GOOD MORNING. I'D LIKE TO CALL
THE APRIL 10TH, 2024 HEARING OF
THE ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS COMMITTEE
TO ORDER, WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN
AS A SUBCOMMITTEE, IF MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE ARE MONITORING
THIS HEARING, PLEASE COME TO
ROOM 444 OF THE STATE CAPITOL SO
THAT WE CAN ESTABLISH A QUORUM.
I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYONE WHO
IS HERE IN THE HEARING ROOM
TODAY, AND WHO IS WATCHING THE
HEARING ONLINE. OAN. FOR THE
PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING, WE ARE
ACCEPTING WITNESS TESTIMONY IN
PERSON, AND WE ARE ALSO
ACCEPTING ACCEPTING WRITTEN
TESTIMONY THROUGH THE
LEGISLATURE'S POSITION LETTER
PORTAL. THAT PORTAL CAN BE
ACCESSED THROUGH THE COMMITTEE'S
WEBSITE OF ELC. DOT ASSEMBLY DOT
CA.GOV. THE COMMITTEE HAS NINE
BILLS ON ITS AGENDA TODAY. THERE
ARE THREE BILLS ON CONSENT WHEN
WE HEAR THE BILLS ON THE AGENDA,
WE WILL HEAR FROM A MAXIMUM OF
TWO PRIMARY WITNESSES IN SUPPORT
AND TWO PRIMARY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION OF THE BILL, WITH THE
LIMIT OF TWO MINUTES PER WITNESS
. OTHER WITNESSES ARE LIMITED TO
PROVIDING THEIR NAME, THE
ORGANIZATION THEY REPRESENT, IF
ANY, AND THEIR POSITION ON THE
BILL. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS WILL
BE RULED OUT OF ORDER. WITH
THESE ANNOUNCEMENTS OUT OF THE
WAY, WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO THE
COMMITTEE'S AGENDA. ALTHOUGH WE
WERE HOPING FOR MORE AUTHORS TO
BE PRESENT, WE DON'T SEE HER
ANYWHERE? OKAY, SO WE CAN'T TAKE
UP THE CONSENT CALENDAR. OKAY.
OKAY WE'RE JUST GOING TO WAIT
FOR A FEW MINUTES TO SEE IF WE
CAN GET SOME MORE AUTHORS HERE.
MOST OF THE AUTHORS ARE MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE, EXCEPT FOR
ONE, SO WE'RE TRYING TO TRACK
THEM DOWN RIGHT NOW. SO TAKE A
CHILL
.
OUR AUTHOR IS ON HER WAY, SO
WE'LL GIVE HER A FEW MORE
MINUTES
.
ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GO
AHEAD AND ESTABLISH A QUORUM.
NOW THAT WE GOT MORE MEMBERS
HERE. SO, MADAM SECRETARY,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. PELLERIN
HERE, PELLERIN HERE, LACKEY HERE
. LACKEY HERE. BENNETT. BERMAN
FUHRMAN HERE. CERVANTES. EASILY
HERE. ASSALY HERE. LOW. WEBER
HERE. WEBER. HERE. WE HAVE A
QUORUM. SO AT THIS TIME, WE'LL
GO AHEAD AND TAKE UP THE
COMMITTEE'S CONSENT CALENDAR.
THERE ARE THREE BILLS ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. THE COMMITTEE
SECRETARY WILL PLEASE READ THE
ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
ITEM ONE AB 1784 BY PELLERIN.
THE MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED
AND BE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE
ON APPROPRIATIONS WITH
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSENT.
CALENDAR ITEM EIGHT, AB 2951.
CERVANTES. THE MOTION IS TO PASS
AND BE RE REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATION WITH
RECOMMENDATION TO CONSENT.
CALENDAR AND ITEM NINE AB 3197
BY LACKEY, AND THE MOTION IS TO
PASS AS AMENDED, TO CONSENT.
