GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY I WANT
TO CALL TO ORDER THE MEETING OF
THE. COMMITTEE ON OUR PRIVACY
AND CONSUMER PROTECTION OF APRIL
THE THIRD.
.
SINCE WE DON'T HAVE QUORUM SO
LET'S START WITH THE.
HAS BECOME SUBCOMMITTEE.
AND TODAY WE HAVE A TOTAL OF
EIGHT BILLS AND TWO OF THEM ARE
ON CONSENT TO A PROPOSED ANSWER.
BUT BEFORE A.
CALL OUR FIRST THEIR. BILL I
LIKE TO MAKE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS
THERE. IN ORDER FOR US TO
EFFECTIVELY MANAGE OUR TIME
TODAY WE WILL BE LIMITING
TESTIMONY ON AB TWENTY NINE
FORTY THREE THAT'S TO LOW BILL
TO TEN MINUTES FOR EACH SIDE.
NOT INCLUDING THE AUTHOR'S
PRESENTATION.
AFTER THE PRIMARY SUPPORT
TESTIMONY PERRY AT THE COMMITTEE
WILL CALL UP ADDITIONAL
SUPPORTERS TO ACTOR NAME
AFFILIATION IF ANY AND POSITION
TO THE RECORD.
LIKEWISE HAVE TO EAT THE
OPPOSITION TESTIMONY PERIOD THE
COMMITTEE WILL CALL UP
ADDITIONAL OPPOSITION TO. HAVE
THEIR NAME AFFILIATION IF ANY
AND POSITION TO THE RECORD.
OF FINALLY IN ORDER TO
ACCOMMODATE SOME WITNESSES WHO
HAVE OTHER COMMUNITY.
ASSIGNMENTS I WILL BE TAKING UP.
AB TWENTY FIVE FORTY SIX OUT OF
REGULAR ORDER SO WITHOUT I
UNDERSTAND THAT. ON THIS LOW
KILEY HAS. OFFERED MS FREEMAN.
THE CHANCE TO PRESENT HER BILL
FIRST SO WITHOUT A LIKE TO CALL
UP THE MS FREEMAN AS ON ITEM ONE
AB TWENTY TWO TWENTY SEVEN.
AND THAT'S ON MOTORCYCLE HANG
TAX.
SO ANYTIME YOU'RE READY MADE.
THANK YOU CHURCH OUR MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE TODAY ARE
PRESENTING EP TWO TWO TWO SEVEN
MOTORCYCLE HANG TAGS IN ORDER TO
UPDATE A PROCESS SIMILAR TO THE
FEDERAL PROCESS FOR NEW CAR
SALES. BUT WHICH MOTORCYCLE
MANUFACTURERS AND DEALERS SHALL
PROVIDE UNIFORM AND TRANSPARENT
PRICING INFORMATION TO
CONSUMERS.
I'M HAPPY TO SIT DOWN WITH ANY
OPPONENT TO MY COME FORWARD TO
WORK FOR THROUGH ANY CONCERNS
ALTHOUGH WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED
ANY OPPOSITION LETTERS.
I AB TWENTY TWO TWENTY SEVEN
REPRESENTS AN ISSUE OF
TRANSPARENCY THAT EVERYBODY CAN
BENEFIT FROM.
AB TWENTY TWO TWENTY SEVEN
ENSURES THAT THE PRICE TAG ON
MOTORCYCLES IS CLEAR TO THE
CONSUMER BY INCLUDING THE
MANUFACTURER'S SUGGESTED PRICES
BEEN NUMBER AND THE SUPPLEMENTAL
ADD ON'S A DEALER MIGHT INCLUDE.
DESPITE THE NINETEEN SEVENTY
EIGHT REQUIREMENT THAT SUGGESTED
RETAIL PRICES BE AFFIXED TO NEW
MOTORCYCLE SOLD IN CALIFORNIA
THERE'S NO STANDARD PRACTICE FOR
HER MOTORCYCLE PRICES PRESENTED
TO THE PUBLIC.
AS A RESULT PRICES OF MOTORCYCLE
MAKE AND MODEL CAN VARY GREATLY
FROM DEALERSHIP TO DEALERSHIPS
STATEWIDE.
AB TWENTY TWO TWENTY SEVEN IS
SPONSORED BY THE MOTORCYCLE
DEALERS ASSOCIATION BECAUSE THEY
KNOW THAT IT'S A BENEFIT TO BOTH
CONSUMERS AND TO THE DEALERS FOR
THE MANUFACTURER'S PRICE AND A
DEALERS OUT ON SUBJECT TO BE
DISPLAYED. CLEARLY IN A MANNER
THAT THE PUBLIC HAS SEEN SO THAT
THE PUBLIC HAS THE ABILITY TO
MADE MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION
ABOUT THEIR PURCHASE.
THIS PRICING MODEL IS MANDATED
ON THE WIND CHILL OF NEW CARS
SOLD IN CALIFORNIA IN THE FORM
OF THEM.
MODERATELY STICKER AND SHOULD
BE UNIFORM FOR NEW MOTORCYCLES
SOLD IN CALIFORNIA AS WELL
TESTIFYING WITH ME TODAY IS
JAMES MUG LOMBARDO SENIOR
REPRESENTING THE MOTORCYCLE
DEALERS ASSOCIATION AND I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FIRST WOOD
IS PLEASE
MISTER CHAIR MEMBERS ARE
COMMITTEE JAMES THE MARTA
SENIOR.
IN SUPPORT OF THE MEASURE I
WOULD BEEN WORKING WITH THE PART
MOTOR VEHICLES FOR THREE AND A
HALF YEARS TO COME UP WITH SOME
SOLUTION SO WE COULD HAVE A
UNIFORM.
HANG TAG THAT WOULD BENEFIT HIS
SHE SAID THE CONSUMER AND THE A
MAN HAD THE DEALER SAID WE HAVE
A DIFFICULTY. IF THE.
BECAUSE MOTORCYCLES AT TO BE
ASSEMBLED TO COMMIT A CRATE. AND
REASSEMBLE THEM AND WE NEED TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPER A VIN
NUMBER IS ON THAT VEHICLE SO
THAT THEY MATCH UP WHEN THEY'RE
DISPLAYED ON THE FLOOR. SO WE
DON'T GET ENFORCEMENT ACTION FOR
HAVE BEEN ACCIDENTALLY SWITCHED
UP OF THE THE STICKERS WE CAN
GET FORTY TO EIGHTY. MOTORCYCLES
AT A TIME IN CRATES AND TRYING
TO GO THROUGH ALL THOSE AND MAKE
SURE THAT THERE. MATCHED UP THIS
WHICH IS CERTAINLY BENEFIT
EVERYBODY THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH ADDITIONAL
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL
PLEASE.
STEPPED FORWARD TELL.
SEEING AND HEARING NONE LET'S GO
TO OPPOSITION.
WELCOME.
GO THROUGH WITH SURE REMEMBERS
FULLY DURING WHERE HE'S
REPRESENTING THE.
MOTORCYCLE INDUSTRY COUNCIL AND
THE RECREATIONAL OFF HIGHWAY
VEHICLE ASSOCIATION WE ARE
OPPOSED TO THE BILL.
EMOTIONAL MARCH RIGHT UP TO
VEHICLES DUKAN UNASSEMBLED. BUT
DON'T HAVE A VENN OVER ON THE.
BY ITS VERY DEFINITION VINCE
VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER.
AND IN THE STATUTES
THAT BEEN NUMBERS GOOD FOR TWO
THINGS REGISTRATION.
AND ALSO FOR POLICE WORK OF FOR
BY CONTROL EARLY.
AND THAT'S WHAT IT'S FOR.
IF THE IF THE DEALER SAKE OF
UNIMPORTANT ALREADY HASN'T BEEN
OVER THEY COULD PUT IT ON THE
HANG TAG THEMSELVES.
WHY BURDEN TO MANUFACTURE
WITHOUT?
AND WHAT THE CHARGE MOTION OF A
BRIEF SECTION HERE READ.
DESCRIBES THEM FOR AWHILE.
S. BRIEFLY PLEASE.
MANUFACTURER SERIAL
REDUPLICATION NUMBERS.
A PER SOCIAL NORMALLY BUY SELL
OFFER FOR SALE READ.
OR HAVE IN HIS POSSESSION.
ALL VEHICLE A COMPONENT PART
THROUGH OF FOR WHICH IN THE
SERIAL OR IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
AGAIN IDENTIFICATION NUMBER.
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY
NUMBER USED FOR REGISTRATION
PURPOSE THAT AFFECTS.
BY THE MANUFACTURER TO THE
VEHICLE OR COMPONENT PARTS WHO
WAS ALREADY THERE.
IN WHATEVER MANNER DE IMPROPER
BY THE MANUFACTURERS BEEN
REMOVED TO FACE ALL FOR ROY.
A LOS THE VEHICLE A COMPONENT
PART IS ATTACHED LETTER TO. AN
IDENTIFICATION NUMBER SIGN OR
APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IN
LIEU OF THE MANUFACTURERS NUMBER
SO. AND IF IF THIS WAS SUCH AN
ISSUE.
AND D. M. V. UPSHUR WOULD'VE
TAKEN ACTION.
ALREADY I WORKED VERY CLOSELY
WITH THE DEPARTMENT AND.
IT WOULD BE UP TO THE APARTMENT
TO CHANGE RULES RULES RELATIVE
TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE
INFORMATION.
THAT'S ON THE HANG TAG.
A FREE ROOM WELL. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH ADDITIONAL ON.
WITNESSES SO IN OPPOSITION TO
THE BILL PLEASE COME FORWARD.
SEEING AND HEARING NINE LET'S
BRING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE
QUESTIONS COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
SEEN AND OUR.
YES MS FREEMAN WHICH LIKE TO
ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS AND
PERHAPS CLOSE AS WELL UP JUST
BRIEFLY I COMMENT I DO
APPRECIATE HOW THE GOVERNMENT TO
COME TODAY.
WE'RE HAPPY TO SIT DOWN TO
ADDRESS THE CONCERNS I WILL JUST
KNOW TWO THINGS FIRST OF ALL
ABOUT SEVENTY PERCENT OF THE
MANUFACTURERS INCLUDING HARLEY
DAVIDSON HONDA KAWASAKI. ALREADY
ARE PRINTING THE VIN NUMBERS.
ON THE TAG SO IT'S NOT A
HARDSHIP FOR THEM OTHER DEALERS
CAN DO IT JUST AS WELL AND AS
FAR AS THE DMV THEY LACK THE.
STATUTORY ABILITY TO REGULATE
AND TO REQUIRE THIS SO WHETHER
OR NOT THEY THINK IT'S AN ISSUE
THEY WOULDN'T OF HAD THE ABILITY
TO TAKE ACTION BUT WITHOUT I'LL
JUST SAY I THINK THAT THE MOST
IMPORTANT THING IS THAT WE HAVE
CONSISTENCY FOR THE CONSUMER SO
THAT THERE'S A STANDARD.
ó OF DISCLOSURE THAT
EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT THE
SAME FROM DEALERSHIPS DEALERSHIP
WHICH THIS BILL WILL BE THE
FIRST ONE TO TO REALLY REQUIRE
SO I DO ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE AND
WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
I'M. WITH THE MANUFACTURERS TO
IF IF I MIGHT MISTER CHAIR.
WE TOOK A SURVEY OF ALL OUR
MANUFACTURERS ONLY ABOUT THIRTY
PERCENT.
THE DUDE OUT VOLUNTARILY AND I
GUESS THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE
WITH THE DEAL OF AND THE
MANUFACTURERS.
AND.
AND WE HAVE I HAVE CONTACTED
THE AUTHOR STUFF AND I JUST
DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS A BIG
CONSUMER ISSUE FOR WAS DMV
WOULDN'T ON SO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH I DO
ENCOURAGE THE PARTIES TO
CONTINUE TALKING HANDLE YOU KNOW
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE I THINK IT'S
A GOOD TOWN CONSUMER PROTECTION.
MEASURE AND IT DOES SURPRISE
TRANSPARENCY AS WELL SO I'LL BE
SUPPORTING IT BUT WHEN WE DO
HAVE A QUORUM THEN WILL ASK FOR
A MOTION BUT I DO ENCOURAGE YOU
TO CONTINUE ARE TALKING. EYES I
COULD THANKS VERY MUCH FOR BEING
HERE TODAY THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIR MAKERS.
SO WITHOUT LIKE HERE. ARM.
GOOD AB TWENTY NINE FORTY THREE
AND THAT'S A.
MISTER LOW'S BILL.
AND JUST A REMINDER THAT THERE
TEN MINUTES ON EACH SIDE IN
ADDITION TO THE.
AUTHORS PRESENTATION.
SO LET'S START DOWN.
SURE PLEASE.
SO ANYTIME YOU'RE READY MISSILE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MISTER CHAIR
AND MEMBERS OF THIS IS ASSEMBLY
BILL TWENTY NINE FORTY THREE
WHICH WOULD CLARIFY THAT
CONVERSION THERAPY IS A
FRAUDULENT PRACTICE IN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA AND THAT THE
CONSUMER LEGAL REMEDIES ACT.
THIS BILLIS COAUTHORED BY ALL
EIGHT MEMBERS OF THE LGBT
LEGISLATIVE CAUCUS.
WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE IT VERY
CLEAR THAT.
THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL
ASSOCIATION TASK FORCE ISSUED A
REPORT DECLARING THAT THIS
PRACTICE.
POSES A SIGNIFICANT HEALTH RISK
AND CONTRIBUTES TO ANTI LGBT
STIGMA.
THE AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC
ASSOCIATION THE AMERICAN
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION.
AMERICAN COUNSELING ASSOCIATION
THEM NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
SOCIAL WORKERS.
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION ALL
OPPOSE. THIS PRACTICE ON A
BASIS.
THAT THIS IS NOT EVIDENCE BASED
AND THAT THIS WOULD HURT IN
INDIVIDUALS MENTAL HEALTH.
A AS YOU MAY KNOW THAT BACK IN
TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE. S. B.
ELEVEN SEVENTY TWO BY SENATOR
LIEU OF BANDS CONVERSION THERAPY
FOR INDIVIDUALS UNDER THE AGE OF
EIGHTEEN RESULT.
THIS BILL ONLY APPLIES IN CASES
WHERE A CONSUMER TRANSACTION
TAKES PLACE WHICH IS THAT A
CONSUMER. MAKES A PAYMENT FOR
GOODS OR SERVICES AND SO IT'S
VERY NARROW AND TAILORED.
WITH RESPECT TO CONSUMER
TRANSACTIONS.
YOU MAY HEAR FROM INDIVIDUALS IN
OPPOSITION OF THAT THIS IS AN
ATTACK ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM OR
FREE SPEECH.
HAVING SAID THAT IT IS WELL
NOTED IN THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS
AS WELL. THAT THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT HAS DECLINED
REVIEW OF THE PREVIOUS VERSION
OF CALIFORNIA'S.
S. B. ELEVEN SEVENTY TWO LAW
BANNING CONVERSION THERAPY FOR
MINORS ON TWO SEPARATE
OCCASIONS.
ONCE WHEN FACING A CHALLENGE TO
THE LAW SERVING THAT IT VIOLATED
FREE SPEECH RIGHTS AND A SECOND
TIME.
FACING A CHALLENGE TO THE LAW
ASSERTING THAT IT VIOLATED
RELIGIOUS RIGHTS AS SUCH THEY
CALIFORNIA NINTH CIRCUIT.
OPINIONS ON BOTH OF THESE
MATTERS CONTINUE TO UPHOLD THE
PREVIOUS SB ELEVEN SEVENTY TWO.
ARE WITH ME TODAY IN SUPPORT OUR
DOUG HOW THE MEN FORMER
PRESIDENT OF THE CALIFORNIA
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION.
DOCTOR MICHAEL FERGUSON A
SURVIVOR OF CONVERSION THERAPY.
AND ANTHONY SAMPSON AN EXPERT.
AND ATTORNEY TO ANSWER ANY
TECHNICAL QUESTIONS THAT WE MAY
HAVE AND I LIKE TO DO FOR THE
REMAINING TIME TO WITNESSES AND
SPORT THANK YOU VERY MUCH THANK
YOU VERY MUCH OF BEFORE WE GO TO
A WITNESSES LIKE TO ESTABLISH A
QUORUM.
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL
ROLE CHAO HERE SHOW HERE KILEY
HERE KILEY HERE BAKER.
BERMAN CALDERON CALDERON HERE
IRWIN.
IRWIN HEAR MULLIN. OBERNOLTE.
OBERNOLTE HERE REYES. FREYA'S
HERE TING.
ALEX ALSO TO TAKE CARE OF ALL
CONSENT TO AGENDA.
WHY WOULD SOMEBODY?
THE CONSENT AGENDA HAS BEEN
MOVED AND SECONDED ON. MADAM
SECRETARY PLEASE CALL ON THE
CONSENT AGENDA.
FILE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN EIGHTY
TWENTY ONE SIXTY THREE TO PASS
AS AMENDED AND FILE ITEM NUMBER
EIGHT.
AB TWENTY SIX SEVENTY SIX TO
PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS.
CHAO PIE CHAO AYE KILEY AYE
KILEY AYE BAKER. BERMAN BAKER
AYE BERMAN CALDERON.
CALDERON AYE IRWIN.
OR WHEN I MULLIN.
OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE AYE RESTS
RECITING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH I APOLOGIZE
FOR THE INTERRUPTION LET'S NOW
GO TO OUR FIRST WITNESS.
GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS DOCTOR
DOUGLAS HALDEMAN I AM THE
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT OF THE
CALIFORNIA PSYCHOLOGICAL
ASSOCIATION AND PROFESSOR AND
CHAIR OF THE DOCTORAL PROGRAM IN
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY. AT JOHN F.
KENNEDY UNIVERSITY IN PLEASANT
HILL THE CALIFORNIA
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
BELIEVES THAT THERE IS NO BASIS
FOR ATTEMPTING TO CHANGE SEXUAL
ORIENTATION FOR FOUR MAIN
REASONS. FIRST THAT SAME SEX
ATTRACTIONS AND BEHAVIORS ARE
NOT A FORM OF MENTAL ILLNESS
REQUIRING TREATMENT.
SECONDLY THAT SO CALLED
CONVERSION THERAPY IS NOT REALLY
A LEGITIMATE FORM OF THERAPY
GIVEN THAT THERE IS NO
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE SUPPORTING
IT.
THREE THAT THESE METHODS POSE A
SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF HARM TO THE
INDIVIDUAL AND FOR THAT THERE
ARE NUMEROUS FERRIC UNIQUELY
LEGITIMATE METHODS FOR
ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS. OF
PEOPLE WHO ARE QUESTIONING THEIR
SEARCH SEXUAL ORIENTATION
WITHOUT RESORTING TO CONVERSION
THERAPY.
FOR THIRTY FIVE YEARS I HAVE
CONDUCTED RESEARCH AND WRITTEN
POLICY IN THIS AREA AS WELL AS
HAVING MAINTAINED A CLINICAL
PRACTICE. THAT INCLUDED HUNDREDS
OF BOYS AND MEN WHO HAD GOT
UNDERGONE SOME FORM OF SO CALLED
CONVERSION THERAPY INCLUDING
AVERSIVE INTERVENTIONS
SUCH AS GENERAL ELECTRIC SHOCK
AND NAUSEA INDUCING DRUGS.
VARIETY OF BEHAVIORAL METHODS
RESIDENTIAL TREATMENTS INVOLVING
FORCED ISOLATION FROM FAMILIES
HUMILIATION AND SO FORTH.
NONE OF THESE METHODS WERE
AFFECTED IT CHANGING ONE SEXUAL
ORIENTATION AND IN FACT USUALLY
EXACERBATED THE PERSON'S ALREADY
SUBSTANTIAL GUILT AND SELF
LOATHING.
IT'S DIFFICULT TO DOCUMENT ALL
OF THE HARMS ASSOCIATED WITH
THESE METHODS THAT I HAVE
OBSERVED OVER THE YEARS IN SHORT
TIME. BUT ONE PATIENT STANDS
OUT.
WHO WAS SO OVERWHELMED WITH
GUILT FOR HIS INABILITY TO
CHANGE
AS WELL AS THE GRIEF THAT CAME
FROM HAVING BEEN OSTRACIZED BY
HIS FAMILY AND COMMUNITY? THAT
HE STRUGGLED WITH CHRONIC
DEPRESSION SEXUAL DYSFUNCTION
AND SUICIDAL IDEATION FOR YEARS.
WHEN I ASKED HIM WHY HE HAD
TRIED SO HARD TO CHANGE TWO
YEARS HE REPLIED
QUOTE. IN MY WORLD I FELT IT WAS
WHAT I NEEDED TO DO TO STAY
ALIVE.
ALTHOUGH WHAT I'M LIVING NOW
DOESN'T FEEL LIKE MUCH OF A
LIFE.
EFFORTS TO CHANGE SEXUAL
ORIENTATION DON'T WORK AND THEY
POSE SUBSTANTIAL RISK
TO VULNERABLE PERSONS
ACCORDINGLY CPA BELIEVES THAT IT
IS IN THE INTEREST OF THE STATE.
IN FACT IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY
OF THE STATE TO ACCURATELY
IDENTIFY THESE PRACTICES AS
CONSUMER FRAUD. PLACING SUCH
ACTIVITIES UNDER THE CONSUMER
LEGAL REMEDIES ACT SERVES TO PUT
THE PURVEYORS OF CONVERSION
THERAPIES ON NOTICE.
THAT THEY CAN NO LONGER GET AWAY
WITH MARKETING THESE DANGEROUS
PRACTICES.
BUT IT SERVES ANOTHER EQUALLY
IMPORTANT FUNCTION
SENDING A MESSAGE TO LGBT AND
QUESTIONING PERSONS OF ALL AGES.
BUT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH
YOU.
IT IT'S TIME FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA ONCE AND FOR ALL TO
PUT AN END TO THESE DECEPTIVE
AND DANGEROUS PRACTICES. I THANK
YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE.
TO THE COMMITTEE CHAIR INTO THE
HONOR WILL MEMBERS OF THIS
ASSEMBLY. I SINCERELY THANK YOU
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE
TODAY AND TO SHARE A PART OF MY
STORY WITH YOU MY NAME IS
MICHAEL FERGUSON AND I'M A
SURVIVOR OF THE SO CALLED
CONVERSION THERAPY PRACTICES.
BUT WE PERSONAL INTRODUCTION
PLEASE LET ME START BY SAYING
THAT I'M A LIFELONG STUDENT OF
THE SCIENCES.
I RECEIVED MY BACHELOR'S DEGREE
IN BIOCHEMISTRY MY PHD IN
BIOENGINEERING SPECIALIZING IN
FUNCTIONAL BRAIN IMAGING.
UPON COMPLETION Y. PHD I DID MY
FIRST POST DOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP
AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY IN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT.
AND I'M CURRENTLY DOING A SECOND
POST DOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP IN
COGNITIVE NEUROLOGY AT A
TEACHING HOSPITAL FOR HARVARD
MEDICAL SCHOOL.
I SHARE ALL OF THIS FOR THE
PURPOSE OF EMPHASIZING THAT I'VE
BEEN LIFELONG COMMITTED TO THE
SCIENCES AND TO THE SCIENTIFIC
METHOD AS IT'S APPLIED TO HUMAN
NATURE.
YET IN SPITE OF MY SCIENTIFIC
LIFE RESUME I AM SORRY I'M
FRANKLY EMBARRASSED TO SAY THAT
I WAS SUCKED IN AND DO. BY THE
CHARLATANS OF CONVERSION
THERAPY.
AS A YOUNG MAN I GREW UP WITH
THE CLOSE FAMILY CONNECTION TO
MY PARENTS AND MY SIBLINGS.
HOWEVER CONVERSION THERAPISTS
SHATTERED THESE RELATIONSHIPS.
CONVERSION THERAPIST TOLD ME
THAT MY PARENTS WERE AT FAULT
FOR MY HOMOSEXUAL NATURE THIS IN
MY FATHER FAILED ME BY BEING TOO
DISTANT MY MOTHER FAMILY BY
BEING TOO CLOSE.
AT A TIME MY LIFE WHEN I NEEDED
MORE THAN EVER TO RUN TOWARD.
AND EMOTIONAL SUPPORT SYSTEM
THAT MY FAMILY COULD HAVE
PROVIDED TO ME.
I WAS INSTEAD ADMINISTERED
EMOTIONAL POISON.
AND I WAS TAUGHT TO FEEL OUTRAGE
HOSTILITY AND ANGER TOWARD MY
FAMILY MEMBERS FOR SUPPOSEDLY
MAKING ME GAY.
BECAUSE OF THE LIES OF
CONVERSION THERAPY.
I BECAME FILLED WITH BITTERNESS
TOWARD MY PARENTS MY FAMILY OF
BITTERNESS AT A STRANGE TO US.
BUT MULTIPLIED OUR SORROWS
AND THE PUSHED ME FURTHER AND
FURTHER INTO THE DARK NIGHT OF
PATHOLOGICAL LONELINESS
EMOTIONAL ISOLATION AND YES.
SELF HATRED.
I AM TRULY BLESSED.
BUT AFTER NEARLY A DECADE I WAS
ABLE TO ESCAPE THIS DOWNWARD
SPIRAL THE CONVERSION THERAPY
CREATES AND TO REBUILD MY
RELATIONSHIPS WITH MY FAMILY.
TOO MANY ARE NOT AS LUCKY.
CONVERSION THERAPIST
SYSTEMATICALLY PRAY ON THE MOST
VULNERABLE AND THE SELF LOATHING
THE EXACT MONETARY PROFITS FROM
THEM AND THEY LEAD THEM FURTHER
AWAY FROM THE AUTHENTIC HELP AN
EMOTIONAL SUPPORT THAT THEY
NEED.
SOME OF ITS MISGUIDED ADVOCATES
WE'LL TELL YOU THE CONVERSION
THERAPY AS A MATTER OF RELIGIOUS
BELIEF.
WELL. IF CONVERSION THERAPIES
ABOUT RELIGIOUS BELIEF THEN WHY
IS THERE A LUCRATIVE INDUSTRY
PROFITING OFF OF IT.
ANYONE MAKING MONEY AND
PROFITEERING UNDER THE BANNER OF
RELIGIOUS FAITH. BLASPHEME THE
RELIGIOUS FAITH.
I WISH THAT I HAD KNOWN HOW
DANGEROUS AN OUTRIGHT FRAUDULENT
CONVERSION THERAPY WAS BEFORE I
STARTED ON THAT PATH.
I AM PLOY YOU.
PLEASE PROTECT MEMBERS OF OUR
SOCIETY LIKE ME.
FROM BEING DEFRAUDED AND
PROFOUNDLY HARMED BY THE PSEUDO
SCIENCE AND THE JUNK THERAPY.
SO CALLED CONVERSION METHODS BY
PASSING THIS BILL AND MAKING A
CLEAR STATEMENT.
SALE OF CONVERSION THERAPY
WHATEVER YOU MAY CALL IT. IS
FRAUD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU MUCH OUR NEXT WITNESS
PLEASE.
AND YES IF YOU CAN IDENTIFY
YOURSELF AND ALSO THE
ORGANIZATION AND THAT YOU'RE
AFFILIATED WITH AS WELL AS YOUR
POSITION THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
GOOD AFTERNOON MISTER CHAIRMAN
AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS JOE
MICHAEL FOR EQUALITY CALIFORNIA
WE ARE PROUD TO BE A CO SPONSOR
OF THIS BILL ALONG WITH THE
TREVOR PROJECT TO ALTHOUGH THEY
WERE NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TODAY.
WOULD ALSO LIKE TO STATE THEIR
SUPPORT TIME THROUGH ME SO I. WE
ARE CO SPONSORING THIS BILL
BECAUSE.
THE PRACTICE IS YOU HEARD ABOUT
TODAY OUR TREMENDOUSLY DANGEROUS
AND DAMAGING TO PEOPLE WHO ARE
LGBTQ CONVERSION THERAPY AS IT
IS OFTEN CALLED DOES NOT WORK.
AND IT DAMAGES PEOPLE WHO ARE
EXPOSED TO IT AYE IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT CALIFORNIA STATUTE BE
CLEAR ON THIS ISSUE SO WE URGE
THE COMMITTEE SUPPORT TODAY
THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
ADDITIONAL INDIVIDUALS IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL PLEASE STEP
FORWARD.
SEEING NONE LET'S GO TO
OPPOSITION.
FOR.
DO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL CHAIR ON.
IF NOT MAYBE THREE OF YOU CAN
SET UP HERE FOR NOW AND.
OKAY WE.
THAT WORKS
.
WELCOME THANK YOU OFFER BEING
HERE CELL S. LA.
WARNING YOU'RE READY YOU MAY
PROCEED.
SO WITH THE FIRST WITNESS.
I LAYS IN GERMAN IT'S AN HONOR
TO BE HERE I'M DOCTOR JOSEPH
NICOLOSI JUNIOR LICENSE CLINICAL
PSYCHOLOGISTS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. AM I RECEIVE MY PHD
FROM THE CHICAGO SCHOOL OF
PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY.
AND I'M HERE WITH THE NATIONAL
TASK FORCE FOR THERAPY EQUALITY.
FOR THE PAST NINE YEARS HAVE
OFFERED THERAPY TO COUNTLESS
INDIVIDUALS. WHO ARE SEEKING
THERAPEUTIC HELP TO FIND ANSWERS
TO QUESTIONS OVER SAME SEX
ATTRACTION AND GENDER IDENTITY
CONFUSION?
MY PRACTICE WAS FOUNDED BY MY
FATHER WHO HELPED THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE OVER THE FORTY YEAR SPAN
OF HIS CAREER.
IN OUR WORK THE CLIENT IS IN THE
DRIVER'S SEAT.
HE SETS HIS OWN GOALS WHICH THE
THERAPIST HELPED HIM ACHIEVE
WE USE EVIDENCE BASED TREATMENT
INTERVENTIONS THE SAME METHODS
USED BY OTHER CLINICS THROUGHOUT
THE WORLD. TO TREAT TRAUMA AND
SEXUAL ADDICTION.
