128 violates a doctor’s Hippocratic Oath to “do no harm.”
•
SB 128 ignores the subjective and unreliable practice of estimating a person’s life expectancy after receiving a terminal
diagnosis.
•
SB 128 disregards the role of depression that is frequently associated with terminal diagnoses, and only suggests that doctors
refer a patient to counseling “if appropriate.”
•
SB 128 downplays advances in palliative and hospice care, which can ease a terminal patient’s suffering during the end
stages of their disease.
•
SB 128 contains no provisions to track or review the total number of assisted-suicide cases, offering instead an annual review
of a “sample of certain records.” Statistical reports would only be complied from these sample records. Death certificates
would list only the underlying terminal illness, not assisted suicide.
•
SB 128 offers no impartial witnesses in case a patient changes their mind after seeking the death prescription.
•
SB 128 prohibits the issuance of insurance in relation to a request, but provides no investigation to be sure the patient is not
under financial duress in seeking the early death option.
•
SB 128 eliminates all liability and professional disciplinary action for doctors who assist a patient with killing themselves.
•
SB 128 provides protections for doctors to opt out of participation, but as we’ve seen in past legislation across the country,
such protections are often wrested away in subsequent years.
•
SB 128 declares it a felony to falsify documents related to assisted suicide requests, but provides no mechanism to ensure
their legitimacy before the suicide.
Sample letter
NOTE: Faxing letters is much more effective than telephone calls or emails, which are not always tracked.
To have your correspondence included in the official record in time for the hearing, letters must by faxed to the committee
office at (916) 651-4101 by 4 p.m. today, May 4, 2015. It is also advisable to fax copies to all committee members.
Contact information for each committee member is listed after the sample letter.
The Honorable Richardo Lara, Chairman
Senate Appropriations Committee
State Capitol, Room 2206
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: SB 128 (oppose)
Dear Chairman Lara:
I would like to add my voice to the growing number of medical and disability rights groups who oppose SB 128, the proposed law
to legalize assisted suicide in California.
As doctors and medical professionals across the country have continued to improve end-of-life care through advances in palliative
and hospice care, the potential for mistakes and abuse are too great to accept this measure. SB 128 simply carries too many risks.
Opposition to this bill is wide and is not contained to a single political party or ethnic group. Marilyn Golden, a progressive who
serves as Senior Policy Analyst of the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund said in a recent Associated Press article that by
their nature, assisted-suicide laws inevitably result in people wrongly dying.
“No safeguards have ever been enacted or proposed that can prevent this outcome, which can never be undone,” Golden said.
I agree and so does research conducted in Oregon, Washington, Belgium and the Netherlands, areas that have already
implemented such laws.
The safeguards presented in SB 128 will not protect vulnerable patients from becoming casualties over the tug-of-war between
affordable health care insurance and the escalating costs to provide medical treatments. Ther is also no true way to protect against
undue influence for those who seek to profit from a patients early death. The true compassionate approach is to provide terminal
patients with a variety of viable life-affurming options, including physical, mental and emotional support.
A host of other organizations agree: Californians Against Assisted Suicide, the American Medical Association, American College of
Pediatricians, American Geriatrics Society, American Nursing Association, California Family Alliance, California Catholic
Conference, California Disability Alliance, Berkeley Commission on Disability, and Autistic Self Advocacy Network.
Please protect all Californians and oppose SB 128.
Sincerely,
Senate Appropriations Committee
Chair Ricardo Lara (D-Long Beach)
Sacramento Office (916) 651-4033
Fax (916) 651-4933
District Office (562) 256-7921
[email protected]
Vice Chair Patricia Bates (R-San Juan Capistrano)
Sacramento Office (916) 651-4036
Fax (916) 651-4936
District Office (949) 489-9838
[email protected]
Jim Beall (D-Campbell)
Sacramento Office (916) 651-4015
Fax (916) 651-4915
District Office (408) 558-1295
[email protected]
Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo)
Sacramento Office (916) 651-4013
Fax (916) 651-4913
District Office (650) 212-3313
[email protected]
Connie Leyva (D-Chino)
Sacramento Office (916) 651-4020
Fax (916) 651-4020
District Office (909) 591-7016
[email protected]
Tony Mendoza (D-Montebello)
Sacramento Office (916) 651-4032
Fax (916) 651-4032
District Office (323) 890-2790
[email protected]
Jim Nielsen (R-Roseville)
Sacramento Office (916) 651-4004
Fax (916) 651-4904
District Office (916) 772-0571
[email protected]
Legislative actions: Week of April 27
AB 201 (Brough R-San Juan Capistrano) Registered sex offenders: local ordinances.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Passed Assembly Local Governmental Organization Committee, as amended, 7-0
To Assembly Public Safety Committee
AB 329 (Weber D-San Diego) Pupil instruction: sexual health education.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Passed Assembly Education Committee, 6-1
Assembly Appropriations Committee, to suspense file
AB 431 (Gray D-Merced) Gambling: Internet poker.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Passed Assembly Governmental Organization Committee, as amended, 20-0
To Assembly Appropriations Committee
AB 517 (Gallagher R-Chico) The California Comprehensive Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Prevention Education Act:
educational materials.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Failed Assembly Education Committee, 5-1
Reconsideration in Assembly Education Committee
Passed Assembly Education Committee, as amended
To Assembly Appropriations Committee
AB 526 (Holden D-Pasadena) Abduction.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Passed Assembly Public Safety Committee, 6-0
Passed Assembly, 77-0
To Senate
AB 733 (Chávez R-Carlsbad) Crimes: prostitution.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Failed Assembly Public Safety Committee, 2-4
Reconsideration granted
AB 734 (Kim R-Fullerton) School intervention: parent empowerment: petition appeal.