CALENDAR DOES ANY MEMBER WISH TO
REMOVE ANY ITEM FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR? SEEING AND HEARING
NONE. DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. SO MOVED
SECOND, MOVED BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BERMAN. SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR
LACKEY. MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. PELLERIN. AYE.
PELLERIN. AYE. LACKEY A LACKEY.
AYE. BENNETT. BERMAN. BERMAN.
AYE. CERVANTES ASSALI A SALLY.
AYE. LOW WEBER. WEBER. AYE. THE
CONSENT CALENDAR IS OUT. SINCE
OUR OTHER AUTHORS NOT HERE, I'M
GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE UP A
BILL I HAVE ON CIVIC EDUCATION.
AND IT IS ASSEMBLY BILL 2627.
I FORGOT MY WATER. THAT'S OKAY.
YOU MAY PROCEED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, EXISTING LAW DIRECTS
THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND
COUNTIES TO IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS
AIMED AT INCREASING VOTER
PARTICIPATION. CONDUCTING
OUTREACH TO ELIGIBLE BUT
UNREGISTERED VOTERS, AND
REMOVING ADMINISTRATIVE BARRIERS
TO VOTING. HOWEVER, FEWER THAN
60% OF ELIGIBLE CALIFORNIA
VOTERS HAVE EXERCISED THEIR
RIGHT TO VOTE IN EACH STATEWIDE
ELECTION SINCE 1972, WITH THE
EXCEPTION OF THE HISTORIC
TURNOUT DURING THE 2020
ELECTION, YOUNG PEOPLE ARE THE
LEAST LIKELY AGE GROUP TO
PARTICIPATE IN ELECTIONS. AND
YET THEY ARE THE ONES WHO WILL
LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF
THESE ELECTIONS. THE LONGEST IN
THE HISTORIC TURNOUT OF 2020,
ONLY 48% OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS
UNDER THE AGE OF 24
PARTICIPATED, AND THE SAD PART
IS THAT THIS WAS SUBSTANTIALLY
HIGHER THAN THE 2016 GENERAL
ELECTION, WHICH SAW YOUTH
TURNOUT OF AROUND 37% MEMBERS.
IF OUR PARTICIPATION RATES WERE
GRADES ON A TEST, WE WOULD BE
FAILING WITH WHEN LESS THAN HALF
OF OUR YOUNG VOTERS ARE
PARTICIPATING IN A PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION. WE NEED TO EXAMINE WHY
THEY ARE ENGAGED AT LOWER RATES
THAN OLDER SEGMENTS OF OUR
POPULATION. TO BOOST CIVIC
EDUCATION OF YOUNG VOTERS IN
CALIFORNIA, AB 2627 ESTABLISHES
THE CIVIC LEARNING, OUTREACH AND
ENGAGEMENT FUND, FROM WHICH THE
SECRETARY OF STATE WILL GRANT
FUNDS TO PARTICIPATING LOCAL
ELECTIONS OFFICIALS. AVAILABLE
GRANTS WILL ALLOW LOCAL
ELECTIONS OFFICIALS TO IMPLEMENT
PROGRAMS THAT INTEGRATE VOTER
REGISTRATION AND
PRE-REGISTRATION WITH CIVIC
ENGAGEMENT PROGRAMS INTENDED TO
SUPPORT HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.