AS THOSE UNDERLYING DYNAMICS OUR
RESOLVE THE CLIENT'S UNWANTED
SAME SEX FEELINGS OFTEN DIMINISH
AS A RESULT.
BUT AB TWO NINE FOUR THREE
THREATENS THE ABILITY OF MY
CLIENTS TO CONTINUE TO SEEK AND
OBTAIN THE HELP THEY WANT.
THROUGH ITS BAN ON THE VAGUELY
DEFINED PRACTICE OF SEXUAL
ORIENTATION CHANGE EFFORTS OR
CONVERSION THERAPY. THE BILL
WOULD POTENTIALLY JEOPARDIZE THE
WELL RESPECTED AND
SCIENTIFICALLY SOUND TREATMENTS
THAT MYSELF AND MANY LICENSED
PROFESSIONALS. HAVE BEEN
OFFERING TO WILLING ADULTS FOR
DECADES.
THE BILL IS PREMISED ON
INACCURATE CLAIMS A MIS
CHARACTERIZATIONS
OF THE TYPE OF WORK I DO FOR
EXAMPLE.
THE BILL INCLUDES IN SECTION ONE
LETTER BE.
THAT THE APA TASK FORCE QUOTE
CONCLUDED THE SEXUAL ORIENTATION
CHANGE EFFORTS COMPOSE CRITICAL
HEALTH RISKS.
BUT THE VERY REPORT FROM WHICH
THESE CONCLUSIONS IS DRAWN
ACTUALLY STATES THAT THOSE
HEALTH. RISK CONCERNS ARE NOT
BASED UPON VERIFIABLE EMPIRICAL
DATA.
AND IN THAT PARTICULAR SECTION
OF THE RECORD REPORT IT SAYS IT
IS QUOTE ANECDOTAL UNPROVABLE
STORIES AND EVEN THE REPORT
ITSELF CONCEDES THAT SHOULD BE
TAKEN QUOTE TENTATIVELY.
IN FACT THAT TASK FORCE REPORT
DETAILS EXAMPLES OF CLIENTS WHO
RECEIVED BENEFITS FROM THE
THERAPIES BANNED BY AB TWO NINE
FOUR THREE. FURTHER MULTIPLE
PRESIDENTS OF THE AMERICAN
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION OF
PUBLICLY COME FORWARD STATING
THEIR OPPOSITION TO THERAPY
BANDS SAYING THEY VIOLATE
PATIENT RIGHTS.
YOU'LL FIND THE FULL REFERENCES
IN THE THERAPY QUALITY HAND OUT
REFERENCE NUMBER THIRTEEN. THIS
BILL ARGUABLY COMPELS THE
THERAPIST TO VIOLATE THE EQUAL
PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT. BY
PROHIBITING A THERAPIST FROM
OFFERING CERTAIN SERVICES TEN
LGBT INDIVIDUALS THAT HE OFFERS
TO HETEROSEXUAL CLIENTS.
IN THIS SENSE THE LEGISLATION
DEMANDS DISCRIMINATION BASED ON
SEXUAL ORIENTATION. I HAVE A
BETTER SOLUTION.
HOW ABOUT WE LET ADULTS MAKE
THEIR OWN DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES THEY WANT
TO PURSUE IN THERAPY?
STATE HAS NO BUSINESS TELLING
SOMEONE THAT THEIR THERAPY GOALS
ARE ILLEGAL AND AVAILABLE FOR
ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OUR NEXT
WITNESS PLEASE.
THANK YOU AND GOOD AFTERNOON.
CHAIRMAN CHAU AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU
ON AB TWENTY NINE FORTY THREE.
I CURRENTLY LIVE IN OREGON BUT
WHEN I WAS A YOUTH.
SIXTH GRADE ON I LIVED IN
CALIFORNIA ALL THE WAY UP
THROUGH.
TWENTY NINE TWENTY FIVE YEARS
OLD AND IT WAS DURING THAT TIME
I STRUGGLED WITH SAME SEX
ATTRACTION AND.
EMBRACE HOMOSEXUALITY GOING
INTO COLLEGE AT UC SANTA
BARBARA.
EMBRACE THAT BUT UNFORTUNATELY
MY OWN SENSE OF WELL BEING
DECLINE AS I FOUND PEOPLE TO
SUPPORT MY HOMOSEXUAL DESIRE MY
HOMOSEXUAL IDENTITY.
I FELT LESS STABLE THAN PRIOR.
AND THAT IS THE EXPERIENCE OF
SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT COME TO
RESTORED HOPE WHICH IRAN NOW I'M
THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF
RESTORED HOPE NETWORK. WHICH IS
A COALITION OF MINISTRIES ALL
ACROSS THE U. S..
THIRTEEN OF WHICH ARE HERE AND
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SO
THAT'S FOR PEOPLE WHO FIND
THEMSELVES DEALING WITH
UNWANTED.
SAME SEX ATTRACTION.
THEN I FIND THAT TO BE A SUBSET
OF THE OVERALL GLBT COMMUNITY
IT'S NOT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY
BUT THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO
ARE DEEPLY TROUBLED BY THEIR OWN
SAME SEX ATTRACTION.
AND.
SURROUNDED BY A SEA OF WITNESSES
THAT SAY YOU MUST EMBRACE THIS
THEY FEEL DESPONDENT. AND
SUICIDAL.
I'VE HAD THREE SUCH INDIVIDUALS
RECENTLY COME TO ME SAYING. YOU
KNOW YOU GAVE US THE FIRST HOPE
IN A LONG TIME.
AND IT'S A HOPE THAT I
PERSONALLY OF EXPERIENCED
BECAUSE OF DEALING WITH MY OWN
UNWANTED SAME SEX ATTRACTION.
I HAVE THE FREEDOM TO BECOME A
MOTHER OF THREE SONS YOUR NOTE
TWENTY ONE EIGHTEEN AND FIFTEEN
YEARS OLD.
AND THEY'RE DOING QUITE WELL BUT
WHAT A REMARKABLE OPPORTUNITY
THAT I WOULD HAVE FORFEITED HAD
I PURSUE THE ROUTE I WAS GOING
AND. HASN'T STABLE AS I WAS
PERHAPS COMMITTED SUICIDE. I WAS
VERY TROUBLED BY WHAT I WAS
DEALING WITH.
AND EVERYBODY AROUND ME WAS
AFFIRMING IT.
IT WAS IN A MATTER OF LACK OF
AFFIRMATION.
SO AGAIN WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS
ALL THESE RESOURCES THAT WERE.
SOME OF WHICH WERE AROUND BUT
MOST WERE NOT.
THESE WOULD BE BANNED IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THOSE
WHO ACTUALLY ARE TROUBLED BY
THEIR UNWANTED SAME SEX
ATTRACTION.
ALL OF THESE BOOKS SOME
REPRESENT THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST
COMMUNITY SOME FROM REGULAR.
CONSERVATIVE BAPTIST FROM SOME
FROM ALL SORTS OF.
ASSOCIATIONS ACROSS THE UNITED
STATES WHO DEALT WITH
HOMOSEXUALITY IN A SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT WAY AND FOUND
AFFIRMING AND KIND CARE.
NOT COERCIVE NOT AVERSION NONE
OF THE ABOVE.
THOSE INDIVIDUALS.
ALL THOSE MATERIALS AND THIS IS
A SMALL SUBSET OF MY BOOKS SHELF
IN MY OFFICE.
WOULD BE BANNED IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA.
AND NOT ONLY THAT BUT A VERY
SPECIAL BOOK TO ME. THE BIBLE
WHICH DECLARE SUCH WERE SOME OF
YOU IN FIRST CORINTHIANS SIX.
CHAPTER SIX VERSE ELEVEN.
STILL THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED
FROM BEING PURCHASED IF IT WERE
IN RESPONSE TO.
I'M DEALING WITH UNWANTED SAME
SEX ATTRACTION WHERE CAN I FIND
HOPE IF SOMEBODY SUGGESTED
ACROSS OFFENSE YOU SHOULD GO BUY
A BIBLE AND READ FIRST
CORINTHIANS. GUESS WHAT THAT
WOULD FALL UNDER THIS BILL.
SO RESPECTFULLY.
I FIND THIS BILL UNFORTUNATELY
TO BE DRACONIAN IN THIS MEASURES
IT'S AN OVER REACH IT NO LONGER
IT DOESN'T RESPECT THOSE WHO ARE
DEALING WITH HOMOSEXUALITY.
AS MUCH AS A DISRESPECT THOSE
WHO DO NOT WISH TO EMBRACE
HOMOSEXUAL DESIRE. PEOPLE LIKE
ME AND OTHERS ALONG THE LINE SO.
ALTHOUGH THE INDIVIDUALS WE
HEARD EARLIER.
DID NOT IN THE AND WISH TO
PURSUE SUCH CARE AS AN ADULT
THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO NO LONGER
DO SO THEY CAN CHANGE THEIR GOAL
IF THEY SO WISH.
WHAT WERE PROHIBITING IS THE
GOAL OF LEAVING HOMOSEXUALITY
WITH AB TWENTY NINE TWENTY THREE
THANK YOU VERY MUCH?
THANK YOU NEXT WITNESS PLEASE.
GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS DAVID
PICK UP.
I'M A LICENSED PSYCHOTHERAPIST
ALMOST ALL MY CLIENTS ARE
RECEIVING THERAPY FOR UNWANTED
SAME SEX ATTRACTIONS BECAUSE BY
EMOTIONAL AND OR SEXUAL ABUSE.
IN CHILDHOOD AND BEYOND.
I AM GREATLY SADDENED TODAY
BECAUSE THIS BILL SAYS THAT MY
CLIENTS DON'T EXIST.
THIS BILL SAYS THAT I DON'T
EXIST.
THIS BILL SAYS WHAT I DO IS
FRAUD AND DOESN'T WORK.
AND WORSE THIS BILL AND THE
WITNESSES YOU'VE HEARD JUST A
FEW MINUTES AGO INTIMATE OR
ACTUALLY CLAIMED THAT WE USE
ELECTROSHOCK AND SHAMING
THERAPIES WHICH IS NOT ONLY
OFFENSIVE. IT'S LUDICROUS AT
BEST YOU'LL NOTICE THEY DIDN'T
GIVE YOU ANY NAMES OF THESE
PEOPLE WHO SUPPOSEDLY CREATED
THESE HORRORS.
I WOULD ASK RESPECTFULLY THE
COMMITTEE TO ASK FOR PEOPLE SO
WE CAN GET RID OF THOSE LICENSED
THERAPIST IF THEY EXIST AND TAKE
WHERE THEIR LICENSES OR THROW
THEM INTO JAIL FOR DOING SUCH
HORRIBLE THINGS.
WE DON'T DO THIS JUNK.
OFTEN IT REPAIRED IF THERE BE
HELPED SAVE.
MY LIFE.
I'M A HETEROSEXUAL MAN BUT AT
FIVE YEARS OLD I WAS PLAYING
HIDE AND SEEK WITH NEIGHBORS
WHEN I WAS DRAWN INTO A TENT BY
A YOUNG MAN WHO TURNED OUT TO BE
A PET A FILE.
MY SEXUAL ORGANS WERE STIMULATED
AND I WAS INVITED TO STIMULATE
HIS ORGANS.
THESE EXPERIENCES WERE ONLY ONE
OF THE ABUSES THAT LED TO
HOMOSEXUAL FEELINGS
AND AS AN ADULT WHEN I ENTERED
INTO PROFESSIONAL THERAPY MY
HOMOSEXUAL FEELINGS DISAPPEARED
OVER PER PERIOD OF YEARS. AND MY
SEXUAL FEELINGS FOR WOMEN
GREATLY INCREASED DUE LICENSE
PSYCHOTHERAPY.
I'M NO LONGER AROUSED BY MEN'S
BODIES BECAUSE THERAPY RESOLVE
THE ROOT CAUSES OF THESE
FEELINGS WHICH IS THE CASE FOR
EVERY SINGLE REAL CLIENT WHO
IDENTIFIES WITH THIS THERAPY.
THIS IS NOT IN BORN FOR THESE
FOLKS.
IN CALIFORNIA THERE ARE HUNDREDS
OF MEN WHO HAVE FACED THE SAME
BASIC ISSUES AN EXPERIENCED
ACTUAL EMOTIONAL CHANGE NOT JUST
BEHAVIORAL CHANGE.
EVERY SINGLE CLIENT WHO COMES
OUR OFFICE FEELS AND BELIEVE
THAT THEIR HOMOSEXUALITY WAS NOT
GENETIC.
ALSO I'M DEEPLY OFFENDED WITH
ALL DUE RESPECT I'M DEEPLY
OFFENDED BECAUSE THE AUTHORS OF
THIS BILL. AND THIS COMMITTING
THESE WITNESSES HAVE NEVER
CONTACTED REAL REPAIRED OF
THERAPISTS OR THEIR CLIENTS TO
ASK THEM HOW THERAPEUTIC CHANGE
WORKS AND TO AT LEAST KNOW WHAT
THIS BILL IS TRYING TO MAKE
ILLEGAL.
WHY HAVEN'T THEY DONE THAT?
WITHOUT QUESTION IF OUR CLIENTS
WHO REPORT CHANGE IN SEXUAL
FEELINGS.
REPORT DISSIPATION OF DEPRESSION
ANXIETY. REPORT FEELING
WONDERFUL BECAUSE THEIR
AUTHENTIC SELVES HAVE ARISEN
THROUGH THERAPY THEY WILL NO
DOUBT EXPERIENCE MORE DEPRESSION
ANXIETY AND SUICIDAL IDEATION
WHICH IS OF COURSE THE EXACT
OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU HEARD THE
PREVIOUS WITNESSES SAY.
THE CRIME HERE AS THAT THE
INTOLERANCE PRESENTED HERE BY
TAKING AWAY PEOPLE'S RIGHTS FOR
THERAPY WILL DESTROY THEIR
LIVES.
EVERYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION
RESPECTS
VERY MUCH
SPECS LGBT PERSONS FOR HAVING
THE RIGHT TO BELIEVE IN LIVE
AUTHENTICALLY.
THIS BILL ROBS ALL THE REST OF
US.
THE SAME RESPECT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OF A A JUST
A REMINDER THAT WE'RE AT THE TEN
MINUTE MARK RIGHT NOW SO IF I
COULD ASK THE LAST ONE IS TO
MAKE IT BRIEF ONE MINUTE OKAY.
I'M DOCTOR LAURA HAYNES LICENSE
CALIFORNIA CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST
REPRESENTING THE NATIONAL TASK
FORCE FOR THERAPY QUALITY IN
AMERICAN COLLEGE PEDIATRICIAN
ADDITIONS.
THIS IS THE EIGHTH MONTH VOLUME
OF THE APA HANDBOOK OF SEXUALITY
IN PSYCHOLOGY.
IT SAYS THE SAME SIX TRACTION
GENDER IDENTITY ARE NOT
BIOLOGICALLY DETERMINED THERE
ARE PSYCHOLOGICAL CAUSES AND
THEY DO INCLUDE CHILDHOOD SEXUAL
ABUSE.
SEVERAL RIGOROUS STUDIES HAVE A
HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT SAME SEX
ATTRACTION BEHAVIOR AND IDENTITY
ALL THREE CHANGE. AND.
.
UNSEAT.
.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO HURRY YEAH
OF THE CAPE AND A SOAK. UP AND
THE HANDBOOK SAYS THAT MANY HAVE
EXPERIENCE CHANGE.
SO FEELINGS DO CHANGE.
AND THERAPY IS NEEDED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OF FOR YOUR
TESTIMONIES ARE THERE ADDITIONAL
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN
OPPOSITION TO BILL PLEASE
AFFORD.
PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND
ALSO. THE ORGANIZATION THAT YOU
ARE AFFILIATED WITH ANY
OPPOSITION.
WELCOME.
HELLO THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME.
MY NAME IS ELIZABETH WARNING I'M
WITH EQUIPPED TO LIVE IN REDDING
CALIFORNIA.
I'M A FORMER LESBIAN MY OPPOSE
THIS BILL FOR TO INFRINGEMENT ON
COUNTLESS WOMEN'S RIGHTS TO
SPEAK OPENLY. AND SEEK HEALING
FROM THEIR LIFE'S EXPERIENCES
YOUR NAME AND ORGANIZATION IN
YOUR POSITION PLACE SORRY.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND
EXPLAINS.
HI THANK YOU. I'M KIM WILLIAMS.
FORMERLY A FROM REDDING
CALIFORNIA REPRESENTING
ACQUITTAL OF AND I OPPOSE THIS
BILL BECAUSE.
MIGHT FOR CHILDREN THANK ME
THAT I DID BENEFIT FROM THE
PSYCHOTHERAPY AND ALL THE
RESOURCES THANK YOU VERY MUCH
NEXT PLEASE.
MY NAME IS THOMAS YOUR MATERIAL
AND I'M FROM THE BAY AREA HERE
AND I.
OPPOSE THIS BILL JUST ON THE
BASIS OF FREEDOM. THAT IF
SOMEONE WANTS TO PURCHASE A
THERAPY A PURCHASE SOMETHING
THEY ARE NAY FREEDOM TO CHOOSE
WHATEVER MAKING LIKE THANK YOU
VERY MUCH NEXT PLACE.
HELLO MY NAME IS RENEE MARTIN
FROM YUBA CITY CALIFORNIA AS
DIRECTOR OF HEARTS OF HOPE A
MINISTRY THAT HELPS PEOPLE
UNWANTED SAME SEX ATTRACTION I
OPPOSE THIS BILL FIGURE MUCH
NEXT PLEASE.
HELLO I'M PESTERED AND PELLETIER
FROM HAMILTON SQUARE BAPTIST
CHURCH IN SAN FRANCISCO. AND
BECAUSE I CARE ABOUT PEOPLE I
DRASTICALLY OPPOSE THIS BILL
THANK YOU VERY MUCH NEXT PLACE.
MY NAME'S PASTOR TONY NEW HOUSE
FROM TABERNACLE BAPTIST CHURCH
IN CONCORD CALIFORNIA. WE HAVE
ONLY A BOOKSTORE WHERE WE SELL
MATERIALS. WE DON'T WANT THOSE
THINGS TO BE OUTLAWED THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
WHAT OF SECURITY BROWN PASTOR
BIBLE BAPTIST CHURCH MARYSVILLE
CALIFORNIA? AND OPPOSE THIS BILL
IT IS A FRENCHMAN OUR
CONSTITUTION THANK YOU KNOW
RELIGIOUS OR RIGHTS.
THANK THE PASTOR THANK YOU NEXT
PLACE LEAVING NO ONE FROM
VARIOUS FULL AND I OPPOSE
ENCOURAGE YOU TO THE SAME THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT PLACE JORDAN
URETHRA SYSTEM PASSED VERY BIBLE
BAPTIST CHURCH AND I OPPOSE THIS
BILL THANK YOU SIR.
JEANNE FISHER FROM CASTRO VALLEY
CALIFORNIA CO DIRECTOR OF THE
HOPE GROUP. I URGE YOU TO OPPOSE
HIS FELLOW AS WELL THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
DAVID FISHER THE OTHER CO
DIRECTOR OF HOPE GROUP IN CASTRO
VALLEY. HIGH BOOK I ASK YOU TO
OPPOSE THIS BILL THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
GOOD AFTERNOON KEVIN SNYDER
CHIEF COUNSEL PACIFIC JUSTICE
INSTITUTE CENTER FOR PUBLIC
POLICY IN OPPOSITION THANK YOU
THANK YOU.
PASTOR MIKE ROGERS FAITH BAPTIST
TABERNACLE AWAKE AMERICA HERE IN
THE CAPITAL.
MY BIBLE AND MY GOSPEL IS NOT A
FRAUD. THIS BILL WHICH.
I CONNECTS PLACE CAROLINE
BELTRAME FROM BRENTWOOD
CALIFORNIA CO.
DIRECTOR OF TRUTH AND LOVE
PLEASE OPPOSE ARM POSES BILL
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AIR STUFF RESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA
I WANT YOU KNOW THAT I EXIST AND
I STRUGGLE WITH SAME SEX
ATTRACTION AND I FOUND HEALING
FROM BROKENNESS AND I EXIST.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MY WAS TODD PETERSON I'M A
BUSINESSMAN HERE IN SACRAMENTO
I'M AGAINST AB TWENTY NINE FORTY
THREE IS THAT RESTRICTS THE
RIGHTS OF PEOPLE TO EXPLORE
ALTERNATIVES TO A LIFESTYLE.
THEY FOUND A SATISFYING FOR ONE
REASON OR ANOTHER THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
MY NAME IS JONATHAN KELLER
PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA FAMILY
COUNCIL CALIFORNIA FAMILY
ALLIANCE WE REPRESENT HUNDREDS
OF THOUSANDS OF CALIFORNIANS.
AND.
THOUSANDS OF CHURCHES AS WELL
OF WITH RESPECT TO ASSEMBLY
MEMBER LOW WE UNDERSTAND HIS I
THINK POSITION BEHIND THE BILL
BUT WE MUST RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE
AND THANK. BELIEVE REACHES TO
FAR THANK THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
A BRANDING CAMPBELL PASTOR THE
FAITH BAPTIST CHURCH IN WHEELING
CALIFORNIA AND I ASK YOU TO
OPPOSE THIS.
INFRINGEMENT ON OUR FIRST
AMENDMENT RIGHTS THANK THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
DOUG WARNING FROM REDDING
CALIFORNIA I OPPOSE THIS BILL
ASK YOU TO DO THE SAME I THINK
IT'S OVER REACHING. THANK YOU.
KARENCLEANER SACRAMENTO I ASK
AND URGE YOU TO OPPOSE THIS BILL
YOU'VE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM OR
LEAN CURLESS STATE PRESIDENT OF
EAGLE FORUM. AND I ALSO I WANT
TO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR COMING I
DO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S TIME FOR
PEOPLE TO BECOME AN ADULT AND
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR LISTENING TO
US. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LET US SEE FROM THE CALIFORNIA
CATHOLIC CONFERENCE OUR LETTERS
ON FILE AND.
QUESTION THE USE OF THE CONSUMER
CODE FOR THIS
THANK.
GREG BYRD CALIFORNIA FAMILY
COUNCIL IN STRONG OPPOSITION
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SEE BIGELOW FROM REDDING
CALIFORNIA. IN OPPOSITION THANK
YOU.
OTHER ADDITIONAL WITNESSES
YES PLEASE COMPORT BY AND CALLIE
ALLEN WITH MORAL REVOLUTION AND
I OPPOSE THIS BILL.
ANYMORE INDIVIDUALS IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL SEEING
AND HEARING NINE I WANT TO THANK
ALL OF YOU FOR BEING HERE AS
WELL AS HARD TO. OUR PRESENTERS.
FROM ON BOTH SITES OBZIRA
T'S
FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS AND
BEFORE WE DO THAT. CAN WE HAVE
TWO CHAIRS MADE AVAILABLE FOR
THE OPPONENTS AS WELL IF YOU CAN
HAVE TEACHERS IT MADE AVAILABLE
TO.
AND YOU CAN HAVE TWO INTO HOW
THAT.
BUT WITHOUT A THE OTHER
ADDITIONAL OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
THAT HELP YES MS BAKER.
AS SOON AS THEY'RE SITUATED THEN
WE CAN GO AHEAD.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR AND.
IT DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE A LOT
OF ALL TRY TO BE I MIGHT BE
RESPECTFUL OF THE COLLEAGUES
TIME.
.
ONE BE SURE THAT WE'RE REALLY
CLEAR ABOUT WHAT IS AND IS NOT
ALLOWED UNDER THE STATUTE ARE
UNDER THIS BILL.
AND I HAVE BECAUSE I HAVE LOOKED
VERY CAREFULLY AT THE
DEFINITIONS AND I'M APOLOGIZE
THE IN ANOTHER COMMITTEE I
MISTER INTRODUCTORY POINT SO YOU
NEVER TO COVER THIS IN DETAIL.
BUT.
IF IT AND IF YOU CAN ANSWER IN
THE CONTEXT OF.
IF I HAVE A CONSTITUENTS.
TO WHAT ON WHATEVER JOURNEY
THERE ON IN UNDERSTANDING
THEMSELVES BETTER.
WHEREVER THEY ARE IN LIFE.
IS INTERESTED IN EXPLORING A
CONVERSATION WITH SOMEONE ABOUT
EFFORTS TO CHANGE BEHAVIORS.
OR JUST WANTS TO REACH OUT TO
SOMEONE.
THAT YOU MAY CONSIDER BY
DEFINITION COVERED BY THIS WHAT
OPTIONS DO THEY STILL HAVE
AVAILABLE TO THEM UNDER THE
SPELL.
SHOULD IT PASS.
SURE I A GIFT SEES ME AGAIN.
ANTHONY SAMPSON WITH ARLEN
PORTER.
.
I THINK THAT THAT ONE THING THAT
NEEDS TO BE SORT OF MADE CLEAR
HERE THAT IS.
THE LIMITED APPLICABILITY
REALLY OF OF THE ABOUT THE
PROPOSAL HERE. THAT IT APPLIES
IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CONSUMER
LEGAL REMEDIES ACT WHICH
REQUIRES A TRANSACTION TO OCCUR.
I'M FOR SERVICES AND.
OF COURSE ADVERTISING OFFERING.
TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ORIENTATION
CHANGE EFFORTS WITHIN AN
INDIVIDUAL.
EXCHANGE FOR DOLLARS.
WOULD BE PRECLUDED.
UNDER THIS BILL.
BUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT
IS WHAT THE DEFINITION IS IN
THAT DEFINITION OF SEXUAL
ORIENTATION CHANGE EFFORTS.
IS ONE THAT SEEKS TO CHANGE AN
INDIVIDUAL SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
SO IN YOUR CONVERSATION ABOUT
THE ISSUE.
AND ONCE DESIRE TO TALK ABOUT IT
AS AN APPROPRIATE PRACTICE.
ONE'S DESIRE TO TALK ABOUT IT IN
A BOOK AND ENDORSE IT IN A BOOK.
WOULD NOT FALL WITHIN THE
DEFINITION.
THAT INDIVIDUAL WOULD NEED TO
SEEK TO CHANGE AN INDIVIDUAL'S
SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
AND SO IF THERE.
IF THAT INDIVIDUAL YOUR
CONSTITUENT THAT YOU MENTIONED
MERELY WANTS TO HAVE A
CONVERSATION.
ABOUT WHAT IT IS.
THAT CONVERSATION CAN BE HAD.
BUT IT'S THE MOMENT WHERE THEY
CROSS THAT THRESHOLD OF SEEKING
TO CHANGE AN INDIVIDUAL SEXUAL
ORIENTATION AGAIN IN EXCHANGE
FOR DOLLARS.
ALRIGHT IF THIS IS A FREE
SERVICE.
IT WOULD NOT FALL WITHIN THE
SCOPE OF THE BILL IT'S LIMITED
UNDER THE CONSUMER LEGAL
REMEDIES ACT WHICH AGAIN
REQUIRES THAT TRANSACTION
TO TAKE PLACE. SO. IF AN
INDIVIDUAL WANTS TO DO MORE THAN
JUST HAVE INITIAL CONVERSATION
BUT WANTS TO TRY.
AND PERHAPS THAT ONE OF THE
LOCATION SIR.
PRACTICES OR.
ENTITIES THAT HERE IN OPPOSITION
TO DEVELOP SELF DESCRIBED IS
CARRYING AND SUPPORTIVE.
WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO DO THAT
UNDER THE SPELL.
WITH.
THE IF THEY SOUGHT OUT.
.
SERVICES FOR THEIR SEXUAL
ORIENTATION ISSUE AND THE
SERVICES PROVIDED ARE ONE TO
COPE WITH THAT.
AND TO TO DEAL WITH IT.
THAT IS OKAY IN FACT.
IT CLICKS UNDER THE BILL.
ITSELF EXCLUDE GENDER SEXUAL
ORIENTATION EFFORT TO DOES NOT
INCLUDE
PSYCHOTHERAPIES.
THAT INCLUDE COPING SOCIAL
SUPPORT IDENTITY IDENTITY
EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT.
INCLUDING SEXUAL ORIENTATION
NEUTRAL INTERVENTIONS.
AND SO. THERE ARE CONVERSATIONS
THAT CAN BE HAD BETWEEN YOUR
CONSTITUENT AND THE THERAPISTS
BUT THE MOMENT THE THERAPISTS
SEEKS TO CHANGE THE INDIVIDUAL
SEXUAL ORIENTATION. EVEN IF IT'S
AT THE REQUEST.
OF THE PATIENT.
THAT'S WHERE THIS.
A BILL WOULD APPLY.
AND AGAIN THAT INDIVIDUAL WOULD
BE ABLE TO SEEK RESTITUTION
MEANING RECOVERY. OF THE A OF
THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT THEY
SPENT FOR THOSE SERVICES AND SO
AND YOUR BELIEF THIS IS NARROW
THIS IS NARROWLY TAILORED THAT
THAT IT'S JUST IF THERE IS ANY.
EFFORT TO ENGAGE IN.
FULL CHANGE.
BUT OTHER ELEMENTS WHICH ALREADY
IN STATUTE IS ACCEPTED I'M
INSIDE ACTUALLY AN AMENDMENT
YOUR BILL ISN'T CHANGES IS A
CURRENT DEFINITION OF COPING.
DEVELOPING STRATEGIES
FOR EXPLORING. AND THAT IS ALL
STILL ALLOWED AS A TRANSACTION
UNDER YOUR BELT. THAT'S CORRECT
BECAUSE IT'S A IT'S UNDER AN
EXEC YOU I THINK I THINK STATURE
OKAY AND AND AND YOU KNOW TO GO
EVEN. FURTHER AGAIN A A LOT OF.
OF THE OPPOSITION REYES FIRST
AMENDMENT ISSUES. AND THOSE ARE
IMPORTANT ISSUES TO RAISE YES
OTHER SIGNIFICANT.