CFA’s Assessment: Monitor
Failed Assembly Education Committee, as amended, 2-4
AB 775 (Chiu D-San Francisco) Reproductive FACT Act.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Passed Assembly Health Committee, as amended, 12-5
Passed Assembly Judiciary Committee, 7-3
To Assembly Appropriations Committee
AB 865 (Alejo D-Salinas) State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission: grants and loans:
diversity.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose.
Passed Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee, as amended, 10-3
Passed Assembly Jobs, Economic Development and the Economy Committee, as amended, 6-1
To Assembly Appropriations Committee
AB 987 (Levine D-San Rafael) Employment discrimination, unlawful employment practices.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Passed Assembly Labor and Employment Committee, 6-0
Passed Assembly Appropriations Committee, 17-0
Passed Assembly, 76-0
To Senate
AB 1044 (Baker R-San Ramon) School employees: reduction in workforce.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Assembly Education Committee
To Interim study
AB 1051 (Maienschein R-San Diego) Human trafficking.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Passed Assembly Public Safety Committee, as amended, 6-1
To Assembly Appropriations Committee
AB 1078 (Olsen R-Modesto) Teachers: evaluations.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Assembly Education Committee
To Interim study
AB 1254 (Grove R-Bakersfield) Health care service plans: abortion coverage.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Failed Assembly Health Committee, as amended 5-14
Reconsideration granted
SB 151 (Hernandez D-West Covina) Tobacco products: minimum legal age.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Passed Senate Health Committee, 9-0
Senate Appropriations Committee, to suspense file
SB 305 (Bates D-Carlsbad) Enhancements: concentrated cannabis.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Passed Senate Public Safety Committee, as amended, 6-0
To Senate Appropriations Committee
Senate second reading, amended,
Re-referred to Senate Appropriations Committee
SB 731 (Leno D-San Francisco) Foster children: housing: gender identity.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Passed Senate Human Services Committee, 3-0
Passed Senate Judiciary Committee, 5-1
To Senate Appropriations Committee
Scheduled floor votes: week of May 4
Monday, May 4
AB 827 (O’Donnell D-Long Beach) Teachers: in-service training: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning pupil
resources.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Summary: Existing law establishes the system of public elementary and secondary schools in this state and provides for the
establishment of local educational agencies to operate these schools and provide instruction to pupils. Existing law states the
policy of the State of California to afford all persons in public schools, regardless of their disability, gender, gender identity, gender
expression, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other specified characteristic, equal rights and
opportunities in the educational institutions of the state.
This bill would require each school operated by a school district or county office of education and each charter school to provide inservice training every school year to teachers of pupils in grades 7 to 12, inclusive, on schoolsite and community resources for the
support of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning pupils, as specified. By imposing additional duties on local
educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
Passed Assembly Education Committee, 6-1
Assembly second reading
AB 1051 (Maienschein R-San Diego) Human trafficking.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Summary: The bill would add human trafficking to the “a pattern of criminal gang activity” crimes covered by the voter approved
Proposition 21.
Additionally, AB 1051 would require that a person convicted of a human trafficking offense or of specified sex trafficking offenses
where any part of the violation takes place upon the grounds of, or within 1,000 feet of, a public or private elementary school,
vocational, junior high, or high school during the hours that the school is open for classes or school-related programs, or at any
time when minors are using the facility, to receive, in addition to any other penalty imposed, punishment of 3 years in state prison.
The bill would also require that the person sentenced under this provision serve the entire term of his or her imprisonment for the
underlying offense, as well as the additional term imposed, in the state prison.
Passed Assembly Public Safety Committee, as amended, 6-1
Assembly second reading
AB 431 (Gray D-Merced) Gambling: Internet poker.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose.
Summary: This bill would authorize the operation of an Internet poker website within the borders of the state and would require
the California Gambling Control Commission, in consultation with the Department of Justice, to develop a licensing process for
operators as well as rules for the operation of an Internet poker website.
Background: Existing law, the Gambling Control Act, provides for the licensure and regulation of various legalized gambling
activities and establishments by the California Gambling Control Commission and the investigation and enforcement of those
activities and establishments by the Department of Justice.