THESE PROGRAMS CAN BE DESIGNED
TO SUPPORT THE ATTAINMENT OF THE
STATE SEAL OF CIVIC ENGAGEMENT,
WHICH IS AWARDED TO GRADUATING
HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS WHO
DEMONSTRATE EXCELLENCE IN CIVIC
EDUCATION AND PARTICIPATION BY
ESTABLISHING A DESIGNATED
FUNDING STREAM TO CONDUCT
OUTREACH PROGRAMS IN
COORDINATION WITH LOCAL
EDUCATION AGENCIES, LOCAL
ELECTIONS OFFICIALS WILL BE ABLE
TO BE MORE CREATIVE IN THEIR
APPROACHES TO OUTREACH TO OUR
YOUNG VOTERS, WHO ARE OUR FUTURE
LEADERS WITH ME TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT IS JESSE SALINAS, THE
CHIEF ELECTIONS OFFICIAL FOR
YOLO COUNTY, AND DEAN LOGAN, THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY REGISTRAR OF
VOTERS. GOOD MORNING. COMMITTEE
MEMBERS JESSE SALINAS, YOLO
COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS. DATA
CONTINUES TO SHOW THAT THOSE 18
TO 24 YEAR OLDS ARE STILL THE
LOWEST PARTICIPATING AGE GROUP,
AND THAT ITEMS FURTHER DOWN ON
THE BALLOT SEEM TO HAVE LESS
VOTER ENGAGEMENT. THIS PAST
PRIMARY ELECTION, WITHOUT A
COMPETITIVE PRESIDENTIAL RACE,
CAPTURED THE REALITY OF THE
STATEWIDE TURNOUT AT ONLY 35.
SIMPLY STATED, YOUNG VOTERS ARE
NOT SEEING THE IMPORTANT
CONNECTION BETWEEN THEIR VOTE
AND ITS IMPACT ON THEIR DAILY
LIVES AT THE LOCAL AND STATE
LEVEL. A RECENT TUFTS UNIVERSITY
STUDY FOUND THAT 81% OF THE
SURVEYED YOUTH WHO REMEMBERED
STUDENT VOICE EXPERIENCES IN
HIGH SCHOOL SAID THEY WERE
EXTREMELY LIKELY TO VOTE IN
2024, COMPARED TO 44% OF THOSE
WHO DID NOT. OUR WORK IN YOLO
COUNTY VERIFIES THESE FINDINGS
LOCALLY AND POTENTIAL
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT OF AB 2627.
FOR THE PAST SIX YEARS, WE HAVE
PROVIDED A ONE DAY NATIONAL
AWARD WINNING YOUTH EMPOWERMENT
SUMMIT THAT BRINGS 100 TO 150
STUDENTS FROM ACROSS THE COUNTY
TO LEARN ABOUT LOCAL GOVERNMENT
AND THE VOTING PROCESS. WE HAVE
CONDUCTED PRE AND POST SURVEYS
SINCE THE SUMMIT'S INCEPTION,
AND WE FOUND THAT WHEN ASKED THE
QUESTION STUDENTS DO YOU
UNDERSTAND HOW LOCAL GOVERNMENT
FUNCTIONS AT THE BEGINNING OF
THE SUMMIT, 44% SAID YES.
AFTERWARDS 90% SAID YES. WE THEN
ASKED THEM IF THEY UNDERSTOOD
THE VOTING PROCESS AND HOW IT
WORKS. 684% SAID YES AT THE
BEGINNING. AFTERWARDS, IT WAS
100. AND THEN WE WOULD FINALLY
ASK THEM, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE
ROLE OF ELECTED OFFICIALS? 62%
SAID, YES, 100% SAID YES.
AFTERWARDS AS LAST YEAR'S
SUMMIT, WE EVEN ASKED STUDENTS
IF THEY FELT EMPOWERED TO MAKE
POSITIVE CHANGES IN THEIR
COMMUNITY. AND 92% SAID THEY
FELT EITHER EMPOWERED OR VERY
EMPOWERED AFTER ATTENDING THE
EVENT. SUCH EFFORTS IN THE HIGH
SCHOOLS WILL INCREASE
UNDERSTANDING OF ELECTIONS AND
CREATE A CRUCIAL GOVERNMENT
CONNECTION TO YOUNG PEOPLE TO
HELP THEM BECOME ENGAGED VOTERS
AND UP AND DOWN THE BALLOT.