AND THE THE COMMITTEE SHOULD
TAKE THEM SERIOUSLY BUT I THINK
WHEN THEY DO TAKE THEM
SERIOUSLY.
THEY WILL FIND THAT WHEN.
THE OPPOSITION'S YOU KNOW STOP
BOOKS UP FOR EXAMPLE.
.
AGAIN INDIVIDUALS CAN EXPRESS
THEIR OPINION.
ABOUT ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND THEY
CAN IN DORSET IF THEY SO CHOOSE
IN A PUBLISHED BOOK.
PEOPLE CAN CONTINUE TO SELL
BOOKS
BUT THE MOMENT AGAIN THAT
DEFINITION OF SEEKING TO CHANGE
AN INDIVIDUAL SEXUAL
ORIENTATION.
TRIGGERS.
THEN.
THAT'S WHERE THIS BILL AGAIN
WOULD APPLY.
SO HE SIMPLY SPEAKING ABOUT YOUR
POSITION ON THE ISSUE IS
SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
AND THAT'S ONE'S ABILITY TO
EXERCISE THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT
RIGHTS OKAY BECAUSE THAT WAS
ANYONE MY QUESTIONS IS.
AND IF I HAD A CONSTITUENT WHO
WANTED TO JUST.
HAVE ACCESS TO.
THOSE BOOKS IN ARE ON THE TABLE
I'M NOT MAKING YOU I'M LOATH TO
MAKE CHOICES FOR PEOPLE.
BUT IF THEY WOULD STILL HAVE
UNDER YOU YOUR UNDERSTAND IN THE
STATUTE THEY WOULD STILL HAVE
ACCESS TO.
BOOKS ABOUT THIS RIGHT THE LID
THE LITERATURE ON SEXUAL
CONVERSION THERAPY CAN STILL
EXIST.
UNDER THIS BILL PEOPLE CAN
PURCHASE.
LITERATURE ABOUT CONVERSION
THERAPY IT IS THE MOMENT THAT.
THAT AND THE THAT THE INDIVIDUAL
WRITING THE BOOK OR THE
INDIVIDUAL THE THERAPIST AGAIN
MEETING WITH THE PATIENT.
SEEK TO CHANGE THE INDIVIDUAL
SEXUAL ORIENTATION.
THAT'S AGAIN WHERE THE THE BILL
TRIGGERS.
SO.
I THINK IT IS A VERY OVERLY
BROAD POSITION TO SUGGEST THAT
SOMEHOW THE LITERATURE ON SEXUAL
CONVERSION THERAPY IS GONNA BE
REMOVED FROM THE SHELVES AS A
RESULT. IN IT THERE'S A I I
DON'T HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH.
YOU KNOW THE THERAPY I DO HAVE
WITH WITH THE STATUTE
IT DIDN'T AS A LAWYER AND THIS
PARTICULAR STATUTE AT.
.
THERE ARE SOME THAT ARGUE.
WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO IS
ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED UNDER
EXISTING LAW BECAUSE THE STATUTE
IN CALIFORNIA?
PROHIBITS
IF.
.
BASICALLY SAYING YOU'RE GONNA
ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING.
THAT YOU CAN'T A IN A IN A
COMMERCIAL TRANSACTION AS A FOR
A BECOMES A FRAUDULENT
TRANSACTION.
.
SO IF YOU COULD ADDRESS A LITTLE
BIT BECAUSE IT'S ONE THE REASONS
AYE I'LL AYE WAS LOOKING INTO
THIS WHY THIS IS NECESSARY.
TO PUT THIS IN THAT LEGISLATION
AS OPPOSED TO THE EXISTING
STATUTE WHICH BY THE WAY. WHEN
THERE ARE LAWSUITS.
IT'S ONE OF THE THREE OR FOUR
STATUTES THAT'S ALWAYS CHARGED
AT IT YOU ALWAYS AND MADE
ALLEGATIONS ABOUT.
AND.
SO WE WILL SEE A LOT OF CASES
POTENTIALLY.
WHY IT'S NECESSARY?
TO HAVE THIS PARTICULAR AT M.
AMENDMENT TO IT GIVEN THAT THERE
ARE SOME WHO ARGUE IT ALREADY
CAN HAPPEN ANYTIME YOU TRY TO.
TO DO SOMETHING AND AND AND
MARKET AND SELL SOMETHING IN THE
CONSUMER TRANSACTION THAT YOU
BELIEVE IS FRAUDULENT.
DO YOU ARE OPEN TO. BEING SUED
UNDER THE STATUTE RIGHT AND SO
FROM THERE WOULD HAVE TO ENSUE
EVIDENTIARY PROCEEDINGS WITH
RESPECT TO.
SEXUAL CONVERSION THERAPY.
AND EXPERT TESTIMONY THE
QUESTION I THINK FOR THE
LEGISLATURE IS WHETHER.
FOR PURPOSES OF THIS PIECE OF
LEGISLATION WHETHER THAT SEXUAL
CONVERSION THERAPY.
OUGHT TO BE CONSIDERED TO BE A
DECEPTIVE PRACTICE.
BY THE VERY TERMS UNDER THE
CONSUMER LEGAL REMEDIES ACT AND
THAT'S WHAT THIS COMMITTEE IS
CONSIDERING TODAY. I'M AND YOU
SAID THE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION
IS SURE. YOU COULD POTENTIALLY
MAKE THAT ARGUMENT AND WIN OR
LOSE IN COURT.
OVER THE COURSE OF THE
LITIGATION PROCESS.
BUT BECAUSE SEXUAL CONVERSION
THERAPY IS NOT CALLED OUT AS A
FRAUDULENT PRACTICE.
IN THE LAW.
TODAY THAT DEBATE WOULD HAVE TO
BE HAD IN LITIGATION PROCEEDINGS
WEARS UNDER THIS ON THAT WOULD
BE CONSIDERED TO BE FRAUDULENT
UNDER THE LAW MEASURE I DON'T
THINK YOU CAN AND LIKE TO LOOK
INTO THIS BUT YOU CAN GET
ATTORNEY'S FEES. AND THINK UNDER
SEAL ARE A.
THAT THEY'RE SITTING UP YOU CAN
GET PUNITIVE DAMAGES.
RIGHT NOT SHOULDN'T OF UNITIVE
AND YOU CAN SEE CONDUCT.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. THE WAY
OF TAILORED THIS.
TO BE VERY SPECIFIC TO A IN A
VERY SAYS SPECIFIC ACTIONS TO
CHANGE.
AS A BECAUSE I WANT I WANT A
CONSTITUENT MIGHT HAVE A
CHILLING EFFECT AS THEY'RE GOING
THROUGH WHATEVER THEY ARE TRYING
TO EXPLORE. WE DON'T WANT THE
JUST THE OPPOSITE TO HAPPEN
WHERE THEY FEEL LIKE THEY CAN'T.
GO TO SOMEONE WHO IS AT LEAST BE
ABLE TO ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS
OR FOR THE PROFESSIONAL.
REPUTABLE THERAPISTS TO BE ABLE
TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION.
AND SAID THE IMPORTANCE OF
TRYING TO HAVE THIS IS NARROWLY
TAILORED AS POSSIBLE IS IS KEY.
AND I THINK THERE ARE
DEFINITIONS ALREADY IN EXISTING
LAW THAT HAVE BEEN DECIDED BY.
THE SUPREME COURT.
OF I BELIEVE THE UNITED STATES
AT LEAST IN AFFIRMING THE NIGHT
ARE NOT ADDRESSING THE NIGHT
CIRCUIT'S DECISION.
THAT ALLOWS FOR THAT OPTION TO
CONTINUE TO BE AVAILABLE.
SO I I AM COMFORTED BY THAT.
ESPECIALLY IS THAT YOU HAVE
ADULT CONSTITUENTS TO.
SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE DECISIONS
FOR THEMSELVES AS THEY GO
THROUGH A JOURNEY I AM
UNFAMILIAR WITH BUT I DON'T WANT
TO TIE THEIR HANDS.
SO MY FINAL QUESTION GOES TO THE
RELIGIOUS CONSTRUED THE CONCERNS
THAT THIS WILL.
SQUELCH RELIGIOUS SPEECH.
AND I I WOULD LOVE THAT IS
IMPORTANT AS WELL. I WOULD BE
SURPRISED IF THIS DOESN'T HAVE
SOME CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE AT
SOME POINT BECAUSE HE'S A REALLY
FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS.
IF ANY OF THE PROPONENTS CAN
ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE THAT IS
IMPORTANT MY UNDERSTANDING IS
SOMEONE CAN STILL GO TO CLERGY.
OR A OUR ANYONE WHO DOES NOT
CHARGE.
TO HAVE HAD THIS THEY CAN STILL
HAVE THAT. SO THAT IF SOMEONE
DOESN'T WANT TO GO TO CLERGY
THEY CAN STILL GO TO SOMEONE
ELSE BUT IF YOU CAN ADDRESS THAT
POINT I WOULD BE GRATEFUL.
IF THEY IF A CHURCH.
AS PART OF THE SERVICES THAT IT
PROVIDES TO ITS MEMBERS INCLUDES
CONVERSION THERAPY.
THEY MAY CONTINUE TO PROVIDE
THAT SERVICE UNDER. THIS LAW.
AGAIN IT. BECAUSE THAT
TRANSACTION HAVE TO TAKE PLACE.
RIGHT THE THAT THE TRANSACTION
OF HAVING TO PAY FOR THAT
PARTICULAR SERVICE UNDERSTOOD
RIGHT AND SO AGAIN IF IT IS FREE
CONVERSION THERAPY.
IF IT IS PROVIDED TO ITS
MEMBERSHIP.
AND THEN THAT IS PERFECTLY
APPROPRIATE. UNDER THE LAW IN
ORDER FOR THE CONSUMER LEGAL
REMEDIES ACT APPLY YOU HAVE TO
HAVE THAT EXCHANGE. IN.
YET AT THAT TRANSACTION AND IN
MANY CHURCHES PROVIDE MINISTRY
PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT MEMBERS SO
THAT'S THAT WOULDN'T BE
IMPORTANT AS WELL THAT YOU DON'T
LIMIT IT TO PEOPLE WHO ARE JUST
MEMBERS AT YOU BUT YEAH EXACTLY
I. AM.
YOU KNOW I FINALLY AYE AYE SORT
OF THE FLIP SIDE OF THIS IS
THERE ARE SOME WHO WOULD NOT
WANT A PERSON WHO IS EXPLORING
OPTIONS OF THEIR. GENDER
IDENTITY TO BE FINE THE ONLY
AVENUE THEY CAN GO TO IS ONE
THAT IS FAITH BASED.
SO FOR MY CONSTITUENT WHO DOES
NOT WANT TO GO TO A FAITH BASED.
PERSON FOR CONVERSATION AND
COUNSELING. ON THIS WHAT DOES
THAT PERSON DO IF THIS BILL
PASSES I'M JUST LOOKING OUT FOR
MY CONSTITUENTS HERE SO.
I NEVER OF A MIGHT TO THAT OF
THE CHAIR RECOGNITION THAT
DOCTOR HOLDEN FORMER PRESIDENT
OF THIS AYE KHALFAN
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION IS
ALSO HERE.
TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION IF I
MIGHT THINK OF SNOW.
ASSEMBLY WOMAN YOU SAID
SOMETHING A A FEW MOMENTS AGO
THAT REALLY BELONGS IN THIS
CONVERSATION I THINK YOU SAID
WORDS TO THE EFFECT OF I AM
LOATH TO MAKE CHOICES FOR OTHER
PEOPLE THEM.
THAT FITS HERE BECAUSE WHAT WE
ARE ADDRESSING IS NOT.
NECESSARILY AT ALL OF THE
THERAPIST WO IS ENTERTAINING
CONVERSATION WITH REFLECTIVE
INQUIRY FOR ALL THE COMPLEX
REASONS
SOMEONE WOULD WANT. TO CONSIDER
CHANGING THEIR SEXUAL
ORIENTATION BUT RATHER.
THIS FOCUSES ON THE ROLL OF THE
THERAPIST WHO IS MARKETING
SOMETHING THAT OP PRIORI.
IS SEEN AS AN EFFORT TO CHANGE
YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION THROUGH
WHATEVER MEANS AND SO THE ONUS
REALLY IS ON THE PRACTITIONER TO
TO. DEMONSTRATE THAT SHE OR HE
IS ABLE TO FOUGHT FULLY ENGAGE
THE PERSON ALL OF THAT THAT WHO
CRIES RATHER THAN A KNEE JERK.
REFLEXIVE REACTION BECOMES FROM
THIS LONG DISCREDITED NOTION
THAT THERE IS SOMETHING
PATHOLOGICAL OR WRONG ABOUT
SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR THAT.
ONE'S SEXUAL ORIENTATION DERIVES
FROM EARLY LIFE DRAMATIC
EXPERIENCES THAT IS SO OLD AND
DISCREDITED BY THE PROFESSION
I'M SURPRISED IT EVEN COMES.
INTO THIS ROOM TODAY BUT THE
REALLY THE FOCUS IS ON AND SO IF
YOU HAVE A CONSTITUENT.
WHO?
PRESS HERE SAYING GEE I REALLY
CAN'T FIND ANYBODY WHO'S IN THE
EAST BAY HERE IS WILLING TO TALK
TO ME ABOUT THIS THIS LAW DOES
NOT. AFFECT THAT AS LONG AS THE
PERSON IS IS NOT MARKETING HER
OR HIMSELF AS A PURVEYOR. OF.
CHANGING YOUR SEXUAL
ORIENTATION.
I APPRECIATE THAT AND THINK YOU
I'M.
I'VE STATUS VERY VERY CAREFULLY
WITH NO PARTICULARLY IDEOLOGY
IDEOLOGICAL WINDOW ON HERE.
AND WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT
THAT THERE ARE OPTIONS AVAILABLE
TO SOMEONE GOING THROUGH A
JOURNEY THAT I HAVE NOT
EXPERIENCED.
AND.
I BELIEVE THIS IS MUCH MORE
NARROWLY TAILORED THAN EVEN THE
FIRST TIME I READ IT I THOUGHT
THE FIRST TIME I READ. THAT IS
ONE OF THE BROADEST OVERBROAD
THINGS I'VE EVER SEEN.
A PARTICULAR FOR A STATUTE THAT
HAS VERY BROAD REMEDIES AND IS
USED ALMOST IS LIKE THE KITCHEN
SINK THAT YOU THROW IT IN COURT.
I BELIEVE IT DOES PROVIDE
OPTIONS FOR THEIR CONSTITUENTS
AND PEOPLE IN OUR WORLD WHO ARE
WHO ARE LOOKING FOR OPTIONS FOR
HIM THEY NEED TO SEEK DIFFERENT
THERAPY AND CONVERSATIONS WITH.
AND SO I APPRECIATE YOUR
THOUGHTFULLY ANSWERING QUESTIONS
I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING FOR
THE BILL.
AND IT'S IT'S NOT A BLACK AND
WHITE ISSUE AND THERE SOME TOUGH
QUESTIONS HERE BUT I AM. I
APPRECIATE YOUR.
FOLK TRYING TO KEEP IT AS
FOCUSED AS POSSIBLE THANK YOU
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MISTER
OBERNOLTE AND THEN FOLLOWED BY
MISTER CALDERON. YOU MISTER
CHAIR OF SOMEONE LOW I
UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO
ACCOMPLISH HERE.
WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE
BILL BUT BECAUSE OF THE RESPECT
I HAVE FOR YOU. AND THE CO
AUTHORS ON THE BILL I THOUGHT
I'D TAKE A MINUTE AND EXPLAIN
WHY.
SO. TO ME WHEN I READ THROUGH
THE BILL THE OPERATIVE PARTS OF
THE BILL IS THAT SEEKS TO.
ESTABLISH SEXUAL CONVERSION
THERAPY AS WHAT IT CALLS A
QUESTIONABLE.
PRACTICE OF QUESTIONABLE
SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY.
AND OUT THERE FOR A FRAUDULENT
BUSINESS PRACTICE THAT SHOULD BE
OUTLAWED.
THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE BILL
DOES.
AND WE HAD A SPIRITED DISCUSSION
HERE OVER THE LAST FEW MINUTES
ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT SEXUAL
CONVERSION THERAPY IS OF
QUESTIONABLE SCIENTIFIC
VALIDITY.
BUT TO ME THAT ENTIRE DISCUSSION
IS MISPLACED BECAUSE THE
OPERATIVE POINT OF THE BILL IN
MY OPINION.
IS IF A HEALTH RELATED PRACTICE
IS OF COURSE QUESTIONABLE
SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY SHOULD IT BE
AGAINST THE LAW.
AND UNFORTUNATELY THAT IS A VERY
SLIPPERY SLOPE BECAUSE
REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU FEEL
ABOUT SEXUAL CONVERSION THERAPY.
THERE IS A WIDE VARIETY OF
HEALTH PRINT PRACTICES.
THAT ARE PRACTICED BY MILLIONS
OF CALIFORNIANS THAT NINETY
PERCENT OF US HERE IN THE ROOM
WOULD AGREE ARE OF QUESTIONABLE
SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY AND YET WE
RESPECT THE RIGHTS. FOR
CONSENTING ADULTS TO ENGAGE IN
THOSE PRACTICES BECAUSE THEY ARE
BASED LEVEL OUR SOCIETY BELIEVES
IN FREEDOM AND LIBERTY.
SO IF WE ARE GOING TO SAY.
THAT THIS IS OF QUESTIONABLE
SCIENTIFIC ABILITY AND SHOULD BE
OUTLAWED WORD WE STOPPED WE CALL
THESE PRACTICES. INTO THIS
CHAMBER ONE BY ONE AN OUTLAW
THEM DECLARE THAT THEIR KIDS
AGAINST THE LAW REGARDLESS OF
THE FACT THAT THEIR PRACTICE BY
MILLIONS OF CALIFORNIANS TO ME
THAT IS THE CRUX OF THE BILL
AND.
THAT'S WHY I'M ON BILL TO
SUPPORT IT TODAY THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR. THANK YOU ARE
MISTER CALDERON.
YOU MAKE THANK YOU MADAM SPEAKER
AND THINK YOU. ARE SOMEONE
MEMBER LAW FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL TO THE COMMITTEE ALSO THANK
ALL OF OUR WITNESSES AND SUPPORT
AND OPPOSITION FOR YOUR TIME
AND.
INCOME IT'S TO SPEAK TO US I
MEAN JUST TO GO OVER. ON MY
UNDERSTANDING OF THE BILLS THAT
WOULD ONLY BAN ADVERTISING OR
ENGAGING IN SEXUAL ORIENTATION
CHANGE THERAPY WHERE THERE IS A
COMMERCIAL TRANSACTION WITH THE
GOAL OF CHANGING A PERSON'S
SEXUAL ORIENTATION. IT WOULD NOT
IMPACT INDIVIDUALS ABILITY TO
SEEK COUNSEL FROM FAITH LEADERS
OR EVEN THERAPY FROM RELIGIOUS
GROUPS SO LONG AS. THE GOAL IS
NOT TO CHANGE SEXUAL ORIENTATION
AND THERE IS NO TRANSACTION AND
DOES NOT INCLUDE THERAPIES THAT
PROVIDE ACCEPTANCE SUPPORTER
FACILITATE COPING. IDENTITY
EXPLORATION OR SEXUAL
ORIENTATION NEUTRAL
INTERVENTIONS TO PREVENT
UNLAWFUL CONDUCT AND.
DO NOT SEEK TO CHANGE SEXUAL
ORIENTATION AS WELL AS THE FACT
THAT THERE IS COURT PRECEDENT
THAT HAS UPHELD THE CALIFORNIA
LAW. BANNING CONVERSION THERAPY
FOR MINORS MAKING IT UNLIKELY IN
MY OPINION A THAT COURTS WOULD
FIND THIS BILL.
NOT TO INFRINGE ON FREE SPEECH
OR RELIGIOUS RIGHTS I'M I I I
THINK YOU KNOW. IS SLIPPERY
SLOPE BUT IT'S INTERESTING TO
MAKE THAT KIND OF ARGUMENT
BECAUSE IT IS SEEN THE BILL THE
REALITY IS IS THAT
THE MESSAGE TO US IS THAT
THERE'S GOING TO BE NO TOMORROW
IF THIS BILL DOES NOT PASS OR OF
THIS BILL DOES PASS. AND I THINK
IT'S INTERESTING TO MAKE A
SLIPPERY SLOPE ARGUMENT BECAUSE.
YOU KNOW ARE YOU CAN MAKE THAT
ARGUMENT I THINK FOR ANYTHING
YOU KNOW IF YOU DO THIS WAS
POTENTIALLY GONNA. GONNA LEAD TO
OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT
TRYING TO CAN THAT THAT WE'RE
NOT TRYING TO GET OUT WELL I
THINK THIS BILL IS VERY
STRAIGHTFORWARD. WHEN IT COMES
TO SPECIFIC PRACTICES WITH
REGARD TO.
SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND.
CONVERSION THERAPY AS A MEANS
TO FIX IT WHICH I'M NOT EVEN
SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT
MEANS OR THAT'S EVEN POSSIBLE I
DON'T SEE THAT THIS BILL WHICH
IS IMPORTANT TO ME. ARE
PROHIBITS ANY INDIVIDUAL FROM
SEEKING OUT ANY TYPE OF OF HELP
OR OR.
TIME TO BE ABLE TO MEET WITH
THAT WITH A A THERAPIST IN ANY
WAY SHAPE OR FORM.
AND SO I THINK THAT.
YOU'VE TAKEN A LOT OF TIME TO
TOO NARROWLY TAILOR THE BILL TO
STE TO AFFECT A SPECIFIC. ARE
ISSUE I AND AND AND AND THAT'S
AN ISSUE LIKE INDIVIDUALS LIKE
MYSELF TAKE ISSUE WITH THIS IDEA
OF CONVERSION THERAPY I DON'T
BELIEVE IN IT.
OUR A OUR AND BE.
I I THINK THAT.
YOU KNOW. WHEN I LOOK AT THE
INDIVIDUAL GROUPS THAT ARE IN.
OPPOSITION.
IT DOES IT DOES SADDEN ME I
MEAN I I THINK.
THE IDEA THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA
SOLVE THE BIBLE IN CALIFORNIA
BECAUSE OF SOMEHOW THIS BILL'S
GOING BRAVE I THINK THAT'S
RIDICULOUS CLAIM.
AND.
YOU KNOW WHEN I THINK OF CHURCH
FIRST I'M A BIG BELIEVER THAT.
YOU KNOW.
.
YOU KNOW. WE ARE ALL CREATED IN
GOD'S IMAGE WILL GO BROKE IMAGE
REGARDLESS OF HOW WE ARE.
BORN WHETHER THAT IS WORK DAY
STRAIGHT TRANSGENDER BISEXUAL
WHATEVER I THINK IT IS ALL
PURPOSEFUL. I THINK IT IS ALL
MEANT TO BE.
THAT THAT WAS ALL BY DESIGN.
I AND AND TO SEE SO MANY
RELIGIOUS GROUPS.
IN OPPOSITION IT.
IT DOES MAKE ME SAD BECAUSE A
LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN
HURT. ARE BY THESE TYPES OF
THERAPIES RIGHT IN CALIFORNIA
MAYBE WE HAVE BETTER ACTORS I
MEAN WE HAVE MORE GENTLE ACTORS
IN INDIVIDUALS TAKING THE TIME.
OUT TO CONDUCT THIS THERAPY IN A
DIFFERENT WAY OF IT IN OTHER
AREAS I THINK IT'S SOMEWHAT
DIFFERENT SHIRT CONVERSION
THERAPY PRACTICES IN CALIFORNIA
PROBABLY LODGE EVERYTHING
CONVERSION THERAPIES. PER AND
PRACTICES IN THE SOUTH SO.
YA I I REALLY DO APPRECIATE.
THE TIME THAT EVERYBODY HAS
TAKEN TO TRY TO CRAFT THIS BILL
IN A NARROWLY TAILORED WAY.
AND.
LOOK FOR TO VOTING AYE AND
MISTER CHAIR I MOVE THE BILL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MISTER
TAINE.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR A FIRST
FOR ME THINK THE THE AUTHOR IN
THE SPONSORS FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD. I I DID WANT TO GO
BACK TO JUST THE THE ANALYSIS
WHERE.
WE DID TALK ABOUT. A CONVERSION
THERAPY CONVERSION THERAPY WE
HAD A NUMBER OF. ORGANIZATIONS
THE AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC
ASSOCIATION THE AMERICAN PSYCHO
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
AMERICAN COUNSELING ASSOCIATION.
THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
SOCIAL WORKERS AND THE AMERICAN.
MEDICAL ASSOCIATION THE AYE ALL
OPPOSED TO PRACTICE OF SEXUAL
ORIENTATION CHANGE EFFORTS.
ON THE BASIS THAT IS NOT
EVIDENCE BASED AND IS
POTENTIALLY HARMFUL.
TO A PATIENT'S MENTAL HEALTH.
WE ALSO HAVE OUR COURT SYSTEM
HERE IN CALIFORNIA THAT'S
RECOGNIZE THE PRACTICE OF
CONVERSION THERAPY. AS A
DECEPTIVE PRACTICE EXIST IN THAT
VIOLATE EXISTING CONSUMER FRAUD
LOS.
SO WHAT WE HAVE IS NOT REALLY
ABOUT SCIENCE WE HAVE IS WHETHER
OR NOT THIS.
PIPER THERAPY.
ACTUALLY.
A COULD BE HARMFUL.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TALKING
ABOUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT CONSUMER PROTECTION AND
WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD BE
ALLOWED TO MARKET THIS.
TYPE OF.
ASSISTANCE
TWO CONSUMER
SO IT'S NOT ABOUT WHETHER YOU
BELIEVE IT OR DON'T BELIEVE IT.
THIS IS REALLY ABOUT US
PROTECTING CONSUMERS WHICH IS
MUCH OF WHAT WE WE DO IN THE
PRIVACY AND BMP AND MET MANY OF
THE COMMITTEES HERE. THAT WE ARE
TRYING TO MAKE SURE. THAT
INFORMATION IS BEING GIVEN TO
THOSE OF US THAT ARE CONSTANTLY
CONSUMING IN THAT IT'S.
THAT'S FAIR ITS OPENNESS
TRANSPARENT AND THAT IT REALLY.
MEETS A MEASURE OF. CONSUMER
EDUCATION.
SO ON WITH THESE TYPES OF
ORGANIZATIONS AND AGAIN ON THESE
ARE ALL THE THE PRIMARY HEALTH
ORGANIZATIONS THAT I THINK WE
WOULD LOOK TO. WHETHER OR NOT
SOMETHING IS EFFECTIVE SOMETHING
IS WORKING SOMETHING IT'S OKAY
TO MARKET.
TO US AS CONSUMERS OF HEALTH
CARE.
PRODUCTS I THINK IT'S
ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE BASED ON
BASED ON THE COURT'S BASED ON
THESE A MAJOR HEALTH CARE
ORGANIZATIONS THAT WE STAND WITH
THEM.
THAT WE SAY THAT THIS IN THIS
KIND OF WORK SHOULDN'T BE
MARKETED TO CONSUMERS.
SHOULDN'T BE A PUT OUT FOR FOR
PUBLIC CONSUMPTION AND THAT IT
SHOULD BE CONCERT NOW.
AGAIN I THINK WE'VE COVERED THE
FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS WE'VE
COVERED THE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
RIGHTS THERE IS NO INFRINGEMENT
ON FREE SPEECH THERE'S NO AYE
INFRINGEMENT ON PEOPLE TO SAY
BUT THEY BELIEVE. TO EXPRESS
THAT VIEW POINT BUT THIS IS
ABOUT A CONSUMER TRANSACTIONS.
THIS IS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU
SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO ADVERTISE.
THIS TYPE OF SERVICE AND WE HAVE
AGAIN EVERY MAJOR HEALTHCARE
ORGANIZATION.
ALL SAYING THE SAME THING TO US
HOUSE A LEGISLATIVE BODY. SO
AGAIN I I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE
THE AUTHOR FOR FOR BRING IN THIS
A BILL FOR ALL BE HAPPINESS BE
HARDER TO THE SECOND THIS BILL
AND ALSO PROBABLY TO SUPPORT
THIS BILL. I THINK IT ABSOLUTELY
IS SOMETHING A VERY IMPORTANT
THAT WE DELIVER THIS MESSAGE TO
CONSUMERS ARE ALL ACROSS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MISTER
BERMAN.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MISTER
CHAIR.
AND FOR EVERYONE CAN TODAY.
TO.
TESTIFYING BOTH SIDES I WANT TO
ECHO THE COMMENTS OF THE LOT OF
MY COLLEAGUES AND THINKING THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS BILL
FORWARD.
THIS ISN'T.
A A KIND A BLUNT INSTRUMENT
THIS IS A AS A LOT OF FOLKS HAVE
MENTIONED A VERY NEARLY CRAFTED
PIECE OF OF LEGISLATION.
THAT IS MEANT TO TAKE.
RESEARCH DONE BY MEDICAL EXPERTS
FROM ACROSS THE FIELD AND THE
COLLEGE OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE
OF PHYSICIANS THE AMERICAN
PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION THE
CALIFORNIA AMERICAN MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION. TAKE ALL THAT
RESEARCH.
AND APPLY IT TO PROTECT
CALIFORNIA'S CONSUMERS.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY THE TYPE OF
LEGISLATION THAT WE SHOULD WE
SHOULD BE LOOKING TO PASS A ITS
EXECUTABLE DECISION I'M HAPPY TO
SUPPORT YOU KNOW CONVERSION
THERAPY. IS A SET OF WIDELY
DISCREDITED PRACTICES OF THE
CRIME TO BE ABLE TO CHANGE A
PERSON'S SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND
CHANGE THEIR GENDER IDENTITY OR
EXPRESSION OR LESSEN THEIR SAME
SEX SEXUAL ATTRACTION.