This bill would authorize the operation of an Internet poker Web site within the borders of the state. The bill would require the
commission, in consultation with the department, to promulgate regulations for intrastate Internet poker. The bill would require
those regulations to include, but not be limited to, a licensing process for an individual or entity to become an operator of an
Internet poker Web site and rules for the operation of an Internet poker Web site.
Passed Assembly Governmental Organization Committee, as amended, 20-0
Assembly second reading
Scheduled hearings: week of May 4
Monday, May 4
SB 703 (Leno D-San Francisco) Public contracts: prohibitions: discrimination.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Summary: Existing law authorizes state agencies to enter into contracts for the acquisition of goods or services upon approval by
the Department of General Services. This bill would prohibit a state agency from entering into contracts for the acquisition of goods
or services of $100,000 or more with a contractor that discriminates between employees on the basis of gender identity in the
provision of benefits, as specified. The bill would require the department to maintain an easily accessible list on its Internet Web
site of contracts for the acquisition of goods or services of $100,000 or more entered into on or after January 1, 2016.
Passed Senate Governmental Organization Committee, 7-3
Passed Senate Judiciary Committee, 5-1
Wednesday, May 6
AB 775 (Chiu D-San Francisco) Reproductive FACT Act.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Summary: Billed as the Reproductive FACT (Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency) Act, the bill
requires pregnancy care clinics to post a notice in at least 22-point type stating “California has public programs that provide
immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services, prenatal care, and abortion, for eligible women.”
The bill would also require pregnancy care centers that provide counseling but not medical care to post a “scare notice” in at least
48-point type stating, among other things, that the facility “is not licensed as a medical facility by the State of California.” In
addition, both types of Pregnancy Care Centers would be forced to make the statements available in all advertising.
Failure to comply carries a $500 fine for first offense and $1,000 for each subsequent offense. The bill authorizes the Attorney
General, city attorney, or county counsel to impose the civil fines.
Finally, the bill would also require the Attorney General to post on the Department of Justice's Internet Web site a list of the
covered facilities upon which a civil penalty has been imposed.
Passed Assembly Health Committee, as amended, 12-5
Passed Assembly Judiciary Committee, 7-3
Assembly Appropriations Committee
Scheduled hearings: week of May 11
Monday, May 11
SB 110 (Fuller R-Bakersfield) Threats: Schools
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Summary: Existing law makes it a crime to willfully threaten to commit a crime that will result in death or great bodily injury to
another person, with the specific intent that the statement is to be taken as a threat and which, on its face and under the
circumstances in which it is made, is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the person threatened
a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and thereby causes that person reasonably to be in
sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or her immediate family's safety.
This bill would make a person who, by any means, including, but not limited to, by means of an electronic act, threatens unlawful
violence to occur upon the grounds of a school under certain circumstances and that threat creates a disruption at the school guilty
of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for a term not exceeding one. year, by a fine of $1,000, or by both
that imprisonment and that fine. The bill would also make a person convicted of violating this provision, or adjudged a ward of the
juvenile court based upon a violation of this provisions, liable to a public agency for any reasonable costs of that public agency's
emergency response to the person's threat.
SB 128 (Wolk-Vacaville) End of life.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Summary: This bill would enact the End of Life Option Act authorizing an adult who meets certain qualifications, and who has
been determined by his or her attending physician to be suffering from a terminal illness, as defined, to make a request for
medication prescribed pursuant to these provisions for the purpose of ending his or her life. The bill would establish the procedures
for making these requests. The bill would also establish the forms to request aid-in-dying medication and under specified
circumstances an interpreter declaration to be signed subject to penalty of perjury, thereby imposing a crime and state-mandated
local program.
Passed Senate Health Committee, 6-2
Passed Senate Judiciary Committee, as amended, 5-2
Senate Appropriations Committee
SB 305 (Bates D-Carlsbad) Enhancements: concentrated cannabis.
CFA’s Assessment: Support
Summary: This bill adds concentrated cannabis to a list of crimes in which additional enhancement sentences can be applied if a
child under the age of 16 is in a home where a person manufactures, compounds, converts, produces, derives, processes, or
prepares a controlled substance. It also applies to the possession of specified chemicals with the intent to manufacture a
controlled substance.
Passed Senate Public Safety Committee, as amended, 6-0
Senate Appropriations Committee
SB 731 (Leno D-San Francisco) Foster children: housing: gender identity.
CFA’s Assessment: Oppose
Summary: This bill would eliminate existing law that prohibits children of the opposite sex from sharing a bedroom in out-of-home
facilities unless each child is under five years of age. Instead, foster children and nonminor dependents in out-of-home-care would
be required to be placed according to their gender identity, regardless of the gender or sex listed in their court or child welfare
records.
In addition to existing anti-discrimination protections, this bill would also specify that all minors and nonminors in foster care have
the right to be placed in out-of home care according to their gender identity, regardless of the gender or sex listed in their court or
child welfare records.
Passed Senate Human Services Committee, 3-0
Passed Senate Judiciary Committee, 5-1
Senate Appropriations Committee