ACCORDINGLY, I REQUEST I
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR
SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, VICE
CHAIR LACKEY, MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. I'M DEAN LOGAN,
REGISTRAR, RECORDER, COUNTY
CLERK FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY.
AND THANK YOU, ASSEMBLY MEMBER
PELLERIN, FOR YOUR SPONSORSHIP
OF THIS BILL ON BEHALF OF LOS
ANGELES COUNTY, I'M HERE TO
SUPPORT ASSEMBLY BILL 2627 AND
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR
SUPPORT. LOS ANGELES COUNTY IS
CALIFORNIA'S LARGEST AND MOST
DIVERSE COUNTY, WITH NEARLY 10
MILLION RESIDENTS FROM MANY
DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES AND
BACKGROUNDS. WE STRIVE TO
PROVIDE AN ACCESSIBLE,
CONVENIENT, AND FAIR VOTING
EXPERIENCE TO ALL OF OUR VOTERS.
WE KNOW, THOUGH, THAT A ONE SIZE
FITS ALL APPROACH OFTEN DOES NOT
WORK IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY. WHEN
TRYING TO REACH VOTERS IN 19
LANGUAGES ACROSS MULTIPLE
GENERATIONS, WITH DIFFERENT
VOTER PARTICIPATION HISTORY AND
FACTORING IN THE GEOGRAPHIC
DIVERSITY OF LOS ANGELES, LOS
ANGELES COUNTY, WE TAKE A TWO
STEP APPROACH TO VOTER EDUCATION
AND OUTREACH, MESSAGING TO
ENSURE WE CAN REACH ALL OF OUR
COMMUNITIES. THIS INCLUDES A
HIGH LEVEL VOTER EDUCATION AND
OUTREACH CAMPAIGN THAT TARGETS
OUR NEARLY 5.7 MILLION
REGISTERED VOTERS, AND WE
COMPLEMENT THAT CAMPAIGN WITH
OUR MULTILINGUAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN,
WHICH PROVIDES CRUCIAL
INFORMATION IN MULTIPLE
LANGUAGES AND LEVERAGES ETHNIC
MEDIA PARTNERSHIPS TO REACH OUR
DIVERSE COMMUNITIES. A SIMILAR
APPROACH CAN BE TAKEN TO REACH
OUR OUR EMERGING ELECTORATE.
YOUNG PEOPLE ENTER THE
ELECTORATE DURING COMPLICATED
TIMES, WITH SIGNIFICANT
CHALLENGES AND BARRIERS SUCH AS
MISINFORMATION AND
DISINFORMATION, AND SIMPLY LACK
OF KNOWLEDGE OF HOW THE PROCESS
WORKS. MEDIA LITERACY PROGRAMS
ARE CRITICAL TO EQUIPPING VOTERS
WITH THE NECESSARY SKILLS TO
NAVIGATE A COMPLICATED
INFORMATION LANDSCAPE, AND TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS, INFUSING CIVICS
EDUCATION WITH CURRICULUM THAT
ADDRESSES VOTER REGISTRATION,
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT, AND MEDIA
LITERACY, AND PARTNERING BETWEEN
EDUCATORS AND ELECTION
ADMINISTRATORS IS A SOLID MODEL
FOR ENCOURAGING OUR NEXT
GENERATION OF VOTERS. AB 2627,
IF PASSED, WILL SIGNIFICANTLY
BOLSTER OUR VOTER EDUCATION AND
OUTREACH EFFORTS. IT WILL ALLOW
US TO BETTER PRIORITIZE
COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE COUNTY
WITH LOWER VOTER REGISTRATION
AND PARTICIPATION RATES, THEREBY
ENSURING A MORE EQUITABLE
DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. THE FUNDS
ARE CRITICAL IN OUR ABILITY TO
ENGAGE AND REGISTER ALL ELIGIBLE
VOTERS, PROVIDING ACCESS TO THE
BALLOT BOX FOR ALL BUT
IMPORTANTLY, THIS BILL IS NOT
JUST ABOUT FUNDING. IT'S ABOUT
ENSURING THAT EVERY VOICE IN OUR
DIVERSE COUNTY IS HEARD AND
REPRESENTED. SO THANK YOU. AND
AGAIN, ON BEHALF OF LOS ANGELES
COUNTY, WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT
FOR AB 2627. WE HAVE A MOTION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? OKAY. WE'LL
DO THAT. DO WE HAVE ANY, THOSE
WHO WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL? COME.