AND ALL THIS RESEARCH RD HAS
IDENTIFIED THAT'S HARMFUL OF FOR
CHILDREN AND ADULTS.
AND SO.
FOR THOSE REASONS AND MORE I'M
HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE BILL THE
DAY THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH OUT.
SEEING NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS I WANT TO THANK
EVERYBODY FOR. FOR BEING HERE
TODAY I THINK IT'S BEEN SAID
BEFORE BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH
ARMS REPEATING. THE BILL DOES
NOT BAN ANY THERAPIES DATA DO
NOT SEEK TO CHANGE SEXUAL
ORIENTATION. ARE DOES NOT BAN
ANY THERAPIES THAT PROVIDE
ACCEPTANCE SUPPORT AND
UNDERSTANDING OF CLIENTS.
OR THE FACILITATION OF CLIENTS
COPING SOCIAL SUPPORT IN
IDENTITY EXPLORATION. ALL AND
DEVELOPMENT. INCLUDING SEXUAL
ORIENTATION NEUTRAL
INTERVENTIONS TO PREVENT OR
DRESS UNLAWFUL CONDUCT.
WHO UNSAFE SEXUAL PRACTICES?
OF FREE THERAPIES ARE NOT COVER
ON THIS THIS BILL. AND
DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN CLERGY AND
THEIR PARISH ARE NOT COVERED.
ON SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO.
REPEAT DOES
AND DOT IT'S YOU KNOW IT'S BEEN
ALSO MENTION THAT THE.
THIS BILL IS SO NARROWER THAN
NOW SP ELEVEN SEVENTY TWO WHICH
HAS.
BEEN CHALLENGED IN COURT TO
NUMEROUS TIMES AND HAS SURVIVED
ALL OF THE LAST BEING THE UNITED
STATES SUPREME COURT DOT TWICE.
AND THE LOWER COURT'S RULING WAS
BASED ON ARE THE FACT THAT THE
LAW REGULATED CONDUCT AS OPPOSED
TO FIRST AMENDMENT RELIGIOUS.
FREEDOM OR FREEDOM OF SPEECH SO
I AM COMFORTABLE A SUPPORTING
THE BILL. ARM BUT I DO WANT TO
THANK ALL OF YOU FOR THIS VERY
ON. HA HA ROBUST DISCUSSION.
SO ON IT HAS BEEN ROBUST
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT YOU HAVE
NOT ASKED A POINT OF ORDER.
QUESTIONS ORNAMENTS THE CHERRIES
OUT OF LINE ZERO RESPECT THE
PROCESS THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND
AND I THINK TODAY WE'VE HAD WHEN
YOU IMAGINE YOUR SON GOING UP TO
ORDER ME WHOSE HAIR SEXUALLY
ABUSED Y. KNOW HOMOSEXUAL
FEELINGS HURT AND PAUSE BIPEDAL
CARL YOU ARE AND WHAT IF IT. WAS
YOUR SON YOU'RE GETTING
SENTIMENTS OUT WHAT IT WAS YOUR
SON YOU WOULD BE GUILTY OF
HAVING YOUR SON NOT BEEN ABLE TO
GET REPAIRED OTHER ADDRESS FOR
YOUR OWN YEAH ORDER PLAY WITH A
BRACE WHO HE IS AND HIS
DECISIONS. YOU ARE BORN THAT WAY
THAT'S THE POINT YOU ARE
SEXUALLY PURE SIR NOT LISTEN TO
EVERYTHING OUR WINDSOR HEAD IF I
MAY ASK YOU TO HOW DARE YOU SIR.
SORRY SIR I.
I'VE ALLOWED NO REBUTTAL
WHATSOEVER WE CAN ANSWER EVER
SINGLE ONE OF THESE ARGUMENTS
EVERY THAT AND THANK YOU VERY
MUCH
FOR THE.
WHICH LIKE TO TAKE A BREAK
NONCHALANTLY.
I I APPRECIATE THE. THE
CONVERSATION.
.
AND THE DIALOGUE.
WHEN WE HEAR ABOUT THIS NOTION
OF CONVERSION THERAPY.
VERY TROUBLING.
CHILDHOOD OF MINE.
WHAT ABOUT THAT SIR SIR?
SIR IF I COULD ASK YOU TO.
SIR PLEASE PLEASE.
PLEASE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A
CAN BE SEEN AS A POLITICAL ISSUE
BUT IF
YOU EMPLOYMENT FOR ONE MOMENT.
AS I WORKED WITH MANY OF YOU ON
A DAY TO DAY BASIS
I TRIED TO EXERCISE SO. RESPECT
AND LOVE.
AND IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO
PRESENT THIS BILL.
BECAUSE WOMEN.
THINKING ABOUT CHILDHOOD.
AND THAT.
WOULD NOT BE OKAY TO BE
YOURSELF.
AND YOU HEARD TESTIMONY ABOUT
SUICIDAL THOUGHTS.
I HAVE ALSO HAVE THAT.
AND THAT COULD CONVERSION
THERAPY HELPED ME.
A.
AND THE AND. AYE CRIES A
MILLENNIA I GREW UP IN A SOCIETY
IN WHICH.
THERE WAS SO MUCH HATE TOWARDS.
MY IDENTITY.
YOU CANNOT GET MARRIED TO THE
PERSON YOU LOVED I SERVED.
AS LOCAL OFFICES MANY OF YOU DID
AS MAYOR I COULD OFFICIATE A
WEDDING BUT CAN GET MARRIED
MYSELF.
A GOOD HOST A BLOOD DRIVE BUT
COULD NOT DONATE BLOOD MYSELF.
I CAN LOOK IN THE BOY SCOUTS TO
CITY HOLDER IN THE MERIT BADGE
BUT CANNOT SERVE MYSELF.
IN THE BOY SCOUTS.
AND SO WHEN HEARING ABOUT THE.
THE PAIN SUFFERING OF.
WITH THESE PRACTICES WILL DO TO
INDIVIDUALS.
I'VE.
EVER CALLED A VERY DARK DAY FOR
ME.
IN WHICH I LIVED.
THE SAME SENTIMENT AND FEELING.
AND THE AYE.
I WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE THAT I
STAND BEFORE YOU AS A STRONGER
PERSON.
BECAUSE OF THE EFFORTS
AND THE RECOGNITION THAT WE ARE
ALSO EQUAL PEOPLE.
AND THAT THERE'S A LITTLE NOTION
THAT YOU NEED TO CONVERT.
PROUD OF YOUR IDENTITY.
SHOULD BE PROUD OF WHO YOU ARE
THAT WE CELEBRATE.
YOURSELF.
BUT YOU CELEBRATE.
YOURSELF.
AND.
THIS RECOGNITION OF THIS IS A
FRAUDULENT PRACTICE.
HELPS RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE
OF THEIR STATE IS DOING.
AND PROTECTING OUR CONSUMERS AND
THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
AND I ASK FOR YOUR.
KIND CONSIDERATION.
SINCERELY.
AND RECOGNIZING THAT WE WANTED
NARROWLY FOCUSED THIS BILL ON
THE PROTECTIONS AND THAT IF IT
INDIVIDUALS TRULY. HAVE SOME
CHALLENGES AND STRUGGLES OF
THEIR IDENTITY AND THEIR JOURNEY
IN LIFE THAT THEY STILL HAVE THE
OPTION TO DO SO. AFTER IT'S BEEN
PREVIOUSLY.
STATED.
AT AND SO WITH THAT I DIDN'T.
WANT TO JUST SHARE THAT IS A
VERY PERSONAL ISSUE TO.
ME INTO MANY OTHER.
CALIFORNIANS THAT ARE LIVING IN
OUR STATE AND I HOPE THAT WE
DEMONSTRATE THE COURAGE OF OUR
CONVICTIONS AND DEMONSTRATE THE
PRACTICE OF PROTECING EVERY
CALIFORNIANS.
AND THAT I RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
A VOTE THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR
LOW AND I WANNA THANK EVERYBODY
AGAIN FOR FOR BEING HERE I KNOW
THIS IS A VERY EMOTIONALLY
CHARGED ISSUE.
AND OUT ITSELF DONE.
SO I I WANNA THANK EVERYBODY
FOR BEING HERE SO WITH THAT DUMB
MADAM SECRETARY OF PLEASE CALL
ROLL.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASSED TO
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAUTH. AYE
CHAU AYE KILEY NO KILEY NO BAKER
AYE BAKER AYE BERMAN.
BERMAN I CALDERON.
CALDERON AYE IRWIN.
OR WHEN I AM MULLIN. OBERNOLTE.
OBERNOLTE NO REYES AYE REUS AYE
TING. TING AYE. YOUR BILL IS OUT
MISTER WELL. THANK YOU AGAIN
FOR.
I'M GONNA TAKE OUT.
ON EXERCISE MY PREROGATIVE AS A
CHARITY TO TAKE UP. ONE BILL ON.
THAT'S ABOUT THE.
TWENTY FIVE EIGHTY SIX AND THE
FORTY SIX BECAUSE ONE OF THE
WITNESSES WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE BY
THREE O'CLOCK. SO THIS POINT
LIKE TO.
IT IN FACT MY BILL SO I'M GONNA
HOUSE MISTER KILEY TO.
TAKE OVER THE GALA.
YEAH
.
SO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR CHAIRMAN
MEMBERS OUT.
TODAY LIKE TO PRESENT AB TWENTY
FIVE FORTY SIX SO.
AND I WANT TO START BY ACCEPTING
US AUTHORS AMENDMENT.
THE AMENDMENT LISTED ON PAGE SIX
OF THE ANALYSIS TO ENSURE THAT
THE BILL DOES NOT PROHIBIT THE
USE OF NAMES.
USER NAMES DOMAIN NAMES OR EMAIL
ADDRESS OF THIRD PARTIES FOR
COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING
PURPOSES.
THE BILL TWENTY FIVE FORTY SIX
WILL ENSURE THAT THE SANDERS OF
FALSE AND DECEPTIVE SPAM EMAILS
ARE HELD LIABLE FOR THEIR
UNLAWFUL CONDUCT.
EXPANDS WHAT IS CONSIDER FALSE
AND DECEPTIVE CONTENT AND ALSO
FINALLY AND WILL ENABLE COURTS
TO ORDER INJUNCTIONS.
THE FEDERAL CONTROLLING THE
ASSAULT OF NON SOLICITED*
AND MARKETING.
OR CANNED SPAM FOR SHORT ACTIVE
TWENTY TWO THOUSAND AND THREE
MAKES TRUFFAUT SPAM LAWFUL AS
LONG AS THE SENDER. IS IDENTIFY
AND THE RECIPIENT CAN OPT OUT.
CAN SPAM PREEMPTS STATE ANTI
SPAM LAW EXCEPT TO THE CA A
EXTEND THAT.
STATE LAWS PROHIBIT FALSITY OR
DECEPTION IN ANY PORTION OF THE
COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL
MESSAGE. OF INFORMATION ATTACH
HERE TO.
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
SECTION SEVENTEEN FIVE TWENTY
NINE POINT FIVE REGULATES FALSE
AND DECEPTIVE SPAMS AND IS
THEREFORE NOT PREEMPTED. BY CAN
SPAM. IT IS COMMON FOR
ADVERTISERS TO SEND UNSOLICITED
COMMERCIAL EMAILS TO CONSUMERS
OFTEN THEY WILL CONTACT WITH
SPAM NETWORKS TO DISTRIBUTE
EMAILS TO CONSUMERS. THOSE SPAM
THAT WORKS IN TURN CONTRACT WITH
THIRD PARTIES WHO ACTUALLY SENT
OUT THOSE EMAILS.
THOSE ARE THE ONES WHO ACTUALLY
PUSHED THE BUTTONS.
OFTEN THE SANDERS WILL USE
MATHIS DESIGNED TO CIRCUMVENT
SPAM FILTERS OR MISLEAD
CONSUMERS. AMONG OTHERS THESE
MATTERS INCLUDES SOMETHING ELSE
FROM MULTIPLE DOMAIN NAMES
ALTERING THE FLOOR FROM LINE TO
MISLEAD RECIPIENT ABOUT THE
IDENTITY OF THE SENDER. COPYING
HEADERS FROM LEGITIMATE
BUSINESSES AND THEN PLACING THEM
INTO THEIR EMAIL OR SIMPLY
PROVIDING UNTRUTHFUL CONTENT TO
MISLEAD A CONSUMER.
UNDER EXISTING LAW ADVERTISERS
ARE STRICTLY LIABLE FOR FALSE
AND DECEPTIVE SPAM HOWEVER THE
ACTUAL CENTERS OF THE EMAILS ARE
NOT LIABLE FOR SENDING THE
UNLAWFUL SPAMS.
P. AND P. SECTION SEVENTEEN FIVE
TWENTY NINE POINT FIVE PROVIDES
RECIPIENTS OF UNLAWFUL SPAM WITH
STANDING.
FILE ACTIONS TO ENFORCE THE
FALSE AND DECEPTIVE A SPAMMER
PROVISIONS FOR SILICIC
COMMERCIAL EMAILS. THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL MAY ENFORCE THE LAW
AGAINST SOLICITED AND
UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL EMAILS
WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT
CONSERVATISM SO BUSINESSES CAN'T
MISLEAD. OTHER CUSTOMERS AND
SOLICIT THEIR EMAILS. THE BILL
TWENTY FIVE FORTY SIX WAS
STRENGTHENED CALIFORNIA'S
PROHIBITIONS ON FALSE AND
DECEPTIVE SPAMS. ALL IN A NUMBER
OF WAYS. ONE HOLDING SPAM
NETWORKS AND THE ACTUAL SANDERS
LIABLE FOR FALSE AND DECEPTIVE
ARE SPAMMING. TO APPLYING THE
LAW TO FALSEHOODS AND
MISREPRESENTATIONS IN A BODY OF
EMAILS NOT JUST THE HEADERS.
THREE HAS ESTABLISHING THE
TRUTHFUL CONTENT IN ONE PART OF
THE SPAM EMAIL THIS NOT CURE
FALSITY IN ANOTHER PART. FOR
PROHIBITING SPAMMING FROM
MULTIPLE DOMAIN NAMES FOR THE
SOLE PURPOSE OF BYPASSING SPAM
FILTERS FIVE. PROHIBITING FROM
NAMES AND MISREPRESENT WHO THE
SPAMS OFF FROM.
SIX PROHIBITING THE USE OF THE
TERM FREE IN THE SUBJECT LINE IF
THERE ARE CONDITIONS THAT APPLY
UNLESS THE SUBJECT LINE CLEARLY.
INDICATES CONDITIONS APPLY.
AND SEVEN AUTHORIZING THE COURTS
TO IMPOSE INJUNCTIONS TO STOP
UNLAWFUL SPAMMING AND FINALLY
ALLOWING THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY
CITY ATTORNEYS AND PERSONS OR
ENTITY WHOSE NAME USER NAME
EMAIL ADDRESS OR DOMAIN NAME
APPEARS. IN THE FROM NAME OR THE
SENDER'S EMAIL ADDRESS WITHOUT
THEIR PERMISSION TO BRING THE
ACTION AGAINST THE LAW UNLAWFUL
SPAMMING.
SOME CONCERNS HAVE BEEN RAISED
I MISSED THAT ABOUT THE
PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE TERM
INTERFERE WITH THE EXISTING
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN. A BUSINESS
AND IT'S OUR CUSTOMERS
UNCOMMITTED SIR.
TO ADDRESSING THAT ISSUE AS THE
BILL MOVES TO LOOK FORWARD AND.
WILLING TO TAKE ANY AMENDMENT
BEFORE THE NEXT THE COMMITTEE ON
THAT LIMITS THOSE PROVISIONS TO
SPECIFICALLY ARE ONLY STE
UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL EMAIL SO
SO I HAVE TO WITNESSES HERE ON
TODAY WITH ME I LIKE TO ARM HAD.
ASKING THEIR SELF INTRODUCED
THEMSELVES.
GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS DAN
BALSAM I'M A CONSUMER PROTECTION
ATTORNEY AND I SUPPORT THIS
BILL.
BEFORE BECAME AN ATTORNEY I
WOULD HAVE WORKED IN MARKETING
HAVE AN MBA FROM UCLA AND I
WORKED ON ADVERTISING FOR
PROCTER AND GAMBLE FED EX VISA
AND EIGHTEEN T.. I LIKE EMAIL
MARKETING BUT I DON'T LIKE IS
WHEN IS FALSE AND DECEPTIVE
SPAMMING.
CALIFORNIA HAS ONE OF THE
STRONGEST ANTI SPAM LAWS IN THE
COUNTRY ARE EFFECTIVE IN TWO
THOUSAND THREE. THERE WAS A
CLEAR LEGISLATIVE INTENT AT THAT
TIME TO PROHIBIT ALL SPAMMING.
BUT DUE TO PARTIAL FEDERAL
PREEMPTION CALIFORNIA CAN ONLY
REGULATE FALSITY IN DECEPTION.
AB TWENTY FIVE FORTY SIX IS JUST
AN AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING LAW
TO CLOSE SOME OF THESE LOOPHOLES
AND PROVIDE CLARIFICATIONS
BECAUSE THERE'S NO SOCIAL VALUE
IN FALSE AND DECEPTIVE SPAMMING.
THIS LAW ANY AMENDMENTS ARE
NECESSARY BECAUSE CALIFORNIA
BUSINESSES AND CONSUMERS CANNOT
SUE UNDER THE FEDERAL LAW
THERE'S NO STANDING.
CALIFORNIA BUSINESSES AND
CONSUMERS WHO RECEIVED THE SPAMS
ALSO CANNOT SUE UNDER THE FALSE
ADVERTISING LAW AND THE UNFAIR
COMPETITION LAW BECAUSE IT'S
VERY HARD TO PROVE UP ACTUAL
DAMAGES FROM RECEIVING THESE
SPAMS.
THE CURRENT STATUTE ALREADY HAS
A PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION FOR
RECIPIENTS AND. ARE ALL THIS
DOES IS SEEK TO PROVIDE
TWO MAIN POINTS I'D LIKE TO
LEAVE YOU WITH OUR THAT THE
STATUTE AND THIS AMENDMENT THE
BILL. ONLY PROHIBITS FALSELY
DECEPTION AND IT ONLY APPLIES TO
UNSOLICITED EMAILS SO IT'S NOT
GOING AFFECT COMPANIES ABILITIES
TO TALK TO THEIR OWN CUSTOMERS.
.
SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE LAW
DOES DO RIGHT NOW.
IT DOES ADDRESS SPAMS THAT ARE
FORGED WITH HEADERS ARE FORGED
TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE SAY THE NEW
YORK TIMES IS STANDING IT WHEN
THAT'S NOT TRUE. MAYBE THE
CURRENT LAW ADDRESSES FROM NAMES
THAT ARE GENERIC THE DON'T
REPRESENT WHO IT REALLY IS FROM
OR PROVIDE FALSE NAMES.
SUBJECT LINES ARE CLEARLY FALL
SUBJECT LINES ARE CLEARLY
PROHIBITED BUT AS MR CHOW
MENTIONED SANDERS THE ACTUAL
PEOPLE WHO BY THE LISTS ON THE
DARK WEB WHO FORGED HEADERS TO
SEE HIT THE SEND BUTTON. THEY'RE
NOT LIABLE UNDER THE CURRENT
STATUTE.
THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON MY NAME IS JACOB
PARKER I AM IN A. CALIFORNIA
CONSUMER ATTORNEY AND I'VE BEEN
WORKING IN THIS SPACE.
SPECIFICALLY DEALING WITH
UNLAWFUL EMAIL ADVERTISEMENTS
FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND.
CURRENTLY THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
ENTITIES AND INDIVIDUALS WHO
ENGAGE IN FALSE AND DECEPTIVE
EMAIL ADVERTISING
AND THEY EXPLOIT THE LOOPHOLES
IN THE EXISTING LAW TO
CAN YOU THAT PRACTICE.
BY WAY OF EXAMPLE ONE OF THE
LOOPHOLES IN THE CURRENT LAW IS
THAT.
SOME OF THESE ADVERTISE SOME OF
THESE ADVERTISERS HAVE ARGUED
THAT.
TRUTH IN ONE PORTION OF AN EMAIL
CAN CURE FALSITY IN ANOTHER SO
TO PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE.
AN EMAIL COULD BE SENT
FROM.
ANYONE OF YOU COULD APPEAR TO BE
SENT FROM ANY ONE OF YOUR.
EMAIL ADDRESSES IT COULD IT
COULD IN FACT SAY YOUR NAME YOUR
ACTUAL EMAIL ADDRESS.
AND ONCE YOU OPEN EMAIL YOU'D
FIND THAT IT WAS A AN
ADVERTISEMENT FOR.
.
CAR LOAN
AND.
IF.
IN THE BODY OF THE EMAIL.
IT SAID THIS IS NOT FROM.
YOU THIS IS FROM.
I.
THIS CAR LOAN ENTITY.
THEY'RE ARGUING THAT.
THE TRUTH IN THE BODY CAN CURE
THE FALSITY IN THE FROM NAME.
AND THIS BILL WILL CHANGE THAT
AND IT'LL CLOSE THAT LOOPHOLE.
ANOTHER LOOPHOLE AS THE BILL
DOESN'T A DRAFT OF THE CURRENT
LAW DOES NOT ADDRESS FALSITY IN
THE BODY SO YOU COULD HAVE.
OUTRIGHT FALSE ADVERTISING IN
THE BODY OF AN EMAIL AND THE
CURRENT LAW DOESN'T ADDRESS THAT
AT ALL. SO THIS BILL WOULD
ADDRESS THAT AND MAKE FALSITY IN
THE BODY. UNLAWFUL JUST AS
FALSITY IN THE HEADERS OF AN
EMAIL IS UNLAWFUL.
.
ANOTHER.
AS A MISTER CHAO SAID INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT
WOULD BE ADDED.
TO ALLOW QUARTS TO STOP BAD
ACTORS.
.
PEOPLE USING FAKE FROM NAMES.
THIS BILL WOULD PREVENT PEOPLE
FROM USING.
MADE UP FROM NAMES THAT ARE MADE
TO SOUND LIKE THEY'RE FROM
INDIVIDUALS WHO DO NOT EXIST.
.
AND.
THIS WOULD ALSO INCLUDE.
EMBEDDED TAX THAT'S DESIGNED TO
DECEIVE SPAM FILTERS
ON WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT
ADDRESSED BY THE CURRENT LAW
WOULD
THE BILL WOULD ADDRESS.
AYE AND LEGITIMATE EMAIL
ADVERTISERS.
OUR ARE ACTUALLY HARM TO BUY.
WEEK CALIFORNIA SPAM I THINK
PLEASE WRAP UP SIR THANK YOU
OKAY.
I JUST GONNA SAY.
.
THE JIMMY EMAIL ADVERTISERS ARE
HURT BY WEAK CALIFORNIA SPAM
LAWS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO
COMPETE WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE
WILLING TO LIE AND DECEIVE.
I ENDED ALSO REDUCES THE PUBLIC
TRUST
IN EMAIL MARKETING IN GENERAL.
AND.
LEGITIMATE ADVERTISERS WHO ARE
NOT CURRENTLY.
.
BEING SOUGHT UNDER THE EXISTING
LAW SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR
ODD THIS THIS. BILL IS DESIGNED
TO SHORE UP THE LOOPHOLES FOR
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE OUT THERE ARE
AYE.
THE BAD ACTORS.
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT.
WHAT THIS IS IN OPPOSITION
?
CHAIR MISTER CHAIR AND MEMBERS
OF STEEP CARLSON FOR THE UPDATE
AND MARKETING ASSOCIATION DIEM A
AND A COALITION OF COMPANIES.
AND ASSOCIATIONS IN OPPOSITION
TO AB TWENTY FOUR FIVE FORTY
SIX.
AMONG THE FACTS MISSING FROM
THIS DISCUSSION IS OR ARE THE
ECONOMIC BENEFITS AND USEFULNESS
OF EMAIL MARKETING BY A BROAD
SEGMENT OF THE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY. MANY OF WHOM HAVE
RAISED CONCERNS OVER THE BREADTH
OF THE BILL INCLUDING INSURERS
RETAILERS BANKERS GROCERS AND
TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATIONS.
THAT'S NOT JUST HAPPENSTANCE.
WE
I THINK WE DISAGREE. WITH THE
CHARACTERIZATION OF.
LOOPHOLES IN THE LAW.
THAT ARE BEING FILLED BY THE
BILL WE BELIEVE THAT.
VIRTUALLY ALL AND AND I AM NOT A
TOTAL EXPERT ON THIS ISSUE BUT
OF OF THE.
ISSUES COVERED BY THE BILL.
ARE ALSO COVERED BY.
THE FEDERAL LAW THE CAN SPAM
ACT.
THE YOU HAVE TO SEE IS A
VIGOROUS AND FORCE OF THE LAW.
WHICH CAN ALSO BE ENFORCED BY
STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL UNDER
EXISTING STATE LAW.
WE BELIEVE THIS BILL WILL
INADVERTENTLY BUT WE BELIEVE IT
WILL.
PENALIZE LEGITIMATE MARKETERS
AND MARKETING.
AND AS WILL BE POINTED OUT
LATER.
WILL INVITE EXCESSIVE LITIGATION
BY ADDING AMONG OTHER THINGS.
A PRIVATE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION FOR WHICH NO DAMAGES
NEED BE SHALL.
A THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT.
WE IN THIS LEGISLATURE
NECESSARILY FAVOR IN MOST CASES.
AS I MENTIONED THE BILL'S DONE
NECESSARY AS I KNOW THAT FEDERAL
LAW LARGELY PREEMPTS THE FIELD
AND THERE IS AMPLE ENFORCEMENT.
WHILE WE MAY NOT QUARREL THAT
SOME OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE
BILL ARE.
IN FACT
CHAU FALSITY AND DECEPTION.
AGAIN.
.
THAT BAY TRIGGER A VIOLATION OF
THE CALIFORNIA CAN'T SPAM LAW OR
THE FEDERAL CAMPS PAM LA BECAUSE
THEY SAID THERE. GENERALLY
COVERED IN SEVERAL CASES OVER
BROAD SUCH AS THE MERE MENTION
OF A THIRD PARTIES DOMAIN NAME.
WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION AND AN
EMAIL. THAT COULD BE AS WELL AS.
DE AS INNOCENT AS AND SENDING A
NEWSLETTER AND.
A DOMAIN NAME OF OF SOME OTHER
ORGANIZATION IS IS IS COVERED.
.
SO WE NEVER CHAO. REFERRED TO
THE THE ISSUE OF FREE WHICH IS A
A A REAL CONCERN TO US AND
OTHERS I THINK YOU'LL HEAR ABOUT
THAT FROM SOME OF THE OTHER
WITNESSES.
.
RIGHT NOW WOULD IT IS ILLEGAL.
TO OFFER FREE PRODUCT OF
SERVICE AND NOT HAVE THE TERMS
OR CONDITIONS DISCLOSED CLEARLY
AND CONSPICUOUSLY.
OUR THE FTC GUIDES ENFORCES THIS
BAT ASPECT OF THE LAW. WE
BELIEVE THIS BILL CREATES
CONDITIONS THAT ARE
UNNECESSARILY WILL NEGATIVELY
AFFECT THE TOOL THAT'S VERY
POPULAR WITH CONSUMERS NOT JUST
MARKETERS.
AS MATCHING MENTIONED ADDING
NEW.
TRIGGERS FOR THE CALIFORNIA LAW.
THE THAT ARE ARE LARGELY COVERED
BY THE FEDERAL LAW SEEMS
UNNECESSARY.
WITH THE STATE SHOULD NOT DO IS
TO ADD A PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION.
THAT NEEDS NOT CHAU DAMAGES AND
POTENTIAL ENFORCEMENT BY FIFTY
EIGHT D. A.'S AND FOUR HUNDRED
PLUS IT CITY ATTORNEYS.
WE CAN'T SPAM LAW WAS WOODS MADE
A FEDERAL LAW BECAUSE OF THE
NEED TO HAVE A CONSISTENT MEANS
OF DEALING WITH THIS UNDERSTOOD
THAT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING HERE IS
IS SORT OF THE EXCEPTION IN THE
LAW THAT DEALS WITH FALSITY IN
DECEPTION.
BUT.
WE GOT WE DO NOT BELIEVE THIS
BILL IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO DO
THAT.
WE BELIEVE THAT ADDING THESE
THERE WILL LIKELY BE A FLOOD OF
LITIGATION THAT YOU CAN SEE THE.
PEOPLE UP TESTIFYING WHERE
MEMBERS OF THE CONSUMER
ATTORNEYS.
.
AND WILL PENALIZE THE GOOD
ACTORS
MOREOVER ADDING THESE REMEDIES.
WE BELIEVE IS ALSO PREEMPTED BY
THE CANCER. CAN'T SPAM LAW AND
FOR THOSE REASONS WE MUST
OPPOSE.
MISTER CHAIRMAN MISTER CHAIR AND
MEMBERS MY NAME IS SARAH BOOT
I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND OUR POSITION ON THIS BILL AS
OPPOSED UNLESS AMENDED. WE
PRESENTED A DRAFT PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS TO MISTER CHAO'S
OFFICE AND WE'VE ALREADY HAD
SOME PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS
WITH HIS STAFF WE APPRECIATE THE
RECENT AMENDMENTS PUT FORWARD
AND WE HOPE. ON THAT WE CAN
CONTINUE DISCUSS AND SEE IF
THERE MIGHT BE SOME MORE COMMON
GROUND.
WE SHARE THE AUTHORS CONCERNED
ABOUT BAD ACTORS PERPETUATING
SPAM EMAIL THAT WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT THIS BILL REMAINS
FOCUSED ON THE TRUE ABOUT
ACTORS.
AND HAS WRITTEN WE BELIEVE THAT
THE ENHANCED PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION IN THIS BILL WOULD
ENSNARE TOO MANY LEGITIMATE
COMPANIES AND LITIGATION AND NOT
DO ENOUGH TO GO AFTER THE SHADY.