PLEASE COME FORWARD TO TESTIFY.
SEEING NONE THOSE IN THE
AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS
SUPPORT. WOULD YOU PLEASE COME
TO MY. GOOD MORNING, DR. ROSE.
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF
CALIFORNIA IN SUPPORT. WE HAVE A
SUGGESTED AMENDMENT, AND WE'RE
APPRECIATIVE OF THE OFFICE
WORKING WITH US ON THAT. THANK
YOU. ANDY BIRNBAUM, LOS ANGELES
COUNTY AND PROUD SUPPORT TRICIA
WEBER ON BEHALF OF CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF CLERKS AND
ELECTION OFFICIALS IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. WE'LL
NOW COME BACK TO THE DÍAS.
ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS
SENTIMENTS? YES, SIR. THANKS. I
JUST WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR. I
WANT TO THANK THE WITNESSES,
SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THIS, I
THINK IT'S AN INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT EFFORT. I THINK WE ALL
CAN PROBABLY REMEMBER AS
CANDIDATES KNOCKING ON DOORS,
AND HALF OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE
HAD WERE PROBABLY CIVIC
EDUCATION. I'D HAVE TO. I'D TELL
PEOPLE I WAS RUNNING FOR
ASSEMBLY OR RUNNING TO BE AN
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, AND THEY'D SAY,
OH, WHAT DO YOU ASSEMBLE, SO I
THINK THIS IS A GREAT EFFORT. I
KNOW IT'S ONE THAT'S BEEN TALKED
ABOUT A LOT, AND HAPPY TO
SUPPORT IT. WOULD LOVE TO BE A
COAUTHOR, WHEN THE WHEN THE TIME
IS RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANKS.
OKAY GO AHEAD. QUESTION. DO YOU
THINK IT'S POSSIBLE THAT PEOPLE
DON'T VOTE BECAUSE THEY DON'T
LIKE EITHER PARTY OR ANY
CANDIDATE? IS THAT A IS THAT A
POSSIBILITY IN YOUR ANALYSIS
OTHER THAN BECAUSE YOU SORT OF
FRAME IT AS PEOPLE AREN'T VOTING
BECAUSE THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND?
NØ I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE
UNDERSTAND AND THEY JUST CHOOSE
NOT TO PARTICIPATE. LIKE IS THAT
ALSO A POSSIBILITY? WELL, I'LL.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER, EASILY. I THINK
OBVIOUSLY THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES
FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE DIFFERENT
VIEWS. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE
FULL BALLOT, THERE'S QUITE A
NUMBER OF ITEMS PEOPLE CAN VOTE
ON, NOT JUST A PARTICULAR RACE.
THERE ARE MEASURES, THERE ARE
LOCAL RACES. THERE'S A WHOLE
LIST OF POTENTIAL OPTIONS FOR
PEOPLE TO STAY ENGAGED AND
WHAT'S HAPPENING IS PEOPLE
AREN'T EVEN SHOWING UP TO
VOTING. SO TURNED OFF BY
POLITICS. I MEAN, I TALKED TO
YOUNG PEOPLE. I TALKED TO A LOT
OF PEOPLE, AND THEY JUST THEY'RE
SO DISGUSTED WITH THE POLITICAL
SYSTEM. THEY DON'T WANT ANYTHING
TO DO WITH IT. SO YOU DON'T HAVE
TO RESPOND. I'M JUST SAYING, I
THINK THERE MAY BE SOME
EDUCATION IS IMPORTANT. PEOPLE
SHOULD OBVIOUSLY KNOW THEY HAVE
THE RIGHT TO REGISTER AND VOTE.