COMPANIES OPERATING IN THE
SHADOWS THERE REALLY TEND TO BE
THE TRUE BAD ACTORS PERPETUATING
THIS BEHAVIOR.
SO THE AMENDMENTS WE SEEK WOULD
BETTER EMPOWER LAW ENFORCEMENT
OTHER GOVERNMENT ENFORCEMENT
ENTITIES TO GO AFTER THE TRUE
ABOUT ACTORS.
AND CURTAIL THIS ADDITIONAL
EXPANSIVE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING
OUR DISCUSSIONS.
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION
PLEASE JUST ASK STATE YOUR NAME
AND POSITION.
AND OF THE WELSH. DRAW COOK FOR
THE CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURERS AND
TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION WHERE
OPPOSE THE MOST AMENDED.
MARGARET CLASS STAMP I HAVE
CALIFORNIA RETAILERS ASSOCIATION
WE ARE ALSO OPPOSED MUST MANAGE.
A MISTER CHAIRMAN WAS CHRIS
MCKINLEY ON BEHALF OF THE
CONSUMER.
BE HAVE A COMP TIA.
WE ALSO SHARE THE SAME OPPOSE
UNLESS I'M IN A POSITION AS
OUTLINED BY THE CHAMBER.
LARA BUT IT WITH TECHNO OPPOSED
WITH AMENDED.
CROSSTALK WITH THE PERSONAL
INSURANCE FEDERATION I WOULDN'T
CARE LETTER IN TIME BUT WOULD
ALSO SHARE THE POST LISTEN AND.
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
MISTER OBERNOLTE.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR OF.
LIKE TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THE BILL FORWARD I I
THINK THIS WOULD BE A DIFFERENT
DISCUSSION IF WE WERE TALKING
ABOUT A NEW. CALIFORNIA STATUTE
REGARDING SPAM EMAIL BUT.
WHAT YOU PROPOSED IS SOME
COMMON SENSE
IN MY OPINION? OUR AMENDMENTS TO
THE LAW THAT ALREADY EXIST SO.
.
I ACTUALLY AM INCLINED TO BE
SUPPORTIVE BUT I'VE A COUPLE
CONCERNS THAT I WANTED TO
DISCUSS WITH YOU. ONE OF THEM
IS.
IN SECTION B. SIX OF THE BILL
HOW JUST READ DESCENDS IT SAYS
THE EMAIL ADVERTISEMENTS HEADERS
SHOW. THAT IT WAS SENT FROM. OR
PURPORTEDLY SENT FROM A DOMAIN
NAME THAT WAS PROXY REGISTERED
FOR FALSELY REGISTERED SO THAT A
PERSON SEARCHING A PUBLICLY
AVAILABLE DATA BASE. SUCH AS WHO
IS CANNOT READILY DETERMINE THE
TRUE IDENTITY OF THE PARTY WHO
INITIATED THE EMAIL.
SO CAN CAN YOU JUST TELL US WHY
THAT SECTION AS IN THE BILL. AND
I TURNED OVER TO MY NGUYEN IS
HERE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
I'M THAT ARE BE SIX
THERE'S ACTUALLY MERELY
CODIFYING EXISTING CASE LAW.
THERE THERE'S A CASE OUT THERE
WHERE THE. COURT OF APPEAL
SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT.
BUT I REFER TO AS GENERIC FROM
NAMES ON FROM CHRISTIAN DATING
YOUR BUSINESS.
.
CAR INSURANCE
I IN COMBINATION WITH A PROXY
REGISTER DOMAIN NAME.
I'M.
AT THE RISK GETTING VERY
TECHNICAL AND PLEASE STOP ME IF
THIS IS TOO DETAILED THERE IS A
PUBLIC DATABASE WE CAN LOOK UP
TO SEE WHO OWNS A DOMAIN NAME.
AND SPAMMERS DON'T LIKE PEOPLE
TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS SO WHAT
HAPPENS IS THEY DO WHAT'S CALLED
PROXY REGISTRATION.
THEY TURN OVER LEGAL OWNERSHIP
OF THEIR DOMAIN NAME TO A PROXY
SERVICE WHICH THEN LICENSES USE
OF THE DOMAIN NAME BACK TO THE
ACTUAL SPAMMER. THE RESULT IS
THAT THE SPAMMER CAN SPAM AWAY
BUT A PERSON CLEARING THE
DATABASE DOESN'T SEE THE SPAMMER
THAT THEY SEE AS THE PROXY
SERVICE PONDERS CASE LAW ON
POINT. THIS MERELY CODIFIES
OKAY WELL THANK YOU FOR THE
CLARIFICATION BUT MY PROBLEM
WITH THIS SECTION IS THIS.
IF.
SOMEONE SPOOFS THE FROM ADDRESS
TO IT WILL BAN THAT WASN'T
ACTUALLY SENT FROM. I WOULD
AGREE WITH YOU THAT THAT IS A
FRAUDULENT PRACTICE AND SHOULD
BE OUTLAWED BUT OTHER PARTS OF
THE BILL ALREADY DO THAT. BY
WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS
WHETHER OR NOT THE CONSUMER
SHOULD BE ABLE TO.
LOOK UP THE ACTUAL PERSON WHO
OWNS A DOMAIN USING A
REGISTRATION SERVICE SUCH AS WHO
IS.
AND. MY PROBLEM WITH THAT IS
THAT MOST COMMERCIAL
REGISTRATION SERVICES.
BY DEFAULT ALREADY PROXY THOSE
ARE REGISTRATION NAMES IF YOU
USE REGISTER DOT COM TODAY TO GO
REGISTER A NEW DOMAIN NAME BY
DEFAULT UNLESS YOU UNCHECK THE
BOX WILL BE PROXY THROUGH THEM
SO. ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO OWN
DOMAINS HELP PRIVACY REASONS WHY
THEY DON'T PUBLISH THE THOUGH
THERE IF THERE ARE OWNERSHIP
LISTINGS OF REMAINS THAT HAVE
NOTHING TO DO WITH A FRAUDULENT
INTENT SO. I WOULD HIGHLY
ENCOURAGE YOU MISTER CHAIR AS
YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS BILL
TO TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT WHY
THAT PROVISIONS IN HERE. BECAUSE
I DON'T THINK IT THAT IT BELONGS
HERE.
BUT I ALSO HAVE A CONCERN WITH
SECTION BE NINE OF THE BILL
CONCERNING THE USE OF THE WORD
FREE AND I UNDERSTAND THE
INTENT HERE.
BUT I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO.
DO SOME SERIOUS.
SOUL SEARCHING ABOUT WHAT THE.
WELL WHAT THE GOAL IS AND HOW
BEST TO ACHIEVE IT BECAUSE THE
PROBLEM IS IN A SUBJECT LINE I
DON'T THINK IT'S.
A REASONABLE EXPECTATION THAT
SOMEONE OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO
EXPLAIN ALL OF THE TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF THE OFFER. AND USE
EXPLICITLY SAID THE LANGUAGE YOU
CAN'T PUT AN ABSTRACT AND
EXPLAIN IT ELSEWHERE SO
ESSENTIALLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS
NOT SAYING THE FREE HAS TO BE
EXPLAINED YOU'RE SAYING. THAT
FREE IS OUTLAWED.
BUT I WHICH I DON'T THINK IS A
REASONABLE THING TO DO IN A
SUBJECT LINE AND ALSO I THINK
YOU ALSO NEED TO CLARIFY. WHAT
EXACTLY?
THE CONTEXT OF FREE THAT YOU'RE
OUT LONG IS BECAUSE IF YOU SAID
SOMETHING LIKE SUGAR FREE.
OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD NOT MEET
THE INTENT OF THE BILL AND YET.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE LEGAL
DEFINITION RIGHT NOW THAT'S NOT
A TERM THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO BE
USED SO I WOULD ASK IF YOU
WOULD.
TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AS THE BILL
MOVES FORWARD.
ABSOLUTELY WILL DO JUST THAT IN
FACT.
.
WELL WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF
THE WORD FREED INTENT OBVIOUSLY
IS TO STOP THE USE OF THE WORD
FREE IF THE ITEM IS NOT FREE.
SO.
THE.
I THINK A. YOU KNOW EXAMPLES OF
THINGS THAT WOULD.
BUT YOU KNOW BASICALLY BE OKAY
WOULD BE FREE IF I IF WE KNEW
ALL FREE IF YOU DO ACTS IN ON
THE SUBJECT LINE I THINK THOSE
WOULD BE ALLOWABLE ACCEPTABLE
UNDER THE LAW. AND BUT WILL BE
HAPPY TO LOOK TAKE A LOOK AT IT
AS WELL ARE WE WERE GONNA AT THE
WORD UNSOLICITED IN FRONT OF THE
WORD FREE OR IN. TO ADDRESS THAT
PARTICULAR ISSUE BUT WILL TAKE A
SECOND LOOK AT THE UP DISSECTION
THAT'S A. SECTION SIX AS YOU
MENTIONED ARE MORE CLOSELY AS WE
GO BUT I DO WANT ADDRESS SOME OF
THE CONCERNS THAT ARE RAISED BY
OPPOSITION AND. AND ALL ONE AT A
TIME AND A WITH RESPECT TO THE
ISSUE OF PREEMPTION. OF FEDERAL
LAWS PRETTY CLEAR IN FACT A
FEDERAL LAW SAYS THAT THERE IS
A%
THERE'S A PREAMP THERE DURING
SPRING I'M XIN OF STATE LAW
EXCEPT. TO THE EXTENT THAT ANY
SUCH STATUTE REGULATION OR RULE
PROHIBITS
FALSE THE OR DECEPTION IN ANY
PORTION OF THE COMMERCIAL
ELECTRONIC EMAIL. AND THAT IS
EXACTLY WHAT AB TWENTY FIVE
FORTY SIX IS OPERATING UNDER IN
FACT THAT'S TOTALLY CONSISTENT
WITH EXISTING LAW AND NOT SO.
YOU KNOW THE THE THE CODE
SECTION THAT I CITED EARLIER AW
IS IN FACT A WITHIN THE CONFINES
OF DOT TO EXCEPTION.
NOW WITH RESPECT ALSO WE HOW THE
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE IN THERE ARE
THAT'S BILLION SO IN THE EVENT
THAT THERE IS ANY QUESTIONS ARE
WE COULD. A TAKE OUT ANY
PROVISIONS THAT MAY BE DEEMED A
PREEMPTIVE. AND WITH RESPECT TO
THE ISSUE OF DUPLICATION. OB
THAT IS NOT ENTIRELY TRUE
BECAUSE I THINK IT'S BEEN
MENTIONED ALREADY ARE CURRENTLY.
YOU KNOW AN INDIVIDUAL HAS NO
STANDING TO BRING AN ACTION ARE
ONLY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL COULD
DO THAT. AND.
.
AND IN FACT DID THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL HAS NOT BROUGHT FORTH A
LOT OF CASES OVER THE YEARS AND
THE FTC HAS ALSO BEEN MISSION.
ONLY BRINGS A HANDFUL OF CASES
EVERY YEAR SO THIS LAW WILL GIVE
THE INDIVIDUAL OR THAT THE
VICTIM OF THE YOU KNOW STANDING
TO BRING A LAWSUIT.
TO RECOVER DAMAGES NOW WITH
RESPECT TO THE PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION THAT IS ALREADY EXISTING
LAW I MEAN WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY
CHANGES TO.
TO PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION
THAT'S ALREADY IN THERE NOW TO
THE POINT BEING.
AT SEA.
THERE WAS A FOURTH POINT OF THE
OUR. IMPACT ON THE.
.
OUR ECONOMY WHICH IS FOCUSING ON
THE UNSOLICITED EMAILS NOT NOT
SO MUCH THE SOLICITED ONES. ARE
NOW IN FACT I THINK GO BACK A
TWO YEARS AGO THE IT.
SIDE THEY DID A STUDY I THINK OF
ALL THE EMAIL TRAFFIC SIXTY FIVE
PERCENT OF THE TRAFFIC
CONSTITUTE A SPAM EMAIL.
SO THAT GOES TO SPEAK TO THE
OUR.
PROBLEM THAT WE STILL HAVE ON
OUR HANDS.
AND.
I THINK.
DOES BUT I AM COMMITTED TO
WORKING WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS
ARE IN THE MONTHS TO COME SO.
THANK YOU APPRECIATE THAT I'M
GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP THE POINT
ABOUT PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION
BECAUSE. OF THE I REACH THE SAME
CONCLUSION AND IF THAT HAD BEEN
SOMETHING NEW. THAT YOU WERE
ADDED I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO
SUPPORT THE BILL BUT BECAUSE IT
IS ALREADY A PART OF STATE LAW
TO ME THAT'S NOT PART OF THE
DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING BUT. I
APPRECIATE YOU LOOKING AT THOSE
TWO ISSUES PARTICULARLY THE USE
OF THE WORD FREE IN THE SUBJECT
LINE.
ABSOLUTE THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR.
MISTER BERMAN.
THE MISTER CARE AND THANK YOU
MISTER CHAIR FOR BRING THE BILL.
DON'T WANT TO BELABOR A LOT OF
THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE I
THINK A LOT OF THE COMMENTS
THAT.
MISTER WANT OBERNOLTE MADE.
WERE VERY VALID I THINK THERE'S
A LOT OF GOOD THINGS IN THIS
BILL BUT I THINK THAT A LOT SOME
THE CONCERNS THAT ARE RAISED BY
THE OPPOSITION. ARE VALID.
AND SO.
WHILE I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE
BILL TODAY IF THIS WERE THE
VERSION ON THE FLOOR I PROBABLY
WOULDN'T.
AND SO REALLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE
YOU TO WORK WITH.
IN ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS.
TO HEAR THEM OUT AND SEE WHAT
YOU CAN DO TO ALLEVIATE.
SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY
RAISED WILL DO JUST THAT AND
WILL REACH OUT YOUR OFFICE AS
WELL PERFECT THAT THANK YOU*
THANK YOU.
ONE CLARIFICATION SO THERE SEEMS
TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF A DISPUTE
AS TO WHETHER THIS BILL CREATES
A NEW PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION IS
IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING MR CHOW
THAT IT. THAT IT DOES. NO IT
DOES NOT THAT'S IN EXISTING LAW.
MINE DOES MY UNDERSTANDING AND
THE OPPOSITION DO YOU AGREE WITH
THAT OR NOT.
I MEAN I THINK THAT IT IN MY
VIEW OF AS WE LOOK AT IT.
RIGHT NOW THE LAW CAN BE
ENFORCED THROUGH EXISTING STATE
LAW SEVENTEEN TWO HUNDRED WHICH
IS.
FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES A
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.
.
WHAT? I THINK THE CONCERN THAT
WE HAVE ON HERE IS THAT WE HAVE
A PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION FOR
WHICH NO DAMAGES NEED.
PROVEN.
UNDER SEVENTY TWO HUNDRED YOU
HAVE TO SHOW DAMAGE.
.
SO THAT THE WELL I'M WRESTLING
WITH THAT NIGHT I BELIEVE THAT
THAT IS A CONCERN THAT THAT SEE
YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THIS ADDS
STATUTORY DAMAGES TO AN EXISTING
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION WHERE
THOSE DAMAGES ARE NOT CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE. THAT'S WHAT WE
BELIEVE.
AND YOU KNOW THAT MR TRUMP WE
ARE GIVING STANDING TO
INDIVIDUALS ON THE LAW AND THE
CURRENT LAW WOULD NOT ADDING ANY
PRIOR WRITER ACTION TO. TO THE
BILL I MEAN YOU KNOW AS YOU CAN
NOTICING THERE'S NOTHING IN THE
LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THAT YOU KNOW
THERE'S ADDITIONAL FOR RIGHT NOW
PRIDE RIGHT I THINK HIS POINT IS
THAT THIS ABOUT CREATES A NEW
OPPORTUNITIES FOR STATUTORY
DAMAGES AYE EE.
DAMAGES THAT PROOF OF HARM
EITHER NOT AVAILABLE UNDER THE
EXISTING PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION
DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT.
I.
I CAN LOOK INTO SOME MORE BUT I
I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE THAT IS
THE CASE BUT THAT THAT SEVENTEEN
TWO HUNDRED IS A. IS.
WHAT GIVES?
?
DID YOU HAVE THE PROGRAM AGES.
RIGHT PASSED SO DOES THAT
RESOLVE YOUR CONCERNS OF THAT
WERE.
.
OUR CONCERN IS WHAT WE'VE
EXPANDED THE SCOPE OF
A CALIFORNIA CANSPAM ACT FAIRLY
SIGNIFICANT MAKE BY ADDING THAT
A LOT OF WORK TRIGGERS RIGHT
WHICH. AGAIN WE BELIEVE IT IS
ALREADY COVERED UNDER THE
FEDERAL LAW MOVIE THINK THOSE
THINGS ARE COVERED UNDER FEDERAL
LAW.
MY CONCERN IS THAT RIGHT NOW.
.
IT CAN ONLY BE ENFORCED UNDER.
UNDER.
.
AND UNDER THE CAN SPAM ACT BY
THE AG EMAIL PROVIDER AND A
RECIPIENT OF THE EMAIL THIS
EXPANDS THE UNIVERSE OF THOSE
WHO CAN BRING ACTIONS.
NOW I THINK THEY HAD ALWAYS
BEEN ABLE TO BRING ACTIONS UNDER
THE UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES
STATUTES SEVENTY TWO HUNDRED
WHICH REQUIRES A SHOWING OF
DAMAGES MIGHT. CONCERN HERE IS
THAT THIS NEW THIS. LANGUAGE
HERE ALLOWS AN ACTION TO BE
BROUGHT WITHOUT. HIM THAT'S
THAT'S WHAT I'M WRESTLING WITH
THE LIGHT.
IF I COULD ASK MY WHEN IT'S
TAKEN REFUSER US I TWENTY BE
VERY CLEAR ON THIS POINT
EXISTING LAW ALREADY HAS A
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION FOR
STATUTORY DAMAGES IT'S ALREADY
THERE.
WHAT THIS AMENDMENT DOES IT DOES
NOT ADD STANDING IT DOES NOT ADD
STATUTORY DAMAGES THE ONLY THING
IT DOES IS PROVIDE SOME EXAMPLES
AND CLARIFICATIONS OF WHAT WOULD
VIOLATE THE STATUTE? ARM AND IT
HOLDS THE SENDER'S LIABLE FOR
ACTUALLY HITTING THE SEND BUTTON
WITH THESE FALSE DIDN'T
DECEPTIVE CLAIMS. THERE'S SIMPLY
NO ADDITIONAL STANDING.
BEING PUT INTO PLACE BY THE
SPELL.
I I I UNDERSTAND THAT POINT I
DO.
THINK IT'S.
PRETTY CLEAR THAT THE BILL
WOULD EXPAND THE SCOPE OF
POTENTIAL LITIGATION.
ALLEGATION.
HAVING NO CONSUMER ATTORNEYS
USUALLY DON'T SHOPPERS FOR
THINGS THE RESULT IN LESS
LITIGATION AND.
YOU KNOW EVEN IF THIS DOES NOT
CREATE A NEW PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION OR EVEN IF IT DOESN'T
CREATE A NEW TYPE OF DAMAGES IT
DOES.
WHY DID THE AMBIT OF THE
EXISTING CAUSE OF ACTION?
AND THAT SO MISTER I CHAO FROM
A YOU KNOW.
ONE SHARE TO ANOTHER I
APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERN FOR OUR
OUR OUR IN BOXES.
ALTHOUGH MY G. MALES SPAM
FILTER SEEMS TO WORK PRETTY
WELL.
BUT I I YOU KNOW AND THERE ARE
ALL KINDS OF NICE LITTLE HOOKS
ALREADY IN THE LAW FOR AND YOU
KNOW ATTORNEYS TO GO OUT THERE
AND MAKE MONEY OFF OF SPAM I'VE
SEEN AT THERE'S A COTTAGE
INDUSTRY THAT'S BEEN BUILT UP
AROUND IT. AYE THEY GO OUT THERE
AND SEARCH FOR POTENTIAL
VIOLATIONS OR ANYTHING CLOSE TO
A POTENTIAL VIOLATION AND THEY
SAY WITHOUT ANY NEED TO REALLY
PROVE THERE'S BEEN.
THIS PERSON A SUFFRAGAN ANYWAY
AND I REALLY HAVEN'T HEARD IN
THE TESTIMONY THAT WE HAVE SOME.
CRISIS OF OF PEOPLE BEING
DEFRAUDED BY BY SPAM GOING ON IN
THE STATE SO WITHOUT ANY KIND OF
PROOF OF THE BENEFITS OF THIS
I'M PRETTY WARY.
TO OPEN UP EVEN MORE AVENUES
FOR OUR WHAT IS OFTEN QUITE
FRIVOLOUS LITIGATION SO I DO
APPRECIATE.
THE INTENT OF THE BILL
UNFORTUNATE ENOUGH TO RECOMMEND
A NO VOTE AND.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO CLOSE.
WELL SINCE.
JUST INCLUDING AYE AYE IT MAYBE
JUST TO HAVE.
I JOIN A SURE THE NUMBERS WITH
YOU BEFORE I BEFORE I CLOSE AND.
IT'S ACTUALLY IT'S THE
ESTIMATED THAT.
O. SPAM EMAIL THAT WOULD CAUSE
CALIFORNIA ORGANIZATIONS WELL
OVER A TWO POINT FOUR BILLION
DOLLARS. IN THE NEXT THERE A
YEAR OR SO SO SO THAT'S THE
BASED ON THE ESTIMATES THAT WE
HAVE. ON FILE SO THAT THERE IS A
ECONOMIC GO COMPONENT TO IT TO
THIS.
AS WELL SO WE GOT AYE I
RESPECTFULLY ASK BRAG.
I THIS IS A MOTION.
AND A SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED
TO APPROPRIATIONS CHAO.
CHAU I KILEY KILEY NO BAKER.
BERMAN A BERMAN AYE CALDERON
CALDERON AYE IRWIN MULLIN
OBERNOLTE. OBERNOLTE AYE RESTS
TING.
TING AYE.
THE BILL IS ON CALL
.
I DON'T REALLY SEE THE.
RIGHT.
NOT A PROBLEM.
DOT.
OKAY WELL THAT'S.
YEAH THAT'S RIGHT ARE DEBORAH
THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM NUMBER
SIX AND THAT'S AB THIRTY ONE
SIXTY NINE.
AND DOWN BEFORE BEFORE ON THE
AUTHOR PRESENTS I'D LIKE TO
CONFIRM THAT THE AUTHOR HAS
ACCEPTED ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS
TO A. B. THIRTY ONE SIXTY NINE.
OFFERED HEARING TODAY THIS MARCO
WILL TAKE THE PLACE OF THE
AMENDMENTS IN THE ANALYSIS I
BELIEVE.
ABOUT THE MARKET A COPY OF THE
MARKET IS BEING CIRCULATED. I
WANNA MAKE SURE EVERY MEMBER
HOUSE THE COPY.
ONCE THAT OCCURS IN WILL BE
KIAN.
YES PLEASE UNIVERSITY.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIRMAN AND I
YES WE ARE AGREEING TO THE
AMENDMENTS IN THE MOCK UP.
THAT'S BEFORE YOU. AND I WANT
TO THANK THE CHAIR OF THE
COMMITTEE STAFF.
AND ALSO THE MEMBERS WHO. KNOW
SEVERAL EXPRESSED INTEREST IN
AND HAD SOME INPUT.
I THINK WE'VE INCLUDED THAT IN
THIS MOCK UP.
S. SO I APPRECIATE THE THE
DISCUSSION THAT MY BILL HAS.
.
GENERATE EVEN BEFORE WE GOT TO
THIS HEARING TODAY.
SO. I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY
FOR FOR THEIR HELP IN THEIR
INPUT.
AND I APPRECIATE THAT NOT
SOMETHING THAT AS THIS BILL.
HOPEFULLY IF IT CONTINUES TO
MOVE FORWARD.
WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT
PROCESS AND WORKING FORWARD SO.
CALIFORNIA THAT PRIDES ITSELF ON
BEING A LEADER WHEN IT COMES TO
FREE SPEECH.
WITH THAT IN MIND I BELIEVE THE
STATE SHOULD URGE A SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES A.
WHERE THESE PLATFORMS HAVE
BECOME VERY LARGE VERY
INFLUENTIAL?
AND WHERE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN
INVITED ON TO EXPRESS ALL SORTS
OF VIEWS.
.
THAT WE ENSURE THAT THERE'S THE
FREE SPEECH OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS
IS PROTECTED. UNDER MATTER WHAT
THEIR POLITICAL VIEWS OR
AFFILIATIONS AB THIRTY ONE SIXTY
NINE WOULD PROHIBIT ANY PERSON
WHO OPERATES A SOCIAL MEDIA.
INTERNET WEBSITE LOCATED IN
CALIFORNIA FROM REMOVING OR
MANIPULATING CONTENT ON THE
BASIS OF THE POLITICAL
AFFILIATION OR POLITICAL
VIEWPOINT. OF THE CONTACT OF THE
CONTENT EXCEPT AS YOU WILL SEE
IN THE.
MOCKUP EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY
THE SOCIAL MEDIA INTERNET
WEBSITES TERMS AND CONDITIONS
OF USE.
ABOUT THE BILL ALSO DEFINED
SOCIAL MEDIA FOR THE PURPOSES.
AS ANY ELECTRONIC SERVICE YOUR
ACCOUNT HELD OPEN.
TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
A POST AND EITHER A PUBLIC OR
SEMI PUBLIC PAGE
DEDICATED TO A PARTICULAR USER
ELECTRONIC CONTENT OR
COMMUNICATION. INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO VIDEOS THAT STILL
PHOTOGRAPHS OR MESSAGES INTENDED
TO FACILITATE THE SHARING OF
INFORMATION. IDEAS PERSONAL
MESSAGES OR OTHER CONTENT.
THIS DEFICIT THIS DEFINITION
DOES NOT INCLUDE THE PUBLIC OR
SEMI PUBLIC PAGE OF A PERSON AN
INDIVIDUAL. WERE ANY POSTED
ELECTRONIC CONTENT OR
COMMUNICATION MAY REASONABLY BE
ATTRIBUTED TO THAT PERSON. THAT
TO WHOM THAT PAGE BELONGS OR IS
ASSIGNED.
OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.
YOU KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN
DIFFERENT STORIES COMING UP
WHERE THERE'S AT LEAST BEEN
ALLEGATION OF.
VIEW POINTS BEING SUPPRESSED OR
REMOVED.
FROM.
SOCIAL MEDIA WEBSITES BASED ON
THE VIEWPOINT OF THE PERSON
POSTING THAT THING SO THAT'S
WHAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO GET
THAT.
WITH.
AB THIRTY ONE SIXTY NINE
CERTAINLY WE WILL THIS WILL
ALLOW INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS.
TO NEO ONLY ALLOW THEIR VIEW
POINTS TO BE EXPRESSED BECAUSE
THAT'S WHAT THE GROUPS ARE BEING
FORMED FOR. BUT THE PLATFORM
ITSELF.
HAS ESSENTIALLY INVITED THE
GENERAL PUBLIC TO COME ON IS
BECOME A LIMITED PUBLIC FORUM AS
AS THAT. CONCEPT HAS BEEN
DEFINED BY CASE LAW.
AND SO WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT
IN THAT LIMITED PUBLIC FORUM
VIEWPOINTS ARE PROTECTED.
.
I COULD GET INTO SOME OF THAT
CASE LAW HERE IN CALIFORNIA BUT
ALL OF.
THE.
MAYBE SAVE THAT FOR A QUESTION
IF SOMEBODY HAS A BETTER.
I WOULD AYE BUGGIN AYE I WELCOME
THE INPUT ON THIS I YOU KNOW I I
KNOW THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS
AND THERE'S ALREADY BEEN I THINK
SOME VERY HELPFUL AMENDMENTS I
THINK HELP US.
THAT I GET THIS BILL TO THE
RIGHT SPOT TO THAT SWEET SPOT.
WERE WERE NOT NEO INFRINGING ON
A PRIVATE BUSINESSES.
RIGHTS.
BUT ALSO ENSURING THE
PROTECTION OF.
PRIVATE FTA SPEECH RIGHTS.
IN MEDIUMS THAT. PREVIOUSLY
WOULD IN NO RIGHT TO ME NOW.
YOU KNOW HOLD PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTIONS SOMETIMES HINGE ON.
FACEBOOK RIGHT.
YEAH TERMS OF THINGS YOU KNOW
TARGETING VOTERS AND DOING
THINGS LIKE THAT IN A WORLD
WHERE. INCREASINGLY OUR IDEAS
ARE EXPRESSED IN THIS MEDIUM.
HOW DO WE ENSURE THE PROTECTION
OF PEOPLES?
SPEECH RIGHTS A THE IN THE
MARKETPLACE.
OF IDEA SO THAT'S OR TRYING TO
GET AT I WOULD I VERY MUCH
APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT ALREADY
AND I WOULD ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE.
THAT TODAY SO THANK YOU THANK
YOU VERY MUCH OUR WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT.
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION.
WELCOME.
CHAIRMAN MEMBERS THE COMMITTEE
THINKS THE OPPORTUNITY TODAY
HAVE SELLING ITEMS KEVIN
MCKINLEY AND THE DIRECTOR OF
CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR AFFAIRS FOR
THE INTERNET ASSOCIATION.
WHICH REPRESENTS OVER FORTY OF
THE WORLD'S LEADING INTERNET
COMPANIES.
THE INTERNET HAS BECOME WHAT IT
IS TODAY BECAUSE THE FACT OF ITS
FREE AND OPEN AND ACCEPTING OF
ALL VIEWPOINTS FROM PEOPLE ALL
OVER THE WORLD. IN PEOPLE FOR
EVERY POLITICAL WALK OF LIFE
CONFINED COMMUNITY.
TO SHARE CONTENT THAT INTEREST
THEM.