I GET ALL THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, I
THINK SOMETIMES NOT VOTING IS A
STATEMENT. SO THOSE ARE MY
COMMENTS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. OKAY ASSEMBLY MEMBER
PELLERIN, DO YOU ACCEPT THE, THE
AMENDMENTS AS PROPOSED BY YOUR,
COMMITTEE? I WOULD ASSUME YOU
MAY, BUT WE NEED TO GET THAT
DOCUMENTED. YES OKAY. YOU MAY
CLOSE. OKAY, GREAT, WELL, AND I,
I KNOW FIRSTHAND HOW IMPORTANT
CIVIC EDUCATION IS. WE'VE
CONDUCTED CIVIC SUMMITS IN SANTA
CRUZ COUNTY. WHEN I WAS THE
COUNTY CLERK, REGISTRAR OF
VOTERS, DID VOTER OUTREACH IN
HIGH SCHOOLS. OUR HIGH SCHOOL
POLL WORKER PROGRAM IS ALSO
INCREDIBLY USEFUL TOOL TO GIVE
STUDENTS A FRONT ROW SEAT ON
DEMOCRACY TO LEARN ABOUT THE
PROCESS AND TO ASSEMBLYMEMBERS,
SALLY, WHAT I TELL PEOPLE, IF
YOU DON'T RUN, DON'T COMPLAIN.
BECAUSE IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE
BALLOT, YOU'RE GOING TO SHOW UP
AND VOTE. SO I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR I VOTE. OKAY. THANK YOU
. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? THANK
YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
SECOND. LET'S CALL FOR THE
QUESTION PLEASE. ON AB 2627
PELLERIN. THE MOTION IS TO PASS
AS AMENDED AND BE RE REFERRED TO
THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION.
PELLERIN, A PELLERIN, A LACKEY,
A LACKEY, I BENNETT. BERMAN, A
BERMAN I CERVANTES A SALLY NÓ A
SALLY NØ LOW. WEBER. WEBER I.
OKAY. YOUR MEASURE IS ON CALL.
OKAY GREAT. THANK YOU, THANK
YOU, THANK YOU
.
OKAY. WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR
NEXT AUTHOR. WE HAVE ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WENDY CARRILLO HERE TO
PRESENT AB 2355.
GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND
MEMBERS, FIRST, LET ME BEGIN BY
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS. AND THANK YOU TO
YOUR COMMITTEE STAFF FOR WORKING
WITH MY STAFF ON THIS POLICY. I
AM PROUD TO PRESENT AB 2355,
WHICH WILL REQUIRE A DISCLOSURE
FOR WHEN GENERATIVE AI IS IN
WHOLE OR SUBSTANTIALLY USED TO
CREATE A ELECTORAL ADVERTISING.
THE ABILITY OF TOOLS TO DOCTOR
IMAGES, VIDEO AND SOUND IS NOT
NEW. HOWEVER, RAPID IMPROVEMENTS
IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OR AI
AND LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS OR LM
LMS THAT ARE CAPABLE OF
GENERATING SOUND IMAGES AND TEXT
HAVE ALREADY RESULTED IN THE
CREATION OF MATERIALS THAT ARE
LIKELY TO PASS OFF AS
CONVINCINGLY REAL WHEN THEY ARE
INDEED FAKE. IN JANUARY OF THIS
YEAR, A ROBOCALL USING AN AI
GENERATED VOICE OF PRESIDENT JOE
BIDEN TOLD NEW HAMPSHIRE VOTERS
TO SAVE THEIR VOTES FOR NOVEMBER
RATHER THAN VOTE IN THE STATES
PRIMARY ELECTION. THE INDIVIDUAL
WHO CREATED THE AUDIO TOLD NBC
NEWS THAT IT TOOK LESS THAN 20
MINUTES AND COST ONLY ABOUT $1,
AS THIS TECHNOLOGY BECOMES
CHEAPER, FASTER AND EASIER FOR
THE PUBLIC TO USE, AND IS
EMBRACED BY CANDIDATES AND
POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS, ITS EFFECT
ON DEMOCRACY REQUIRES US TO ACT.