AND INTERNET PLATFORMS ENABLE
EVERYONE TO LEARN SHARE AND
DEBATE THE DIVERSITY OF VIEWS.
WE APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR
SENTIMENT OF ENSURING THAT THESE
PLATFORMS REMAIN OPEN TO
EVERYONE.
AND WE'RE OPPOSED TO THE BILL AS
ITS IMPRINT THE NEW MARK UP THAT
YOU SEE TODAY.
CIRCULATED THIS MORNING AND WE
HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO FULLY VET.
EVERY PIECE OF THAT MARKUP.
.
AND THE NEW FOCUS IS MORE ON THE
TERMS OF SERVICE OF WHAT THE
SENATE PLATFORMS DO.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT
THAT UNDER CURRENT LAW THE
COMPANIES CAN BE HELD LIABLE FOR
VIOLATING THEIR TERMS OF
SERVICE.
WHICH IS ALSO WITH THIS VERSION
PROPOSES TO DO SO THAT'S ALREADY
CURRENT LAW.
IN FURTHER.
.
THIS APPROACH OF FOCUSING ON
TERMS OF SERVICE MAY FORCE.
THESE.
.
POLICIES TO BE LONGER AND WE'RE
NOT SURE THAT THAT WILL REALLY
RESULT MORE TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOMPLISH THE GOALS.
SO WE APPRECIATE AUTHORS
WILLINGNESS TO BE OPEN WORK ON
THE LANGUAGE GOING FORWARD.
BUT WE REMAIN OPPOSED
APPROACH THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ADDITIONAL INDIVIDUALS IN
OPPOSITION TO THE BILL.
SEEING.
GOD.
BRIEFLY UP CEREBRAL WOULD AYE
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE OUR INTENTION WAS TO
IMPOSE OPPOSE THIS BILL AS IT IS
IN PRINT TODAY HOWEVER.
WE APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS OF
MISTER GALLAGHER TO DO SUCH
SIGNIFICANT AMENDMENTS. I WILL
BE REVIEWING THEM WITH OUR
MEMBERS WE DO STILL HAVE
CONCERNS WERE AS WHETHER THEY
WILL WORK FOR THEM OR NOT.
OKAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH OUR.
SEEING NO OTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS.
QUESTION OF MISTER QADER.
THANK YOU.
JAMES I.
APPRECIATE YOU WAITING IN THIS
CONVERSATION IT IS AN IMPORTANT
CONVERSATION I WHAT I WILL SAY
THAT THIS BILL RAISES.
.
THIS NEED TO BE DISCUSSED.
WE NEED A LARGER CONVERSATION
ABOUT WHAT ROLE WEBSITES A
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
SHOULD PLAY IN MAINTAINING
PUBLIC FORMS. OF WHAT
RESPONSIBILITY DO THEY HAVE FOR
FALSE OR MISLEADING CONTENT WHAT
RESPONSIBILITY DO THEY HAVE TO
PROVIDE SPACE FOR THOUGHTFUL
FACT BASED DISCUSSIONS ABOUT
POLITICS AND POLICY. WHAT DOES
THAT MEAN FOR CONTENT THAT
DISTRACTS FROM? THAT DISCUSSION
OR IS FALSE OBSCENE OR IS BASED
ON HATRED.
THESE ARE QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE
GONNA HAVE TO GRAPPLE WITH.
WHICH I DO HOPE THAT THIS BILL.
LEADS TO PASS SOME CONCERNS
THAT I HAVE ABOUT THIS BILL IS
THAT WHEN IT COMES THAT
CONVERSATION IS THIS BILL
ADVANCING THAT CONVERSATION AND
SO I WHILE I PREVIOUS.
APPRECIATE THE AMENDMENT THAT
REMOVE SEARCH ENGINES.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT.
IT'S SIMILARLY ON WORKABLE FOR
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS AND SO MY
FEAR IS THAT IT WOULD HAVE AN
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF
ACTUALLY MAKING IT MORE
DIFFICULT TO REMOVE OBSCENE
HATEFUL OR VIOLENT OR. A VIOLENT
OR OTHER CONTENT THAT VIOLATES
PLATFORMS TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
IN MY OTHER CONCERN IS THAT
THIS MEASURE COULD FORCE
PLATFORMS TO MAINTAIN CONTENT
THAT THEY DISAGREE WITH. WHICH
WOULD SEEM TO ME AT GOVERNMENTAL
REGULATION OF SPEECH AND SO I
THINK THE POINT I'M TRYING TO
MAKE IS THAT WHILE WE HAVE YOU
KNOW THE FREEDOM. YOU KNOW THE
RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH TO SAY YOU
KNOW WHAT WE WHAT WE LIKE
THERE'S ALSO A FREE SPEECH SSUE
WHEN IT COMES TO THESE COMPANIES
IN THESE PLATFORMS BEING ABLE
TO.
ARE NOT. LET THEIR PLATFORM
PROMOTE THINGS THAT THEY DON'T
JUST THAT THAT THAT THEY DON'T
AGREE WITH.
IN THAT I ALSO HAVE A CONCERN
ABOUT WHEN ITCOMES TO BULLYING
THREATS.
HATE SPEECH.
WHAT I DON'T ONE IS I I THINK
THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE IN THIS
ROOM YOU INCLUDED THAT?
WE DON'T WANT OUR TO CREATE A
SITUATION WHERE YOU WOULD THESE
PLATFORMS COULD BE SUED. BOB
BECAUSE THEY REMOVED CONTENT
THAT WAS A SPECIFICALLY MEANT TO
BE A SOME TYPE OF HATE SPEECH
WILL MORE THREATENING OR WAS.
WAS A BULLYING.
INCIDENT I AND SO THAT IS A
MAJOR CONCERN THAT I HAVE.
YOU KNOW I KNOW THAT I I'VE
HEARD SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS.
YOU KNOW THE WHAT ABOUT ALL THE
POSITIVE STUFF ON TRUMP OUT
THERE JUST KEEPS GETTING VERY
BLACK TIGHTS NOT THERE BECAUSE
IT DOESN'T EXIST BUT. I WILL SAY
THAT.
YOU SAY SO THAT.
THAT.
BUT BUT IF YOU KNOW.
YOU KNOW THAT IDEA OR THAT
QUESTION OF POLITICAL.
YOU KNOW YOU KNOW THAT THAT
POLITICAL RELEVANCE THAT
POLITICAL SPEECH WHAT DOES THAT
MEAN BECAUSE SOMEBODY. YOU KNOW
WHO IS IS ENGAGING IN HATE
SPEECH OR OR RHETORIC THAT'S
GOING TO LEAD TO VIOLENCE.
YOU KNOW WHERE THIS PLATFORM MAY
THINK OKAY THIS NEEDS TO BE
REMOVED BECAUSE THERE CAN BE
HARM A NOW THEY'RE. THEY'RE
LIABLE WILL THERE'D LARA LIABLE
FOR LITIGATION BECAUSE I THINK
IT COULD BE ARGUED WHILE I'M
EXERCISING MY FREE.
MY RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH IN THIS
IS POLITICAL SPEAK FOR ME
BECAUSE THIS WAS POLITICALLY
WHAT I BELIEVE IN AND WHAT I
THINK. AND SO I MEAN I THINK
YOU'RE. I MEAN.
I THINK OF WAGING A REALLY
IMPORTANT CONVERSATION HERE MY
ONLY CONCERN IS.
THAT BULLYING IN THE THREATS
ASPECT I DON'T WANT TO OPEN THAT
UP TO LITIGATION WHERE WE CAN'T
REMOVE THAT. THAT CONTENT OR YOU
KNOW OR DEAD PLATFORM IF IT JUST
IF THEY DISAGREE WITH THAT AND
THEY BELIEVE IT INFRINGES ON
THEIR FOR THEIR RIGHT TO FREE
SPEECH.
WANT TO REMOVE THAT FOR SAFETY
REASONS OR WHATEVER OTHER
REASONS.
THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE
TO DO THAT I'LL HAVE TO LOOK IN
TO SEE YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT
THAT THAT THE EXCLUSION OF THE.
THEY HAVE VIOLATED THE TERMS
AND SERVICES AGREEMENT.
THAT WOULD COVER IT.
.
BUT I'M A BIG QUESTION MARK
RIGHT NOW AS TO ALL OF THAT AND
SO. I DON'T WANT TO VOTE NO ON
YOUR BILL I WANNA GIVE ME TIME
TO WORK ON IT AS OF RIGHT NOW. I
FEEL LIKE A ONE OF STAINED IS
BECAUSE ON HOW BIG THE ANSWERS
TO THAT QUESTION.
BUT I AM STAYING OPEN TO BEING
SUPPORTIVE OF THIS BECAUSE I
REALLY DO THINK YOU ARE IMPOSING
AN IMPORTANT QUESTION. AND WE'RE
GONNA HAVE TO IT WE'RE GONNA
HAVE TO REALLY FIGURE OUT WHAT
IS ONLINE MEDIA WITH ITS IT.
WITH WHEAT WHAT WHAT WE'VE SEEN.
YOU KNOW WITH WITH THESE ONLINE
PLATFORMS AND AND AND OTHER
ONLINE TOOLS ABILITY TO BE ABLE
THEM TO MANIPULATE.
A CONVERSATION THAT'S REALLY
DANGEROUS FOR OUR DEMOCRACY
BECAUSE YOU KNOW AS A SEARCH
ENGINE OR MEDIA SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORM YOU KNOW USING
INFORMATION FROM A SEARCH
ENGINE.
IT'S.
YOU KNOW WHAT ARE YOU ALREADY
LOOKING AT WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING
UP WHAT IS IT THAT YOU'RE
ALRIGHT WAS INFORMATION THAT
YOU'RE ALREADY SEEKING AND IT'S
TO GIVE YOU MORE THAT SAME
INFORMATION. I WOULD ARGUE THAT
YOU SHOULDN'T BE GETTING MORE OF
THAT SAME INFORMATION YOU SHOULD
BE ABLE TO GET. WHATEVER IT IS
THAT'S OUT THERE THAT ISN'T
NECESSARILY YOU KNOW FOCUSING
TAYLOR TOWARDS YOU I UNDERSTAND
OF THE POINT OF WHY IT THAT.
THAT THAT THEY DO THAT TO ME
MAKES SENSE OF FUN SEARCHING HO
YOU KNOW. COOL NIKE SHOES THEN
YOU'RE GONNA GET ADS FOR COOL
NIKE SHOES BUT WHEN YOU ARE
GOOGLING HATE SPEECH YOUR
GOOGLING OTHER GROUPS.
THAT ARE PROMOTING HATE THAT
COULD LEAD TO VIOLENCE
I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD BE
GETTING MORE OF THAT ARE YOU
KNOW YOU SHOULD AND YOU KNOW IF
YOU'RE COMING FROM A POSITION OF
IGNORANCE YOU SHOULDN'T BE
GIVING MORE THINGS TO MAKE YOU
MORE IGNORANT. AND SO.
YOU KNOW I I I JUST I FIND THAT
TO BE VERY DANGEROUS TO OUR
DEMOCRACY BECAUSE I THINK
REGARDLESS OF THE SITE WHAT WHAT
POLITICAL.
SIDE OF THE SPECTRUM YOU RESIDE
ON THERE HAS TO BE FAITH IN OUR
GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS AND WHAT
I LIKED OFFICIALS TO DO THE JOB
TO PROTECT PEOPLE. ABA WHEN
YOU'RE WHEN YOU'RE CONSTANTLY.
YOU KNOW SPOON FED ALL THIS
INFORMATION THAT THAT IS THAT'S
DISINFORMATION AYE AND MAKES YOU
FEEL A CERTAIN WAY.
THAT'S DANGEROUS ARE AND AND I
DON'T KNOW IF THIS BILL IS IS A
WAY IT IS A START TO THAT
CONVERSATION WHICH I THINK IS
IT'S LARGER CONVERSATION BUT
MAYBE IT IS AND I WANT TO STAY
OPEN TO THAT.
.
BUT AGAIN ANYTHING I CAN DO THAT
TEAR TORQUE WITH YOU ON THIS
ISSUE I'D LIKE TO WORK WITH YOU
MOVING FORWARD THANK YOU.
THOUGHT THAT.
JUST A LITTLE RISK BY PETRUS Y.
PRESHEAF THAT YEAH I MEAN THAT'S
EXACTLY WHAT I WANT TO DO WITH
THIS BILL IS IS OPEN UP A
CONVERSATION.
ABOUT YOU KNOW IN THIS NEW
MEDIUM THERE'S A LOT OF
DIFFERENT THINGS THAT. WE JUST
HAVEN'T SEEN BEFORE RIGHT.
IT YOU KNOW FROM FROM A SPEECH
IN AND AND FROM OTHER. AVENUES
RIGHT. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT?
YOU ARE ONE OF THE REASONS WHY
WE WENT WITH THE TERMS OF.
CAN TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF OF
USE IS ALREADY THE PLATFORMS ARE
ADOPTING AND INCORPORATE INTO
THEIR TERMS AND USES SERVICES
THINGS LIKE BULLYING AND THEY
WILL. YOU KNOW WE WOULD TAKE
DOWN SOMETHING THAT YOU KNOW.
THAT IS SEEN AS CEO BULLYING
TOWARDS A AN INDIVIDUAL.
SARTI SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE
HAPPENING IN THE MARKETPLACE
RIGHT AND THOSE CAN BE BUILT
INTO THE TERMS.
OF SERVICE THE OTHER THING
THAT'S THERE IS. ALREADY IN CASE
LAW
WE DO HAVE BUILT IN PROTECTIONS
IT. YOU KNOW IT INCITEMENT
SPEECHES NOT PROTECTED SPEECH.
THAT UNDER THE LAW IF A IF IF
THIS AT THE.
IF SOMETHING IS BEING SAID IN
ORDER TO INCITE PEOPLE TO
VIOLENCE IMMEDIATELY THAT'S NOT
PROTECTED SCHOOL BUT THAT BUT
AGAIN A THAT'S A GOOD POINT. BUT
T'S YOU KNOW RIGHT NOW THERE'S
A SHOOTING THAT HAS HAPPENED
TODAY YOU TO.
I AND OUR A PUTS OUT A VIDEO
COPY WEEKS AGO SAYING.
YOU KNOW FIGHT BACK AGAINST YOU
TO FOR CENSORING US.
COULD THAT BE CONSTRUED AS AS
INSIGHTFUL SPEECH EVEN OTHER
SAYING FIGHT SO WHERE IS THE
LINE SO MY CONCERN IS WHERE IS
THE LINE.
AND THAT I MEAN AND AND AND I
DID SEE THAT TRAGIC EVENT TODAY
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS BECAUSE
FROM THAT OR NOT I'M NOT I'M NOT
SUGGESTING THAT I'M NOT
SUGGESTING THAT IT WAS. BUT YOU
DON'T KNOW IT SO I SEE THE ISSUE
AND THAT'S AND THAT IS WHAT.
WE'VE ACTUALLY GRAPPLED WITH FOR
YEARS YOU KNOW FOR.
NOW DECADES YOU KNOW IN THE FREE
SPEECH
DISCUSSIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT
IS WHAT IS SOMETHING THAT AND
SITES TO VIOLENCE RIGHT YOU
KNOW.
IS ORGANIZING AT A COMMUNIST
RALLY.
YOU KNOW ONE OF THE OLD CASES IS
JUST ORGANIZE HAS THE COMMUNIST
PARTY IS THAT INCITING
REVOLUTION AND LEADING TO
OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT WILL
EVENTUALLY WE SAID. NOTS NOT
REALLY ENOUGH GUYS RIGHT.
.
YEAH YOU KNOW THERE'S SO THERE
IS SOME YOU KNOW THAT THOSE ARE
THOSE LINES ARE CONTINUALLY
BEING DRAWN RIGHT. BUT WHAT WE
DO OPEN UP A PUBLIC FORUM WE
WANT TO ENSURE THAT THAT SPEECH
IS PROTECTED.
AND WE ALSO ALREADY HAVE THE
LEGAL PARAMETERS IN PLACE TO TO
PROHIBIT THINGS AND PRIVATE
BUSINESSES WOULD BE. WELL WITHIN
THEIR RIGHTS TO PROHIBIT THINGS
THAT ARE INCITEMENT OBSCENITY.
AND DEFAMATION.
RIGHT SO THERE'S THERE'S THINGS
THAT ARE NOT PROTECTED SPEECH
THE PRIVATE BUSINESSES ARE
ALREADY WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS TO
PROHIBIT. AND THEN THEY CAN ALSO
BUILD AN ADDITIONAL PROHIBITIONS
INTO THEIR TERMS.
A OF SERVICES LONG AS THAT'S
CLEAR SO THE CONSUMER KNOWS HEY
WHEN I'M USING THIS.
THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE
GOING TO BE PROHIBITED.
RIGHT NOW YOU KNOW WHAT WE HAVE
IS AN OPEN FORUM BUT THEN IF WE
DON'T LIKE IN CERTAIN CASES
MAYBE IF WE DON'T LIKE YOUR
SPEECH.
WILL SUPPRESS IT AND THAT
BECOMES DANGEROUS ESPECIALLY IN
OUR MODERN ERA.
WELL WE WANT A FREE FLOWING
DEBATE RIGHT WE WANT TO HAVE A
BUNCH OF IDEAS EXPRESSED.
AND WE ARE THOSE THAT ARE NOT
GOOD IDEAS CAN ALSO BE CALLED
OUT RIGHT IN THE MARKETPLACE OF
ABOUT A OF IDEAS WILL FIND THE
FALSE.
I AGREE WITH YOU THERE'S ALSO
THE PROBLEM OF PEOPLE BECOMING
INCREASINGLY MORE INSULAR ON
BOTH SIDES RIGHT YEAH LIKE THEY
WERE ONLY WANT TO HEAR THIS.
THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION BECAUSE
THIS MORE LAUGHTER IT'S MORE
RIGHT. AT LEAST ONE THING THAT
WE SAW WITH THE WHOLE. NOT YOU
KNOW THE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IS
A DATE THEY FOOLED PEOPLE ON
BOTH SIDES RIGHT WITH WITH FALSE
STORIES THEY GOT PEOPLE FIRED UP
ON THE LEFT AND THEY GOT PEOPLE
FIRED UP. ON THE RIGHT IN AND
SEVERAL OUT OF WE HAVE TO BE
MINDFUL OF HALEY SINGS ARE BEING
USED TO MANIPULATE PEOPLE.
RIGHT WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS
PROTECT A FREE FLOWING.
DEBATE OF IDEAS AND THAT'S WHY
I'M TRYING TO GO AT THIS BILL.
.
WHILE ALSO PROTECTING AGAINST
THE THINGS THAT WE KNOW OUR ARE
NOT PROTECTED SPEECH.
YOU KNOW MAYBE A QUESTION FOR
THE OPPOSITION YOU DON'T MIND
AND I APOLOGIZE FOR MONOPOLIZING
THE TIME HERE FROM THE UP TO THE
OPPOSITION. YOU KNOW WHAT WITH
WITH THE AMENDMENT OF THE TERMS
AND USES.
YOU KNOW THAT THE SERVICE
AGREEMENT.
YOU DON'T DOES THAT CHANGE THE
CALCULUS WHEN IT COMES TO
BECAUSE YOU SAY YOU KNOW WHAT WE
NEED TO LOOK AT IT YOU KNOW WE
NEED TO EXAMINE THIS MORE I
MEAN.
YOU KNOW WHERE DOES THAT PUT YOU
GUYS.
YOU KNOW MOST LIKELY ON THE
BILL. YOU KNOW CONSIDERING THAT.
WELL THE.
THE FOLKS ON TERMS SERVICE I
THINK IS A POSITIVE CHANGE FOR
THE BILL.
THERE'S TWO PIECES OF THE BILL
ONE ON CENSORING REMOVING
CONTENT WHICH SEEMS TO BE MOST
OF THE DISCUSSION DAYS FOCUSED
ON. THE SECOND PIECE IS
MANIPULATING THE CONTENT AND
THAT'S A PART OF HIM STILL
THINK.
HAS AN ISSUE.
WITH THE TERMS OF SERVICE
BECAUSE MANIPULATING CAN MEAN
ONE THING FOR THE AUTHOR'S
INTENT BY I THINK WHERE HE'S
GOING.
BUT IT ALSO COULD BE JUST WHAT
THE PLATFORM SHOW CUSTOMERS WHAT
THESE USES THE PLATFORM'S WANT
TO SEE HOW THE ALGORITHMS WORK
ABOUT YOU KNOW WHAT I SEEN.
SO.
I DON'T THINK THE TERMS OF
SERVICE TODAY REALLY GET INTO
ALL THAT.
AND SO THAT'S THE THING I MOVED
TO MY OPENING.
THAT.
THE TERMS OF SERVICE MAY HAVE
TO BECOME MUCH LONGER WHICH IS
SOMETHING THAT THIS BODY. HAS.
HAD ISSUES WITH IN THE PAST.
AND WE'RE NOT SURE THAT REALLY
ACCOMPLISHED TRANSPARENCY I
THINK THE AUTHORS GOING AFTER SO
THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'D LIKE TO
LOOK AT GOING FORWARD.
MARIAH AT MA'AM I IT I KEEP
GETTING HUNG UP ON YOU KNOW
POLITICAL SPEECH WHAT IS THAT
WHAT QUALIFIES UNDER POLITICAL
SPEECH AND I FEEL LIKE IT'S
REALLY BROAD. AND OPENS UP A LOT
OF CONVERSATION.
OR A POTENTIALLY YOU KNOW I
LITIGATION THAT AND THAT IS MY
CONCERN I'D LIKE I JUST I DON'T
WANT US TO HANDCUFF OURSELVES.
AND HANDCUFF OUR STATE IN
PARTICULAR.
FOR BEING ABLE TO REMOVE
ATTENTION A DANGEROUS.
INFORMATION ONLINE I AM WITH YOU
I DON'T THINK WE'RE GODLESS OF
WHAT SIDE IT'S ON YOU SHOULDN'T
BE SUPPRESSING.
ANY TYPE OF.
YOU KNOW INFORMATION JUST
BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE WITH IT
BEING WHAT YOU KNOW RIGHT OR
LEFT.
BUT I MEAN THAT BUT THAT'S NOT
NECESSARILY WHAT MY CONCERN IS
IT'S MORE ARE WE HANDCUFFING
OURSELVES FROM BEING ABLE TO TO
REMOVE. THAT TYPE OF SPEECH ARE
THAT THAT COULD CAUSE HARM.
I THINK EVERY TIME IT WAS
BERMAN.
YOU VERY MUCH AND THANK YOU.
MISTER GALLAGHER FOR BRING THE
BILL IT'S IT IS A CRITICALLY.
IMPORTANT.
CONVERSATION AND I AND ONE
THAT'S.
.
STILL VERY CONFUSING.
IN TERMS OF HOW WE ADDRESS A
LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT YOU RAISE
YOUR RIGHT ARM. CHAIR OF THE
ELECTIONS AND REDISTRICTING
COMMITTEE IN A COUPLE WEEKS AGO
WE HAD THAT.
JOINT COMMITTEE HEARING WITH
THE SENATE SIDE ON CYBERSECURITY
ISSUES AROUND ELECTIONS AND A
LOT OF THAT IS THE
MISINFORMATION CAMPAIGNS. THAT
VARIOUS NEFARIOUS ACTORS ARE
CONDUCTING ON SOCIAL MEDIA
PLATFORMS.
AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS.
THE HIGH LEVEL CONCERN I HAVE IS
I HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO FULLY
DIGEST THE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE
MADE THIS MORNING.
AND AND THAT GETS ME A LITTLE
BIT A PAUSE.
ON SUPPORTING SOMETHING TODAY.
BUT THEN IT'S UP.
IT'S ALSO.
HOW CAN WE I AGREE WITH THE GOAL
OF NOT WANTING TO?
INFRINGE ON ON POLITICAL SPEECH.
I STILL NEED TO WRAP MY HEAD
AROUND THIS IDEA THAT A SOCIAL
MEDIA SITE IS A PUBLIC FORUM.
AND AND I DON'T YEAH IT IT'S A
CONVERSATION I'D LOVE TO HAVE
MORE OF AND GET A BETTER
UNDERSTANDING OF BECAUSE I DON'T
THINK I'M FULLY THERE YET.
BY BUT THEN HOW DO WE MAKE SURE
WE ARE ASKING OUR SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES
TO BE MORE DISCERNING. IN IN
THAT TYPES OF OF
POSTS
THAT PEOPLE ARE MAKING ON THEIR
PLATFORMS AND BOOSTING ON THEIR
PLATFORMS BECAUSE WE SAW. ON
BOTH SIDES OF THAT.
YOU KNOW THERE IS THERE IS
MANIPULATION OF VOTERS ON BOTH
SIDES.
AND.
IN THEORY I LOVE THIS IDEA THAT
YOU KNOW IF HE GETS OUT THERE
THAN PEOPLE WE WILL BE ABLE TO
TELL WHAT'S RIGHT OR WRONG. BUT
I THINK THAT THAT WASN'T BORN
OUT BY TWENTY SIXTEEN RESULTS
AND AND A LOT OF THE. THINGS
WE'VE LEARNED AFTER THE FACT AND
SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE THERE YET
AND I THINK.
MORE STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE
INCLUDING ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE
COMPANIES.
TO BETTER.
KIND OF REVIEW AND REGULATE.
SOME OF THE POSTS THAT ARE BEING
MADE THAT ARE WHO THAT I MADE
SOLELY WITH THE GOAL OF
CONFUSING PEOPLE.
AND AND YOU KNOW MISINFORMING
THE PUBLIC SO.
AND THEN THE OTHER SAYS WELL YOU
CAN'T YOU CAN'T.
YOU KNOW YOU YOU CAN'T. DIE
DON'T HAVE THE EXACT TERMINOLOGY
TO CHANGE SOMETHING OR PULL IT
DOWN BY SOME POLITICAL SPEECH SO
WHAT IF THE YOU KNOW THESE
NEFARIOUS ACTOR START EVERY POST
WITH I'M A DEMOCRAT. AND AND
THEN THEY DO WHAT THEY WANT TO
DO IDEA HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT
THEY'RE STILL ON ABILITY AND
MAYBE THAT'S ADDRESSED IN HERE.
AND SO I ASK THAT THE AUTHOR BUT
YEAH THESE ARE JUST CONCERNS AND
AN OPEN QUESTIONS THAT I STILL
HAVE THAT I HAVEN'T HAD A
CHANCE.
TO TO CHAT WITH YOU ABOUT AND
AND REALLY GET ANSWERS TO.
YEAH ME AND AND IT IS TOUGH I
MEAN WE TALK ABOUT DISCERNMENT
RIGHT AND AND I GUESS.
RIGHT NOW THE STATUS QUO IS IS
REALLY THAT DID THE COMPLETE AND
TOTAL THE SERMON IS IN THE HANDS
OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD OF THE
COMPANY. RAY I MEAN THEY DECIDE
WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO EITHER
REMOVE.
OR DELETE OR YEAH.
SO IS IS IS THAT WE WANT THE
DISCERNMENT DO YOU. DO YOU WANT
AND THEY HAD THE GOVERNMENT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT CAN BE IS
THAT AS YOU KNOW A STICKY WHEN
YOU WRITE AND YOU WANT THE
GOVERNMENT DETERMINING.
WHAT IS NEFARIOUS SPEECH AND
WHAT IS NOT RIGHT?
?
I THINK WHAT WE'VE DONE
TRADITIONALLY YOU KNOW IN OUR
SYSTEM IS THAT WOULD WE ALLOW
FREE MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS
SO THAT THE THE FREE MARKETPLACE
WILL EXPOSE THOSE IDEAS THAT.
ARE LESSER THEN AND WILL PROMOTE
THOSE THINGS THAT ARE ACTUALLY.
YOU THE GREATER GOOD RIGHT NOW
BECAUSE ULTIMATELY PEOPLE WILL
SEE THAT THESE ARE THE.
THESE ARE THE BETTER IDEAS IN
THE WORKABLE IDEAS. AND YOU KNOW
THOSE WHEN THE DAY HOWEVER. YOU
KNOW YES WE HAVE SEEN INSTANCES
WHERE FALSE THINGS HAVE BEEN PUT
OUT THERE.
I AM POLITICS THAT CERTAINLY
NOTHING NEW RIGHT I MEAN WE'VE
SEEN OF. AYE I THINK GOING BACK
TO OUR FOUNDERS WE HAD LETTER
WRITERS WHO WOULD WRITE THINGS
THAT WERE.
NOT TRUE ABOUT CANDIDATES AND
THINGS LIKE THAT NOW EXISTS IN
THIS NEW WORLD OF.
A OF YOU KNOW FACEBOOK AND
SOCIAL MEDIA SITES WHERE YOU'RE
DOING THE SAME THINGS BUT THE
OTHER GET OUT THERE WITH MAYBE
MUCH MORE EXPOSURE RIGHT. AND
AND THE OTHER THING TO THINK
ABOUT IS LIKE IN IN TERMS OF A
PUBLIC FORUM.
BUT IF YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT
RIGHT NOW LIKE FACEBOOK FOR
EXAMPLE IS MUCH MORE OF A PUBLIC
FORUM.
PROBABLY THEN THE STEPS OF THE
CAPITOL RIGHT. THE PEOPLE HAVE
RALLIES HERE ALL THE TIME BUT
YOU PROBABLY SEE A LOT MORE
DIFFERENT.
IDEAS BEING EXPRESSED AND THINK
COMING BACK AND FORTH MORE SO IN
THAT SOCIAL MEDIA WORLD AND
INFLUENCING WHAT PEOPLE THINK
ABOUT.
POLITICS AND ISSUES MUCH MORE SO
THAN PEOPLE HOLDING A RALLY. NOW
ON THE CAPITOL STEPS RIGHT I
MEAN.