THERE IS A RISK, NOT JUST IN
FALSITIES, BEING PASSED OFF AS
REAL, BUT ALSO THE SPREAD OF
CYNICISM AND VOTERS COMING TO
BELIEVE THAT NOTHING, IN FACT IS
REAL IN THIS NEW ENVIRONMENT.
SENSIBLE REGULATIONS THAT
PROTECT FREE POLITICAL
EXPRESSION AND SPEECH ARE VITAL
TO GET AHEAD OF THIS NEW
TECHNOLOGY, THE LEGISLATURE WILL
BE EVALUATING A NUMBER OF BILLS
THIS YEAR THAT AIM TO GET AHEAD
OF THE IMPACTS OF GENERATED AI,
AI AND LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS
WILL UNDOUBTEDLY HAVE OUR
SOCIETY THAT WILL UNDOUBTEDLY
HAVE AN IMPACT ON OUR SOCIETY
AND OUR DAILY LIVES. THESE
CONVERSATIONS ARE NECESSARY.
NECESSARY BECAUSE WE KNOW WE
WANT TO BE INTENTIONAL AND NOT
CAUGHT OFF GUARD WHEN IT COMES
TO THE IMPACTS OF IMPROVING
TECHNOLOGY AND WHAT I MEANS
CURRENTLY AND IN THE FUTURE.
HERE TO TALK MORE ABOUT THE NEED
OF THIS BILL IS TRACY ROSENBERG
WITH OAKLAND PRIVACY ARE OKAY.
GOOD MORNING. CHAIR PELLERIN AND
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS TRACY
ROSENBERG AND I AM WITH OAKLAND
PRIVACY, A REGIONAL COALITION
THAT FOCUSES ON REGULATIONS AND
GUARDRAILS TO PROTECT THE RIGHT
TO PRIVACY. AB 2355 COMES AS
WE'RE FACING THE DEPLOYMENT OF A
NEW AND TRANSFORMATIONAL
TECHNOLOGY THAT PROMISES TO
REDEFINE WHAT WE CALL PRIVACY,
AND THERE ARE MANY AI BILLS IN
FRONT OF THE LEGISLATURE THIS
YEAR. A NUMBER OF THEM ARE
EXTREMELY COMPLEX, AND WE WOULD
SAY PERHAPS ARE TRYING TO DO TOO
MANY THINGS AT ONCE. AB 2355
DOES NOT SUFFER FROM THAT
PROBLEM. IT SEEKS TO HELP VOTERS
TRY TO DISTINGUISH WHAT IS REAL
AND WHAT IS NOT, AS THEY TRY TO
MAKE UP THEIR MINDS ABOUT HOW TO
VOTE. BUT THE BILL REQUIRES THAT
SYNTHETIC PAID POLITICAL
ADVERTISEMENTS JUST BE LABELED
AS SUCH. AND THIS PROVISION IS
REALLY SIMILAR AND IS STRUCTURED
IN THE SAME MANNER AS OTHER SORT
OF LONG STANDING CALIFORNIA LAWS
THAT FOCUS ON DISCLOSURE FOR
PAID POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENTS,
LIKE SOURCES OF FUNDING, SO IT'S
KIND OF A FAMILIAR MODEL THAT IS
BEING SORT OF REUSED TO MEET
WITH THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY. IF THE
LABELING DOESN'T HAPPEN, ANY
VOTER CAN SEEK AN INJUNCTION TO
REMOVE THE UNLABELED CONTENT.