AND SO HOW DO WE DEAL WITH THAT
AND I MEAN THAT'S I THINK THAT'S
WHERE DO.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO
EVENTUALLY FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE
ACTUALLY DEAL WITH THIS IN THE
MODERN WORLD HOW WE PROTECT
SPEECH RIGHTS THAT'S KIND OF MY
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE HERE.
.
YOU KNOW IN THIS KIND A NEW
MODERN WORLD WHERE THIS IS HOW
PEOPLE EXPRESSING THEIR IDEAS IN
A IN A FORUM YEAH NOT FULLY
APPRECIATE THAT I. MIGHT MIGHT
YOU KNOW WINNING LOTS OF
DIFFERENT FACTORS IN AND.
PROTECTING SPEECH RIGHT AND I I
STILL ALSO I NEED TO GET A
BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF OF. YOU
KNOW WHAT IS THE.
DONE
WHERE IS HARM BEING DONE
CURRENTLY IN TERMS OF OF.
RESTRICTING SPEECH RIGHTS.
BECAUSE.
IT'S IF THAT'S NOT REALLY
HAPPENING AND WE TAKE ACTIONS
THAT INHIBIT THE COMPANY'S
ABILITIES.
INTO TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF
THE POST IN TERMS OF THE
MISINFORMATION AND YOU KNOW THEN
WE'VE KIND OF SHOT HERSELF IN
THE FOOT IN TERMS OF ADDRESSING
WHAT I THINK IS. ONE OF THE MOST
IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT WE FACE
GOING INTO THE TWENTY EIGHTEEN
TWENTY TWENTY ELECTIONS.
SO VERY FUN PHILOSOPHICAL LEGAL
CONVERSATIONS I DIDN'T US UP MY
CONLON TEXTBOOKS I'M GONNA HAVE
TO.
BUT.
I IT'S I I DON'T KNOW WHERE I'M
AT NOW I'M LEANING TOWARDS OF
STANDING.
BUT DO YOU KNOW THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT. YOU KNOW THAT IN
THE THIS TO MORE TIME AFTER
TODAY IN ONE HAVE MORE
CONVERSATIONS I GET A LITTLE BIT
ARE STANDING OF THINGS.
WHICH ARE OPEN NOT. SHARE FIVE
MISTER GALLAGHER VERY
APPRECIATIVE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING
TO DO HERE.
I HAD MEASURE WHERE SOME
SERIOUS RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE
WAY THAT THE BILL HAD DEFINED
SOCIAL MEDIA. AND YOU'VE
ADDRESSED A LOT OF THOSE IN THE
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE OUT I JUST
SAW THIS AFTERNOON.
I STILL HAVE SOME CONCERNS
ABOUT.
THE INTERSECTION BETWEEN FREE
SPEECH
YEAH AND COMMERCIALISM.
BECAUSE I MEAN I UNDERSTAND THAT
NOW SOCIAL MEDIA SITES LIKE
FACEBOOK OR THE NEW TOWN SQUARE.
AND THAT'S WHERE PUBLIC
CONVERSATIONS OCCUR BUT.
OUR THE WAY THAT YOU DID EVEN
THE AMENDMENTS TO FIND.
THE SOCIAL MEDIA.
LEAVES ME OPEN THE QUESTION OF
YOU KNOW IF YOU ARE A COMPANY
AND YOU HAVE A PUBLIC FORUM TO
DISCUSS YOUR PRODUCTS.
AND THE CUSTOMER GETS ON THERE
AND SAYS YOUR PRODUCT STINK I'M
NEVER BUYING THEM I URGE
EVERYONE ELSE STOPPED BY THE MID
YOU HAVE A RIGHT.
TO CENSOR THAT CONTENT BECAUSE
UNDER THE NEW THE AMENDED
DEFINITION I WOULD QUESTION
WHETHER NOT YOU DO I MEAN I
ACTUALLY THINK THAT THAT MIGHT
BE INTERPRETED AS FREE SPEECH
WHAT EFFORTS. PATENTLY FALSE
SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE SAYS
THEY'RE ABOUT YOUR PRODUCTS YOU
HAVE THE RIGHT TO CENSOR THAT I
JUST THINK IT'S A VERY.
KIND OF ARE INTERESTING BUT
DICEY ISSUE. AND IT'S SOMETHING
THAT I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY
DELIBERATE ABOUT BECAUSE. OF THE
LAST THING THAT WE WANT TO DO IS
BE AMBIGUOUS WHEN WE WRITE
LANGUAGE LIKE THIS AND JUST
THROW IT OPEN TO THE COURTS.
IT I THINK WE WE OWE IT REAL A
DUTY TO TO BE SAYS SPECIFIC AS
WE CARE AND I FEEL LIKE. YOU
KNOW WE NEED TO SLOW DOWN THE
PROCESS HERE TO NON FISCAL BILL
AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU
BECAUSE I RESPECT WHAT YOU'RE
TRYING TO ENCOURAGE YOU. TO TO
CONTINUE WORKING WITH PEOPLE IS
THIS BILL MOVES FORWARD BECAUSE.
IN I'D I JUST DON'T THINK IS
THERE YET AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S
VERY RUSHED.
LIKE TELL YOU WHAT MY INTENT IS
IS THAT YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT LET'S SAY YOU
CREATED A PAGE ABOUT YOUR
PRODUCT. RIGHT.
CERTAINLY IF YOU'RE CREATING A
PAGE LIKE WE ALL CREATE PAGES
FOR OUR. A NEO FOR OURSELVES
RIGHT AND AS ASSEMBLY MEMBERS.
CERTAINLY IF YOU'RE RUNNING THAT
PAID YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO.
DETERMINE WHAT CONTENTS GOING TO
BE ON THAT PAGE YOU KNOW AND AND
PEOPLE EXERCISE THAT RIGHT. OUT
OF THE GAME BUT HAVE A PROBLEM
WITH THAT RIGHT THAT'S NOT THE
ISSUE. IT'S REALLY ABOUT.
THE THE.
THE HOST OF THE FORUM.
YEAH THE PIECE MEAL LARGER
COMPANIES WHO ARE HOSTING THESE
FORMS THEN DETERMINING WELL I
DON'T.
EITHER SUPPRESSING NEO THINGS
THAT ARE ON YOUR PAGE OR THINGS
THAT ARE ON OTHER PEOPLE'S PAGES
OR THINGS THAT ARE BEING SHARED.
.
IN A WAY THAT WOULD BE
SUPPRESSING THE SPEECH RIGHT TO
THE PERSON THAT'S REALLY THE
INTENT I'M GOING NOT TO WHERE
PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO
CONTROL.
KINDA CONTROL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT
THEIR PRODUCTS OR THEIR IDEAS
THAT THERE. THAT ARE PART OF
THEIR GROUP.
AND I THINK WE'VE GOT OUT OF
THAT A LITTLE BIT WITH THE
LANGUAGE BUT I REALIZE IT'S NOT
PERFECT AND SO THE THING I WOULD
ASK THE COMMITTEE.
HIS I I YOU KNOW. I'M NOT GOING
TO STEAMROLL THIS THING. I THINK
LOOK I CAN'T SCHEME DISSIPATE
RIGHT AND HIM AND.
FLAWS AS A REALITY RIGHT.
WHAT I WANNA DO IS CONTINUE TO
WORK ON IT AND EVEN IF WE DON'T
GET THERE THIS YEAR WE WILL WILL
HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION MAY WE
CAN MOVE NET IN THE NEXT YEAR?
CONTINUED ON THAT BUT I WANT TO
CONTINUE TO MOVE ITS I'D ASK
THAT WE'D.
YOU KNOW WE'VE MADE SOME
AMENDMENTS THAT OF ADDRESS THE
CONCERNS OF OPPOSITION I'D ADDED
NO THEIR OPPOSITION UNTIL
YESTERDAY YOU KNOW SO. I I WENT.
AFTER I HEARD THAT AND TRY TO
MAKE AMENDMENTS TOOK IT BUT TOOK
INPUT FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS SO
WE'RE ALL WORKING KIND OF. ON A
QUICK TIMEFRAME.
BUT AS WE MOVE IT OUT OF THE
COMMITTEE ITS TOSS TO GO TO
ANOTHER POLICY COMMITTEE.
WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE THESE
DISCUSSIONS WILL CONTINUE TO
WORK ON LANGUAGE
AND WE HAVE TIME SO I MEAN IT'S
A.
SO TO ME I WOULD ASKS IT LEAST
THE THE COMMITTEE'S INDULGENCE
IN MOVING THE BILL FOR WE HAVE
MADE CHANGES WILL CONTINUE TO
WORK ON LANGUAGE.
AND NOBODY'S GONNA JUST YOU
KNOW.
PUSH THIS THING THROUGH WITHOUT
A LOT OF FURTHER DISCUSSION.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR.
QUESTIONS SEEING NINE.
.
LET ME.
ME SAY.
A COUPLE REMARKS ARE WE DO LIVE
IN THE IN A A TIME IN WHICH. THE
MORE TRADITIONAL PUBLIC FORUM
MORE FOR.
BEING GRADUALLY REPLACE WITH
PLATFORMS LIKE FACEBOOK AND
TWITTER'S AND AND THE LIKE AND
AND THAT'S WHERE THE DEBATES
AND.
DISCUSSIONS ARE BEING HELD.
SO I THINK WE WANT APPROACH OUR.
PROCESS OR A LAW MAKING
PROCESSES OF FROM A DIFFERENT
WITH A DIFFERENT MINDSET AS
WELL.
AND YOU KNOW ON THE SURFACE THE
BILL SEEMS TO BE ARM.
CONTINUE TRUMP SO THAT'S WHAT
KIND OF PROMPTED ME TO KIND OF
CONTINUE ON WITH IT. AND I WANT
TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR TAKING.
A NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS ON THE
LAST MINUTE. OF REQUEST AND AND
I HOPE THIS IS THE IN
OPPORTUNITY FOR IS TO BASICALLY
CONTINUE A DIALOGUE THAT WHICH
WE STARTED TODAY. AND AND I
THINK WE WANT TO EXPLORE IDEAS
THAT YOU KNOW COULD FINE TUNE
THIS THIS BILL. SO THAT'S WHY
I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT TODAY
AND I'M HOME HOPING TO MOVE OUT
OF COMMITTEE SO THAT WE CAN WORK
WITH YOU CONTINUOUSLY A IN THE
MONTHS TO COME SO.
SO WITH THAT DA HELL IDENTITY IN
MOTION.
OKAY DO I HAVE A SECOND.
WE DO HAVE A.
MOTION AND SECOND. SO.
.
SO WITH THAT THE AYE.
I'M GONNA ASK.
AND SECRETARY TO. THE LOCAL.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED
TO ARTS ENTERTAINMENT SPORTS
TOURISM AND INTERNET MEDIA
COMMITTEE.
CHAO HELD BY CHILD BY KILEY.
BAKER.
BERMAN.
CALDERON.
IRWIN. MULLIN. OBERNOLTE.
REST.
TING.
IT YOU NEED A FEW MORE.
THANK YOU IS CHAIRMAN THANK YOU
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
WITH THAT MISTER CALDERON YOU
HAVE A BILL. ITEM.
.
THREE HATS AB TWENTY SIX FIFTY
EIGHT.
ELECTRONIC RECORDS
.
WELL MY.
.
WITNESSES MAKE THEIR WAY UP
UNDER GO AHEAD GET AND START GET
STARTED THAT ARE YOU MISTER
CHAIR COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
FIRST I'D LIKE TO ACCEPT%
COMMITTEES AMENDMENTS AND THANK
THEM FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS I'D
ALSO LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
THIS BILLS WORK IN PROGRESS AND
I AM COMMITTED TO WORKING. WITH
ALL OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS TO
FURTHER.
REFINE THE LANGUAGE AS THE BILL
MOVES TO THE PROCESS GRANTED IS.
AN ISSUE ARE A VERY NEW.
ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO
THIS HOUSE.
THIS BILL WILL DEFINE AB TWENTY
SIX FIFTY EIGHT WILL DEFINE
BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY FOR THE
FIRST TIME IN STATUTE AND WILL
PROVIDE A GREATER LEGAL
CERTAINTY FOR THE USE OF THIS
TECHNOLOGY WITHIN CALIFORNIA'S
INNOVATION ECONOMY. A BLOCKCHAIN
IS A TYPE OF DISTRIBUTED LEDGER
THAT KEEPS CONTINUOUSLY UPDATING
DIGITAL RECORDS AS A DISTRIBUTED
LEDGER IT DOES NOT HAVE A
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATOR. BUT
RATHER A NETWORK OF REPLICATED
DATABASES WHICH ARE SYNCHRONIZED
VIA THE INTERNET.
THE INNOVATION A BLOCKCHAIN
TECHNOLOGY IS THAT TRANSACTION
TRANSACTIONS ARE INTERACTIONS
BETWEEN PEERS NO LONGER NEED A
CENTRAL AUTHORITY TO VALIDATE
THEM LIKE A BANK.
BLOCKCHAIN ALLOWS.
PARTIES WHO HAVE NEVER MET AND
HAVE LITTLE REASON TO TRUST EACH
OTHER TO CONDUCT SENSITIVE
BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS QUICKLY
AND EFFECTIVELY EXCUSE ME
EFFICIENTLY.
THIS PROVIDES BOTH SECURITY AND
EFFICIENCY BENEFITS TO POTENTIAL
USERS BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES.
DEFINING BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY
IN STATUTE WILL PROVIDE
BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRY GREATER
CERTAINTY SUCH THAT IF THEY
DECIDE TO UTILIZE THE SAKE
TECHNOLOGY IT WILL BE RECOGNIZED
AS AN ELECTRONIC RECORD UNDER
THE UNIFORM ELECTRONIC
TRANSACTIONS ACT. WITHOUT
KNOWING THE LEGAL STANDARD
STANDING A BLOCKCHAIN BUSINESSES
AND INDUSTRY MIGHT AVOID
INNOVATING OR UTILIZING
BLOCKCHAIN AS PART OF THEIR
BUSINESS. AB TWENTY SIX FIFTY
DEFINES BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY TO
PROVIDE TO PROVIDE THAT
CERTAINTY AND TO FOSTER
INNOVATION WITH BLOCKCHAIN HERE
IN CALIFORNIA STILL ULTIMATELY
THE BOB THE POINT OF THE BILL IS
TO DEFINE. BLOCKCHAIN BUT ALSO
ALLOW CALIFORNIA TO CONTINUE TO
BE AN INNOVATOR.
IN ALL THINGS TECHNOLOGY AND
SPECIFIC TO THIS CONVERSATION A
BLOCKING WE WE WILL BE ONE OF
THE FIRST. TO DO THIS AND WE
KEEP OURSELVES OPEN TO THIS
INDUSTRY TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
TO TO LEAD ON THIS ISSUE. SO
WITH THAT I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
AN AYE VOTE IN WITH ME TODAY TO
TESTIFY IN SUPPORT IS DAYS IT
DAVID. GRASS BLACK UP FROM
FOUNDERS DOJO ALONG WITH SOME
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT THANK
YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH EFFORTS
SIDE WHEN HIS PLACE.
MY NAME IS GOING OTHER MOST
STORY AND THE COFOUNDER AND THE
C. E. O. OF OVERCLOCK LABS.
OUR AUGUST NETWORK IS A
BLOCKCHAIN BASED OPEN
MARKETPLACE FOR CLOUD COMPUTING
SERVICES.
AND WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF AB
TWENTY SIX FIFTY EIGHT.
I LIKE TO THANK MAJORITY LEADER
CALDERON. GERMAN CHILD VICE
CHAIRMAN KILEY AND THE REST OF
THE COMMITTEE FOR ITS ATTENTION
TO THIS IMPORTANT AREA OF
TECHNOLOGICAL. DEVELOPMENT.
BLOCKING TECHNOLOGY IS IT IS IN
ITS INFANCY.
BUT ITS POTENTIAL IMPACT ON
BENEFITS FOR THE COMMERCE RIVALS
THAT OF THE WORLDWIDE WEB
ITSELF.
AS WITH WEB TECHNOLOGY
CALIFORNIA IS OF THE FOUR MOST
FOREFRONT OF INNOVATION.
WE'RE GRATEFUL TO THE
LEGISLATURE OF FOR HIS
LEADERSHIP AND PROTECTING IT
EDUCATING CONSUMERS. AS
INNOVATION PROCEEDS
AT ARE EVER INCREASING US BEAT.
IN MY OPINION EXPANDING YOU ETS
DEFINITION OFF THAT TRACK RECORD
AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE TO
INCLUDE AND RECORD OUR SIGNATURE
THAT IS SECURE THROUGH THE
BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY. THE NO
BRAINER.
WIFE BECAUSE BLOCKCHAIN IS
INHERENTLY IMMUTABLE AND
AUDITABLE.
IN OTHER WORDS ONCE A WRECK IT
IS WRITTEN TO A BLOCKCHAIN. IT
IS THEREFORE EVER.
IT CANNOT BE ALTERED AND IT IS
VISIBLE TO ANYONE WITH ACCESS TO
THE CHASE.
A BLOCKCHAIN IS A DATABASE THAT
GOD BE HACKED.
FURTHERMORE SECURITY IS BAKED
INTO THE CRYPTOGRAPHY.
WHEN I SIGNED THE RECORD WITH MY
PUBLIC KEY IT IS UNALTERABLY
ATTRIBUTE IT TO ME ON THE
BLOCKCHAIN.
THIS IS BECAUSE A CRYPTOGRAPHY
KEY IS ACTUALLY A PAIR OF KEYS.
A PUBLIC KEY SEEN BY EVERYONE
GIANT MATHEMATICALLY TO A
PRIVATE KEY.
SEEN ONLY BY ME.
SO I BAD ACTOR CANNOT HACKETT
DATABASES TO MY PASTOR BECAUSE
MY PRIVATE KEY NEVER LEAVES MY
COMPUTER.
HOWEVER. I SUGGEST CAUTION
REGARDING SMALL CONTRACTS.
WRITTEN CONTRACTS ARE ALL OFTEN
ARE DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND BUT
THERE.
BERKELEY ASSEMBLY THEORETICALLY
HUMAN READABLE.
SMART CONTRACTS ON THE OTHER
HAND.
ARE WRITTEN IN COMPUTER CODE.
AS A PROFESSIONAL SOFTWARE
ENGINEER.
IT CAN BE DIFFICULT FOR ME TO
UNDERSTAND SOMEONE ELSE'S CODE.
TO SAY NOTHING OFTEN. ABILITY TO
DO SO.
AND OF COURSE COURT OFTEN HAS
BUGS WHICH CAUSED UNINTENDED
BEHAVIOR.
AS A RESULT THERE'S A GREATER
RISK FOR IT OFFICE PERSON
COMMITTING TO ESPOT CONTRACT
THAT HAS PROVISIONS THAT THERE
ARE EVEN THE CONTRACT WE SURE DO
NOT FULLY UNDERSTAND.
IN MY OPINION LEGISLATION
REGARDS WHAT CONTRACTS MUST.
CONSIDER THESE IMPORTANT
CHARACTERISTICS
SO I SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS TO
THE BILL.
AGAIN I THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND I
REPORT TO COLLABORATE IN THE
FUTURE AND JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT
THE AMENDMENTS WE ARE LIMITING
SMART CONTRACTS FROM THE BILL
AND JUST TO CLARIFY IN TERMS OF
THE BLOCKCHAIN IT IS ELECTRONIC
LEDGER. THAT CANNOT BE HACKED A
ESSENTIALLY BECAUSE YOU KNOW IN
ORDER TO AYE IT'S AN AUDITABLE
AUDITABLE THE CONTRACT WHERE YOU
WHICH PROVIDES THAT CERTAINTY OF
DOING THAT TRANSACTION THEN THAT
BUSINESS. BUT IT'S NOT EASILY
HACKED OR NOT POSSIBLE TO HACK
BECAUSE YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO
HACK JUST ONE INDIVIDUALS IN
THAT GROUPS.
INFORMATION YOU WOULD HAVE TO
HAVE HACK EVERY SINGLE
INDIVIDUALS INDIVIDUAL
INFORMATION AYE AN ORDER TO DO
IT AND THAT IS CONSTANTLY
VERIFYING CONSTANTLY BUILDING
AND THAT'S WHY IT IS NOT
POSSIBLE TO HACK THIS AND THAT'S
WILL PROVIDE THAT CERTAINTY. OF
THIS BLOCKING TECHNOLOGY WHAT'S
WERE PROVIDES A CERTAINTY OF
BEING ABLE TO HAVE A A
DECENTRALIZED APPROACH TO.
VIA THAT THIS TYPE OF
TRANSACTIONS WE STEPPED AYE
TRANSACTIONS ONLINE. GREAT THANK
YOU NEXT WITNESS PLEASE
HELLO.
MY NAME IS DAVID GROSS PLOT I
RUN AN ORGANIZATION IT'S A
COWORKING SPACE AND A FOUNDERS
COMMUNITY CALLED. TOTAL IN SAN
FRANCISCO.
SINCE TWO THOUSAND FIVE WE'VE
WORKED WITH OVER TWO HUNDRED
STARTUPS.
A LOT OF SAN FRANCISCO.
NOW THROUGH GLOBAL OF THEY'VE
GENERATED BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF
ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IN CALIFORNIA
AS WELL AS THE UNITED STATES IN
THE WORLD.
.
SO THAT'S WHYDO AYE DEFENDED
AYE SUPPORT FOUNDERS AND
ENTREPRENEURS IN CALIFORNIA'S
UNIQUE POSITION IN THAT WORLD.
HOME TRUE BELIEVER OF THAT. AND
RIGHT NOW I'M WORRIED BECAUSE I
HAVE NEVER SEEN PUSH BACK.
ONE TECHNOLOGY LIKE I'M SEEING
NOW HOME BLOCKCHAIN FROM A LOT
OF.
ADMINISTRATION'S ADMINISTRATORS
AND REGULATORS AND I THINK IT'S
SUPER IMPORTANT.
THAT WE IS CALIFORNIANS DEFEND
OUR OUR ENTREPRENEURS IN OUR
FOUNDERS AND ARE INNOVATORS. AND
OF THIS THIS THING THAT CREATES
A LOT OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY FOR
US I THINK THIS BILL. IS A GREAT
FIRST STEP.
THIS ESTABLISHES THAT WE ARE
PAYING ATTENTION THAT WE'RE HERE
TO CREATE FRAMEWORKS.
THAT BUSINESSES AND
ENTREPRENEURS IN CALIFORNIA CAN
WORK WITH.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M HERE TO BE.
A RESOURCE.
AND AN ADVOCATE AND ANYWAY I CAN
HELP
THANK YOU MAKING MATCHA
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
TAPPED LISA.
IDENTIFY YOURSELF THE
ORGANIZATION YEAR ASSOCIATE IT
WITH AND ALSO YOUR POSITION.
HI MY NAME IS JACK IS AND I'M A
FOUNDER OF THE US BLOCKADE ON IN
SUPPORT.
THANK YOU NEXT PLACE.
HELLO MY NAME IS KIM OKAJIMA I'M
THE FOUNDER ALSO OF THE S.
BLOCKCHAIN AND I AM SUPPORT BY
LOS LIKE TO HAVE OUR COMPANY'S
INITIATIVES IN BLOCKCHAIN
EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATIONAL LEVEL.
ON THE COMMUNITIES AS WELL AS IN
TECHNICAL AND FACILITY THE NEXT
GENERATION WORKFORCE NOW LIKE TO
SAY A COUPLE OF WORDS ABOUT THIS
A MOVEMENT.
A MEAL CALIFORNIA IS THE CRADLE
OF INNOVATION YOU KNOW WHETHER
BE SILICON VALLEY NO LOS ANGELES
OR SACRAMENTO IT IS OUR MISSION
AND IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO
PURSUE INNOVATION AND KEEP
CALIFORNIA AT THE FOREFRONT OF
THIS.
YOU KNOW THIS LEGISLATION IS THE
FIRST STEP OF PUSHING MORE
BLOCKING LEGISLATION BUT HOWEVER
SMALL THIS INSPIRES CONFIDENCE
IN COMPANIES TO CORPORATE
BLOCKING TECHNOLOGIES IN
CALIFORNIA ENCOURAGES MORE TO
OPERATE.
HOWEVER IT DOESN'T PROMOTE JOB
CREATION A BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY
KEEP CALIFORNIA AT THIS FOR
FRONT AS A CRITICAL MASS THANK
YOU VERY MUCH THANK YOU.
HI I'M TELL C. ROSTRUM AND I'M
THE COFOUNDER OF BLOCK SEVEN AND
FOUNDER OF BLOCKCHAIN FOR GOOD.
THIS CONVERSATION ACTUALLY
REMINDS ME A LOT OF THE
BEGINNING OF THE SHARING ECONOMY
CONVERSATIONS REGARDING HOME
SHARING IN. LAS HADN'T BEEN
CREATED YET COUNTIES INNOVATIONS
IN YOUR.
PLEASE THAT NEED TO HAPPEN. AND
I'M I'M REALLY EXCITED THAT
WE'RE HERE TODAY TALKING ABOUT
CREATING FOUNDATIONAL.
LEGAL FRAMEWORKS AROUND
BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY IN MAKING
IT POSSIBLE TO BUILD ON TOP OF
THAT FOR THE FUTURE THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
HI MY NAME IS MICHELLE HSING I
MEANT GENERAL COUNSEL OF A
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY AND I
WAS A PAYMENTS AN IP ATTORNEY AT
PAYPAL.
AM COFOUNDER AND CEO OF HATS AND
COFOUNDER OF SPACE PAYMENTS BOTH
IN THE WATCHING SPACE.
I AM IN SUPPORT OF CALIFORNIA
BILL TWENTY SIX FIFTY EIGHT.
HAVE TO DECENTRALIZE I FEEL
REVIEW COMPANY ON THE BLOCKCHAIN
TO.
AND SPACE PAYMENTS ALSO ALLOWED.
IF I COULD ASK YOU TO WRAP IT
UP JUST YOUR NAME ORGANIZATION
IN YOUR POSITION PLEASE.
OKAY.
AND.
I JUST WANT TO REALLY THANK YOU
FOR TODAY'S CONVERSATION. AND
AND THAT'S CALIFORNIA IS REALLY
TALKING ABOUT THESE ISSUES TODAY
THANK YOU THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE THANK YOU MUCH.
MISTER CHAIRMAN WAS CHRIS MCKAY
WE ON BEHALF OF THE COMPUTING
TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
IN SUPPORT THANK YOU MUCH.
SARAH BOOT ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL THANK
YOU.
JOHN BUT I CITY WITH A
CALIFORNIA CREDIT UNION THE IN
SUPPORT THANK YOU.
LARA BENNETT WITH TECHNO AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU MATCH.
I AGENT.
YOU NEUTRALIZE.
HEY COME ON A.
THE AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS
TAMPON FOR THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL
WE DON'T HAVE AN OFFICIAL
POSITION ON THE BILL WE HAVE A
NUMBER OF CONCERNS THAT WE'VE
BEEN SHARING WITH AUTHORED
STAFF.
HERE POLICY COMMITTEE STAFF AND
OTHERS JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT
SOME OF THOSE FOR YOU. A
UNDERSTAND IT'S A WORK IN
PROGRESS AND YOUR COMMITMENT TO
WORK WITH US AND WE LOOK FORWARD
TO THAT CONVERSATION.
I'M JUST REAL QUICKLY IS THE
AUTHOR MENTIONED THE GOAL IS TO
PROVIDE GREATER LEGAL CERTAINTY
HOWEVER THE BILL AS IT'S
CURRENTLY WRITTEN WE
RESPECTFULLY.
SUGGESTS THAT IT DOES NOT DO
THAT FOR A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT
REASONS AS THE ANALYSIS POINTED
OUT THERE'S NOT CURRENTLY A AND
A UNIFORM ESTABLISHED.
STANDARD FOR WHAT CONSTITUTES
PLOTTING TECHNOLOGY IN THE SIX
OR SEVEN BILLS. THAT OTHER
STATES HAVE HAVE STARTED DOWN
THIS ROAD THEY USE DIFFERENT
TERMINOLOGIES THE UNIFORM LAW
COMMISSION IS NOT. ENGAGE IN
THIS EFFORT.
AND THERE ARE A VARIETY OF
DIFFERENT WAYS IN WHICH.
TO.
TO DEFINE THE TECHNOLOGY SO
THAT THAT IS ONE OF OUR CONCERNS
ANOTHER IS THAT. IN VERMONT IN
PARTICULAR WHERE.
.
WHERE ELISE THAT FORMED THE
BASIS FOR THE IDEA BEHIND THE
LEGISLATION THAT? THE
LEGISLATION WAS INTRODUCED THERE
FOLLOWING ABOUT A TWO YEAR.
UNSTEADY WE'D WE DON'T HAVE THAT
HERE AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
ISSUES WHEN YOU JUST LOOK UP
RESEARCH AROUND BLOCKCHAIN. YOU
SEE THAT THERE ARE A VARIETY OF
PROPONENTS OF COURSE OF THE
TECHNOLOGY AND THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF CONCERNS INCLUDING
PRIVACY CONCERNS.
BECAUSE OF THE IMMUTABLE NATURE.
OF IT I'M.
MY COMMITTEE THAT REVIEWED THE
BILL IS MADE UP OF COMPLEX
LITIGATION JUDGES AND ATTORNEYS
VERY SOPHISTICATED THESE ARE NOT
LET AYE IT'S.
AND THEY LOOK AT THE CURRENT
DEFINITION AND DON'T UNDERSTAND
HOW THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO
IMPLEMENT THAT.
HERE IN CALIFORNIA SO I THINK A
LOT OF WORK NEEDS TO BE DONE
TERMS OF THE.
THE DEFINITION TO TO TO MEET
THE GOAL. AND THE OTHER THING
THAT WE'RE REALLY CONCERNED
ABOUT IS THAT WE'VE NOT HEARD
YET ANY REAL WORLD EXAMPLES OF
HEARING CALIFORNIA A CASE.
THAT WAS NOT ABLE TO BE BROADER
HAD SOME CONFUSION IN TERMS OF
HOW WAS LITIGATED BECAUSE OF THE
LACK. OF A DEFINITION OF WHAT
TRAIN TECHNOLOGY IF WE CAN GET A
BETTER SENSE.
OF WHAT THEIR REAL CONCERN IS IN
THE LEGAL WORLD.
A ABOUT THAT. ABOUT THE NEED
THEN PERHAPS WE COULD HELP WITH
WHERE IT SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE
CODES HOW TO BETTER DEFINE IT.
TO PROVIDE THE CERTAINTY THAT
THAT WE KNOW THAT YEAR.
.
SEEKING THE FINAL THING THAT M.
THAT MY FOLKS WANTED TO BRING
OUT IS THAT THAT WE KNOW THIS IS
AN EMERGING IN REALLY IMPORTANT
TECHNOLOGY THAT'S GETTING A LOT
OF ATTENTION BUT THERE ARE OTHER
NEW TECHNOLOGIES OUT THERE
SOMEONE TOLD ME I SHOULD
MENTION.
CUBIT
WHICH I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW
EVEN WHAT IT MEANS BUT I'M TOLD
THAT IT COULD REPLACE OR BE A
NEW AND DIFFERENT. WAY OF
ADDRESSING YOU KNOW THESE KINDS
OF TRANSACTIONS ARE WE GOING TO
UPDATE OUR CODES. EVERYTIME
THERE IS ONE OF THESE NEW
TECHNOLOGIES SO FOR ALL THOSE
REASONS WE DO HAVE CONCERNS BUT
WE LOOK FORWARD. TO TO WORKING
WITH THE AUTHOR HIS STAFF YOUR
POLICY COMMITTEE STAFF AND
OTHERS AS THE BILL MOVES. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH ADDITIONAL OF IF I
JUST TO MAKE SURE OF IS THAT OUR
FI I RESPECT THE POSITION.
JUDICIAL COUNCIL I ABSOLUTELY
AM GONNA CONTINUE TO WORK WITH
THEM I MEAN APART THE PROBLEM IS
IS THAT THERE'S JUST NOT A LOT
OF LANGUAGE OUT THERE WITH
REGARDS THIS TECHNOLOGY WE'RE
TRYING TO DO WAS. AS HONE IN ON
AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO WAS ALSO
CREATED A SITUATION WHERE WE CAN
UNABLE THIS TECHNOLOGY TO AT
LEAST YOU KNOW BE. BE WORKED ON
HERE CREATED HERE AND CREATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK WITHIN
CALIFORNIA BECAUSE APPARENTLY
DOESN'T EXIST ONE THERE THERE'S
NOT ONE THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS
AND YOU KNOW WHAT WE DO HERE IN
CALIFORNIA COULD ALSO SET A
STANDARD. I'M NOT JUST
NATIONALLY BUT WORLDWIDE BECAUSE
THERE REALLY IS NO FRAMEWORK
WHEN IT COMES TO THESE
TECHNOLOGIES AND THE REASON WHY
WE ARE FOCUSING ON THIS ISSUE
WHEN IT COMES TO THIS CHARACTER
CURRENCY AS AS A BIT BIT POINT.
IS BECAUSE THERE IS A REAL
MARKET WHERE A LOT OF DOLLARS
AND A LOT OF A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE
ARE MAKING A LOT OF MONEY AND A
LOT OF TIME AND ATTENTION IS
BEING PLACE TO IT AND SO. YOU
KNOW IF THE IF YOU KNOW IF IF WE
WANT TO CONTINUE TO BE THIS
INNOVATION HA BAY INNOVATION HUB
WE NEED TO START COMING UP WITH
THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ABOUT
THE DEFINITIONS ARE KIND OF THE
START OF THAT SO I LOOK FORWARD
TO WORKING WITH JUDICIAL
COUNCIL.
AND AGAIN THE NEXT COMMITTEE
WHICH IS THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
OUGHT TO HELP US KIND OF HONE IN
ON THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT
MORE.
TO GET BACK IS AGAIN THAT
THERE'S THERE'S NO WHERE ELSE
FOR US TO LOOK TO TRY TO DEFINE
WHAT THAT IS IT'S WHAT WE YOU
KNOW WE ARE CREATING AN.
ABSOLUTE THANK YOU VERY MUCH
ADDITIONAL INDIVIDUALS IN
OPPOSITION OR NEUTRAL.
YES I HAD.
HIGH ON MY NAME IS ANDREW
CLINTON.
I REPRESENT A BLOCKCHAIN AT
BERKELEY LAW. I AM THE HEAD OF
LEGAL RESEARCH THERE.
I AM ALSO A MEMBER OF.
AN INTERNATIONAL WORKING GROUP.
ON.
DISTRIBUTE LEISURE TECHNOLOGY
ALSO KNOWN AS BITCOIN PARA
BLOCKCHAIN.
.
AND.
I I'M RELUCTANT TO SAY THAT I
OPPOSE THE LEGISLATION BECAUSE I
VERY MUCH.
SUPPORT.
THE OBJECTIVE OF THE
LEGISLATION IN UP PROMOTING.
LEGAL AND REGULATORY CERTAINTY.
SURROUNDING THIS TECHNOLOGY.
BUT I HAVE A NUMBER OF FAIRLY
SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS WITH THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE BILL.
AM FIRST AND FOREMOST A LOT OF
THE.
LEGAL CHALLENGES.
THAT DIGITAL ASSETS FACE.
ARE NOT PRIMARILY AT THE STATE
LEVEL.
THEY THERE ARE CERTAINLY SO IT
IS KIND OF A MYTH THAT.
DECLINE IS UNREGULATED IT IT IS
ACTUALLY REGULATED.
PRIMARILY UNDER MONEY
TRANSMISSION STATUTES.
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF FINS
AND.
AND UNDER THE BANK SECRECY ACT.
.
HOWEVER THAT HAS RESULTED IN THE
REGULATORY REGIME ARE BEING VERY
FRACTURED THE PATCHWORK OF STATE
AND FEDERAL REGULATION.
INVOLVING FENCE AND THE CFTC
THE SEC THE IRA S..
AND A NUMBER OF OTHER AGENCIES
AND SO. ARE THE BASIC CONCERN IS
THEY THE YOUNG THE LEGAL
UNCERTAINTY THAT EXISTS IS
PRIMARILY NOT AT THE STATE LEVEL
NOW I THINK THERE ARE THINGS AT
THE STATE LEVEL THAT CAN BE
DONE.
BUT HONESTLY DEFINING A
BLOCKCHAIN IS NOT REALLY THAT
THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE.
THE ELECTRONIC RECORDS ACT AS
IT CURRENTLY ALREADY EXISTS.
.
IS QUITE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS
BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY.
AND I THINK THAT THAT THE
DEFINITION IS VERY.
CONCERNING TO ME.
.
BECAUSE IT USES TERMINOLOGY LIKE
A A DECENTRALIZED SHARED AND
RECIPROCAL LEDGER.
WELL DECENTRALIZATION CAN IS A
PARAMETER THAT IS EXIST ON A
SPECTRUM ITS NOT A BINARY IT'S
NOT IT IS DECENTRALIZED OR IT'S
NOT.
.
IT IS.
IF THINGS CAN BE MORE OR LESS
CENTRALIZED ON A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS.
SIMILARLY.
I AM NOT QUITE CLEAR ON WHAT A
RECIPROCAL LEDGER MEANS.
.
THE BILL SAYS THAT A BOXING IS
DRIVEN BY TALKING I SCRIPT OF
ECONOMICS.
THE TERM CRYPTO ECONOMICS IS
NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS EVER
BEEN.
HOUSTON AS STATUTE I'M NOT SURE
ANYONE KNOWS WHAT THAT MEANS TO
BE HONEST.
AND THEN FINALLY IN THE IN THE
SECOND SENTENCE ARE DESCRIBING
BLOCKING TECHNOLOGY.
IT SAYS THE DATA ON THE LEDGER
IS PROTECTED WITH CRYPTOGRAPHY.
IT'S NOT.
IS IMMUTABLE.
IT'S NOT TECHNICALLY.
IS AUDITABLE IT MAY NOT BE
THERE ARE A PROTOCOL SUCH AS HE
CASH IN THE NARROW WHICH OUR
PRIVACY PRESERVING.
AND WHICH ARE NOT IN FACT
AUDITABLE.
AND PROVIDES AN UNCENSORED
TRUTH AND I THINK THAT IT CAN BE
VERY MISLEADING BECAUSE A
BLOCKCHAIN CAN RECORD.
.
CAN RECORD THAT A STATEMENT OR
TRANSACTION WAS MADE BUT NOT THE
TRUTH NOT THE UNDERLYING TRUTH
OF THAT. SO I CAN SAY THE SKY IS
PURPLE AND A BLOCKING CAN RECORD
THAT IN ALMOST PERPETUITY. THAT
I SAID THAT BUT OBVIOUSLY WOULD
NOT.
IN FACT MAKE THE SKY PURPLE.
.
SO WE HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS.
WITH THAT.
.
AND I A I HEARD THAT THE BIT
ABOUT SMART CONTRACTS.
WAS WAS STRUCK SO I I GUESS I
WANT.
COME INTO THAT.
BUT I DO HAVE ALTERNATIVE
LANGUAGE.
THAT THAT COULD BE ADOPTED.
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY.
I AM ABLE TO IDENTIFY ABOUT A
HALF DOZEN.
AREAS OF CALIFORNIA LAW THAT
COULD BE AMENDED THAT WOULD
ACTUALLY PROVIDE.
SIGNIFICANT CLARITY AND
BENEFITS.
FOR THE INDUSTRY ON WHICH I'M
HAPPY GO INTO MORE DETAIL ON ALL
OF THOSE.
SHOULD THE COMMITTEE WISH.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH I DO INVITE
YOU TO. CONTINUE CONTACTING THE
AUTHORS OFFICER WITH YOUR INPUT
AND SUGGESTIONS AND THE MONTHS
TO COME. ARM CONSIDERING THAT
THIS IS THE FIRST MEDIA THAT THE
BILLS ARE HURT THE BILL AND.
MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO MOVE A
FORCE SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE
THE DIALOGUE AND. AND.
.
S. B. NATION BLOCKCHAIN IS
INDEED TO THE TECHNOLOGY THAT'S
GONNA.
RECEIVE A LOT OF ATTENTION IN
IN IN THE MONTHS AND YEARS TO
COME IN AND TALK THAT'S BEEN
MENTIONED ALREADY.
PICKLING IS BASED ON.
WATCHING AND I'M. DON'T THINK
THE AUTHOR FOR STAYING AHEAD OF
THE CURVE OR STAYING WITH THE
CURVE BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT'S
WHERE OF THINGS ARE GOING TO. SO
IN FACT MY TEAM ARE HAS LOOKED
AT.
BLOCKCHAIN ALSO IN A LITTLE BIT
SO I'M I I'M THANKFUL THAT
YOU'RE TAKING THE.
THE LEADERSHIP AND INITIATIVE
AND AND.
DOING BUILT SO.
SO WITH THAT LET ME SEE IF
THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL OP
OPPOSITION INDIVIDUALS IN
OPPOSITION OR SUPPORT OKAY GET
PLEASE.
I'LL TAKE IT.
OKAY ABOVE I PAUSES RESEARCHERS
AS WELL AS ON BEHALF OF CIRCLE
PAY WE APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR'S.
TIME IN THE STAFF WORK WITH US.
UNDERSTANDING THE BILL.
WERE SUPER SUPPORTIVE WE'RE
GLAD THE CONVERSATION'S GETTING
STARTED HERE AND THIS IS THE
RIGHT AMOUNT OF.
DOT TIME IN LANGUAGE AND
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THIS
CONVERSATION ABOUT BLOCKCHAIN
THANK YOU ABSOLUTE ADDITIONAL
SUPPORTERS OR OPPONENTS.
SEEING NONE LET'S BRING BACK TO
COMMITTEE.
MISTER OBERNOLTE PLACE
THANK YOU SHARE OUT SOMEONE
CALDERON OF THANK YOU FOR DON'T
BRING THE BILL FORWARD I'M
EXTREMELY JEALOUS THAT I DIDN'T
THINK OF IT FIRST.
BOB I TOGETHER.
WHAT SURE PEPPY CO AUTHOR FEEL
I'D? LIKE ARCHITECT I'M AUTHORS
DONE.
I DO SHARE THE CONCERNS OF BEEN
RAISED ABOUT THE DEFINITION OF
BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY RELIES
APOLOGIST TOOK THE DEFINITION OF
THE ARIZONA BILL. A BUT I THINK
IT DOES NEED SOME REFINEMENT
PARTICULARLY IN THE TECHNICAL
ASPECTS TO MAKE IT MAKE SURE
THAT WERE BEING VERY SPECIFIC
ABOUT WHAT WE MEAN. WHEN WE SAY
BLOCKCHAIN BUT I WITH THAT COPY
OUT I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THANK
YOU AND ANNA AND I DO COMMIT TO
THE COMMITTEE.
THAT.
TAKING THE TIME TO TRY TO
DEVELOP A BETTER PROGRAM OR A
BETTER DEFINITION WHEN IT COMES
TO BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY IS
MICHAEL.
AND YOU KNOW TO THE BEST OF OUR
ABILITY WE'RE GONNA DO THAT WE
EXPECT THAT TO BE TAKEN NEW
AMENDMENTS IN THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE AND AS THIS BILL MOVES
FORWARD AYE I WILL ABSOLUTELY DO
WHATEVER IT TAKES TO MAKE SURE
WE GET THIS RIGHT WE STRUCK
RIGHT BALLOTS.
THANK YOU MUCH ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.
SCENE NINE.
BILL'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED
THAT YOU MAY CLOSE.
I THINK YOU MEMBERS APPRECIATE
YOUR TIME HOUSE APPRECIATE THE
COMMENTS FROM THOSE THAT SPOKEN
SUPPORT AS WELL AS OPPOSITION I
TAKE ALL.
CRITICISMS.
SERIOUSLY NOW AFFORD TO WORKING
ON THE ISSUE THANK YOU VERY MUCH
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE KALRA.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED
HIS UNIT JUDICIARY.
CHAO HIGH SO I KILEY BAKER.
BERMAN I'VE BERMAN AYE CALDERON
AYE CALDERON AYE IRWIN. IRWIN
AYE MULLIN.
MULLIN AYE OBERNOLTE OBERNOLTE I
REST RAVES I TING.
TING AYE.
YOUR BILL IS OUT.
THANK CONGRATULATIONS IN THAT
LEAVES OF.
ONE BILL AND THAT'S MY BILL I'M
GONNA TURN THE GAVEL OVER TO MY
VICE CHAIRS ON HERE SO.
MISS OBERNOLTE WHICH LIKE THE
CHAIR.
REST OF THE MEETING.
NTIA.
WE THEN THAT IF YOU CAN SAID SHE
TOLD ME. SHE.
SHE DEAD.
OKAY PENETRATE SHALL BELIEVE
YOU'RE PRESENTING ON AB TWENTY
SIX SIXTY TWO PLEASE RC THANK
YOU VERY MUCH MISTER AND A
MEMBERS. AB TWENTY SIX SIXTY TWO
WILL ESTABLISH AND FUND A
PROGRAM TO STUDY THE ROLE AND
IMPACT OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA. ON
THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHILDREN.
TO DATE THERE ARE NOT MUCH
RESEARCH HAS BEEN CONDUCTED TO
RIGOROUSLY EXAMINE THE EXTENDED
USE OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA.
AND THE EFFECTS IT CAN HAVE ON
THE COGNITIVE PHYSICAL SOCIAL
AND EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF
CHILDREN. AND ADOLESCENTS
ADDITIONALLY NOT MUCH RESEARCH
HAS BEEN CONDUCTED TO MORE
THOROUGHLY EXAMINE THE USE OF
ELECTRONIC MEDIA TO SUPPORT
HEALTHY DEVELOPMENT.
JUST TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME
STATISTICS TODAY EIGHTY ARE
NINETY EIGHT PERCENT OF CHILDREN
IN AMERICA ARE UNDER THE AGE OF
EIGHT. HAVE ACCESS TO A MOBILE
DEVICE AT HOME.
SEVENTY EIGHT PERCENT OF
TEENAGERS CHECK THEIR DIGITAL
DEVICES AT LEAST HOURLY.
AND FIFTY PERCENT OF TEENAGERS
REPORTED FEELING ADDICTED TO
THEIR MOTHER MOBILE DEVICES.
STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT THE
BRAINS OF THE YOUNG PEOPLE
DIAGNOSED WITH INTERNET
ADDICTION.
CHAU SIGNIFICANT ALL LESS GRAY
MATTER DENSITY WHICH IS
ASSOCIATED WITH PLANNING
DECISION MAKING AND IMPOSE
CONTROL.
THE RAPID RISE OF TECHNOLOGY AND
DIGITAL DEVICE USE AMONG
CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS HAVE
HAS CREATED A PRESSING NEED. TO
EXPAND RESEARCH INTO THE HEALTH
CONSEQUENCES OF TECHNOLOGY USE
AND ALSO POSSIBLE DIGITAL
ADDICTIONS. AND THE IMPACT IT IS
HAVING ON THE SOCIAL EMOTIONAL
AND COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT OF
CHILDREN.
THANK YOU AB TWENTY SIX SIXTY
TWO WILL ESTABLISH A PROGRAM TO
ENSURE EXPERTS STUDY ARE TO
STUDY THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE. SO
WITHOUT I HAVE ONE WITNESS SO.
THEY KNOW OUR KAISER WITH
COMMONSENSE KITS.
GOOD AFTERNOON DANIEL KAISER ON
BEHALF OF COMMON SENSE KIDS
ACTION.
COMMONSENSE SEEKS TO PROVIDE
PARENTS AND EDUCATORS WITH THE
TOOLS AND RESOURCES TO MAKE
INFORMED DECISIONS ABOUT THE
MEDIA THAT THEIR CHILDREN USE.
OVER THE YEARS WE'VE SUPPORTED
IN AT INNOVATIVE RESEARCH
INCLUDING REPORTS LIKE CENSUS ON
MEDIA USE BY TWEENS AND TEENS.
VIRTUAL REALITY ONE A ONE WHAT
YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT KIDS AND
BE OUR AND MOST RECENTLY TRUTH
ABOUT TACK A ROAD MAP TO. A A
ROADMAP FOR KIDS DIGITAL WELL
BEING.
HOWEVER IT'S NOT ENOUGH FOR ONE
INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATION TO TAKE
ON THIS TYPE OF RESEARCH RATHER
WE NEED COMPREHENSIVE
LONGITUDINAL LONGITUDINAL
INFORMATION. ABOUT HOW THE
UNSEEN POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE AYE
AFFECTS OF MEDIA ARE AFFECTING
OUR CHILDREN AS THEY CONSUME
THOSE.
AB TWENTY SIX SIXTY TWO WOULD
ESTABLISH A PROGRAM TO SUPPORT
THE RESEARCH ON DUTCH DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGIES AND THEIR POTENTIAL
IMPACT ON THE HEALTH AND WELL
BEING OF KITS.
SUCH INFORMATION WILL HELP WILL
HELP PARENTS EDUCATORS
POLICYMAKERS AND THE TECH
INDUSTRY UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT
OF THE INNOVATIONS ON
TECHNOLOGY.
ON CHU ON CHILDREN OF FAMILIES
AND HOW TO MAXIMIZE THESE TOOLS
FOR THE BETTERMENT OF ALL.
AS WE'RE LOOKING TO HOW OUR
CHILDREN WILL MATURE INTO ADULTS
WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO BETTER
PLAN FOR THEM AS THEY GOING TO
HIGH SCHOOL COLLEGE AND BEYOND.
AS NATIONAL LEADERS IN
TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION AND
IT'S APPROPRIATE THE CALIFORNIA
TAKE ON THAT LEADERSHIP ROLE IN
THE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION
THAT'S COMING TO OUR CHILDREN.
WE URGE YOUR AYE VOTE THANK YOU.
RIGHT ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
IN SUPPORT.
ANY TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION TOPS
ARE GOING.
GOD.
KEVIN MCKINLEY ON HALF THE
INTERNET ASSOCIATION NO POSITION
ON THE BILL WE COMMEND AUTHORS.
.
GOALS WITH THE BILL AND WE JUST
HAVE A COUPLE TWEAKS TO THE
BILL.
ABOUT WHAT EXPERTS SHOULD BE
INVOLVED IN RESEARCH.
RIGHT TRIBAL CANTINA WORK WITH
YOU THANKS ABSOLUTELY.
ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IN
OPPOSITION.
SEEING NONE BRIGADE BACK
COMMITTEE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE
AUTHOR MISTER KILEY.
I'M SORRY TO MISS YOUR TEST
MEANS TO SHARE JUST TAP COME
BACK FROM HIS IN MY OWN DEL I.
SO FORGIVE ME IF YOU COVERED
THIS ALREADY I AM BUT I IS THIS
AIMING TO HAVE.
OUR STATE AGENCIES
SORT OF.
PROMPTS FRESH RESEARCH TO BE
DONE OR IS THE PURPOSE TO. AG
LATE IN THE ANALYZE EXISTING
RESEARCH THAT'S OUT THERE AND
THEN I YOU KNOW I'VE TRIED TO
DRIVE INSIGHTS FOR.
YOU KNOW CALIFORNIA SPECIFIC
PUBLIC POLICY BUT THE IDEA IS TO
HAVE THE OFFICE OF OUR PLANNING
AND.
RESEARCH UP BASICALLY CONTACT
AND CONTRACT WITH CONTRACT WITH
OUR THIRD PARTIES FOR EXAMPLE
RESEARCHER.
EXPERTS TO CONDUCT OUR RESEARCH
IN THIS BUT THE OTHER WEEK
RECALL ISN'T WHETHER OR NOT THE
USE.
EXISTING STATISTICS ON SO YOU
KNOW WHO THEY COULD BUILD ON
WHAT'S OUT THERE ALREADY BUT
ESSENTIALLY THIS IS YOU KNOW AN
AREA THAT WE WANT TO CUT IT.
KINDA UNTIL NEW LAUNCH
BASICALLY.
SO IT SEEMS TO ME OF THAT GOAL
IS TO DO NEW RESEARCH MAYBE
WE'RE NOT THE BEST AND THE DEED
TO BE.
YOU KNOW.
MAKING THAT HAPPENED I I MEAN
JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT SOME OF
THE SITUATIONS YOU MAKE IT SEEM
LIKE THERE'S BEEN WORK DONE
ALREADY SO. WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO
THAT'S GOING TO ADD TO THAT
WHATEVER PROFESSORS AT VARIOUS
UNIVERSITIES AROUND THE WORLD
ARE DOING ON THIS IF WE COULD
AGGREGATE WHAT THEY'VE DONE AND
THEN SORT OF MAKE IT USEFUL FOR
US THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A DATE
FUNCTION? NOW I'M GONNA ASK MY
NGUYEN IS TO ADD TO THAT AGAIN
THIS COMMON SENSE KIDS ACTION
HAS DONE A. QUITE A LOT OF
RESEARCH AND PULLED ON RESEARCH
THAT'S ALREADY EXISTING. THIS
THIS RESEARCH HAS ONLY RECENTLY
BEEN DONE SO WHAT WE NEED TO BE
DOING WHAT WE FEEL THAT THE BILL
WOULD DO IS TO LOOK AT CURRENT
RESEARCH EXPAND UPON NOT. AND
LOOK AT THAT LONGITUDINAL DATA
WE CAN'T JUST RELY ON DATA
THAT'S ALREADY BEEN IN PLACE.
SO SHE IS TECHNOLOGY IS
DEVELOPING KIDS ARE USING
DIFFERENT FORMS OF TECHNOLOGY
MORE AND MORE OF IT.
SO AGAIN NOT LONGITUDINAL DATA
IS WHAT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO
GET OUT.
YEAH.
OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE AUTHOR.
I HAVE ONE A. MISTER CHOW I'M
GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE BILL
A AND I AM. VERY THANKFUL THAT
IN THE PREAMBLE YOU POINTED OUT
THAT THE PURPOSE THE REPORT IS
TO ADDRESS BOTH. NEGATIVE AND
POSITIVE OUTCOMES
EXOTIC IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE BE
UNBIASED AND NOT SEEK A A
PREDETERMINED CONCLUSION WHEN WE
ADDRESS REPORT LIKE THIS
HOWEVER.
IT IN THAT VEIN I WOULD ASK THAT
YOU CONSIDER PUTTING IN SOME
ADDITIONAL TOPICS TO RESEARCH
BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF
THINGS WE'RE LOOKING INTO.
PARKED IN TERMS OF TRYING TO IN
A SENSE NEGATIVE HEALTH
CONSEQUENCES
AND I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO
SINCE WE'RE IN FOR BEING
UNBIASED WE ALSO NEED TO WEIGH
THINGS LIKE. OF THE EFFECT OF
INTERACTION WITH DIGITAL DEVICES
AS CHILDREN ON LIFETIME EARNINGS
ON PROFESSIONAL SUCCESS SO THAT
PEOPLE CAN REALLY MAKE. AN
INFORMED DECISION ABOUT BOTH THE
DANGERS AND THE ASSETS OF THAT
TYPE OF INTERSECTION AS A CHILD.
YES ACTUALLY THANKS FOR THE
SUGGESTION IN FACT OF THE
LANGUAGE IS QUITE CLEAR THAT
THAT WE CAN STUDY BOTH THE
POSITIVE NEGATIVE ROSE. ALL
THAT'S IN THE SECTION SIX AYE
VOTE FOR TO A FOUR ZERO POINT
ONE SIX BE. SO WE WILL LOOK AT
BOTH BOTH SIDES OF THE COIN AND
ALSO LOOK AT.
HERE IS THAT.
YOU KNOW MAY NEED ME DEMAND
MORE MORE RESEARCH I THOUGHT I
SAW THAT IN THE THE LANGUAGE BUT
THEN WHEN WE.
.
WHEN WE ITEMIZE ALL THE
DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF A REPORT IS
GOING TO LOOK INTO TRAIN.
I'M SUGGESTING THAT MAYBE WE
ADD SOME AVENUES OF RESEARCH
THAT COULD YIELD SOME POSITIVE
DATA HERE INSTEAD OF JUST
FOCUSING ON THE ONES THAT
POTENTIAL YIELD NEGATIVE HERE
JUST TO BE UNBIASED ABSOLUTELY
RIGHT BECAUSE IT JUST AND THANK
YOU VERY MUCH WILL. TAKE THAT
INTO CONSIDERATION ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS OF THE AUTHOR.
RIGHT SEEING NONE WE HAVE A
MOTION BY SOME WOMEN CALDERON
SECOND BY SOMEONE IN BERMAN
MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL.
THE MOTION IS TO PASSED ARTS
ENTERTAINMENT SPORTS TOURISM AND
INTERNET MEDIA COMMITTEE CHAO
TYPE CHAO AYE KILEY AYE KILEY
AYE BAKER.
BERMAN. BERMAN AYECALDERON
CALDERON AYE IRWIN.
MULLIN.
MULLIN AYE OBERNOLTE AYE AYE
OBERNOLTE AYE VARIOUS REYES AYE
TING. TING AYE. FAVORITE BILLS
OUT WILL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN.
HEY LET'S.
OKAY WE NEED A MOTION ON THE
FIRST ITEM TWELVE.
THEM.
THE ARE THAT'S A TWENTY TO
TWENTY FIVE SEVEN FREE MEN ON
MOTORCYCLES ARE.
HANG TAX SO MADAM SECRETARY
PLEASE CORRUPT. MOTIONS YOU
PASTOR APPROPRIATIONS
SHALL I.
KILEY.
KILEY NOT VOTING BAKER.
BERMAN.
BERMAN AYE CALDERON CALDERON AYE
IRWIN.
IT'S BETTER. MULLIN.
THOSE WHEN I OBERNOLTE.
OBERNOLTE NO REYES.
REYES AYE TING.
TING AYE ORGANIZER
BERMAN I HATE OUT THAT BILL IS
ALL SIX TO.
IT'S TWO ONE.
.
NEXT ONE IS.
.
AB TWENTY FIVE FORTY SIX THAT'S
A CHILD BILL ITEM TO COMMERCIAL
EMAIL ADVERTISING.
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
CURRENT VOTE IS FIVE ONE.
BAKER.
IRWIN.
MULLIN.
MULLIN I. REST.
REYES I HAD THOSE OUT SEVEN ONE
WILL OPEN FOR. OTHER ABSENT
MEMBERS NEXT.
IS ITEM THREE TWENTY SIX FIFTY
EIGHT THAT'S OUR CALDERON.
CURRENT VOTE COUNT AS. ZERO
KILEY.
KILEY AYE BAKER.
IT'S NINE ZERO THAT BILL IS OUT
THERE.
TWENTY SIX SIXTY TWO THOUGH
THAT'S SO THE WEATHER WHICH IS
TED TOOK UP ITEM FOR CHILD.
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS
BAKER.
EARLY.
OKAY NEXT TO ITEM FIVE AB TWENTY
NINE FORTY THREE LOW.
THE CURRENT VOTE COUNT IS SEVEN
TWO.
MULLIN.
MULLIN I.
I AM SIX AB THIRTY ONE SIXTY
NINE GALLAGHER.
CURRENT VOTE COUNT AS ONE.
KILEY.
ACRE.
BERMAN.
CALDERON.
IRWIN.
MULLIN.
OBERNOLTE.
REYES.
REST NOT VOTING TING.
THAT WAS UNCALLED.
SO OUR CONSENT.
PLEASE CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
BERMAN. BERMAN AYE MULLIN.
MULLIN AYE TING.
I GET THAT.
WE'LL LEAVE THE ROLE OPEN FOR
ABSENT MEMBERS TO ADD ON.
ALL THEIR UPDATING HIGHER AT.
OKAY THAT WE'VE ACT OKAY WELL
THANKS.
TO HAVE TO MOVE MY OTHER
MEETING.
I'VE SEEN.
WE
MEETINGS ADJOURNMENT