BUT THIS IS IMPORTANT. THEY HAVE
TO GO TO A JUDGE. SO THE
DECISIONS WITH FIRST AMENDMENT
RAMIFICATIONS ARE MADE BY A
TRAINED JUDGE. AND INTERPRETING
AND APPLYING CONSTITUTIONAL LAW,
AND THE PUSH AND PULL BETWEEN
THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND THE NEED
TO PROTECT VOTERS FROM
INTENTIONALLY DECEPTIVE CONTENT.
WE ALSO APPRECIATE THE FOCUS IN
TWO, THREE, FIVE, FIVE ON TRYING
TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND GET THE
DECEPTIVE CONTENT OUT OF THERE,
RATHER THAN ASSESSING FINES AND
FEES AND PENALTIES. WE HOPE YOU
WILL SUPPORT AB 2355 AND THANK
YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK
TO YOU TODAY. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. ARE THERE ANY OTHER FOLKS
WHO WANT TO ADD THEIR SUPPORT TO
THIS BILL? HI. GOOD MORNING,
KARA BINDER WITH THE COMPUTER
AND COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION. WE ARE TAKING A
SUPPORTIVE, AMENDED POSITION ON
THIS BILL AND LOOK FORWARD TO
WORKING WITH THE AUTHOR'S OFFICE
FURTHER. DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON
BEHALF OF TECHNET, ALSO IN
SUPPORT OF AMENDED. LOOK FORWARD
TO WORKING WITH THE AUTHOR ON
THIS BILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY PRIMARY WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION TO THE BILL?
ANYBODY WHO JUST WANTS TO STATE
THEIR NAME IN OPPOSITION. OKAY,
I'LL BRING IT TO THE COMMITTEE.
ANY QUESTIONS, MR. LUCKY? YES.
HOW WOULD YOU EXCUSE ME? HOW
WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THE POINT
THAT IT STATED THAT IT'S ALREADY
AGAINST THE LAW TO USE PHOTOSHOP
OR ANY KIND OF DECEPTIVE AD
ALREADY? IS THERE A DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN PHOTOSHOP AND DEEPFAKES,
WHICH IS ACTUALLY WHAT AI IS?
HOW WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THAT?
PHOTOSHOP? THANK YOU FOR THE
QUESTION. ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
PHOTOSHOP IS A TOOL USED BY A
HUMAN BEING BEHIND A COMPUTER.
AI IS A SOFTWARE THAT IS DONE
INTERNALLY GIVEN DIRECTIONS BY
WHOEVER IS GIVEN THE DIRECTION
OF WHAT AN IMAGE SHOULD LOOK
LIKE. IT DOES NOT HAVE
NECESSARILY THE INPUT THAT A
PHOTOSHOPPED IMAGE WOULD HAVE,
AND SO THE CONCERN WITH THE BILL
IS THAT WE ARE ACTUALLY SEEING
MORE, OR THE REASON WHY WE'RE
DOING THE BILL IS A CONCERN THAT
MORE AI GENERATED CONTENT IS
BEING USED TO PASS OFF AS REAL,
WHEN IN FACT IT'S NOT. AND SO
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
AIRBRUSHING A PIMPLE OR
AIRBRUSHING A HAIR OUT OF YOUR
FACE, OR MAYBE PUTTING TREES
BEHIND AN IMAGE. AND IT'S QUITE
ANOTHER TO CREATE FAKE
INDIVIDUALS, THAT SEEM TO APPEAR
TO BE ACTUAL HUMAN BEINGS. THANK
YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR.
BERMAN? YEAH. I, THANK THE
AUTHOR FOR BRINGING FORWARD THE
BILL. I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT,
TODAY, I WOULD I WOULD
RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH WITH
THE WITNESS, THAT I THINK THAT
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO GO
FURTHER THAN WHAT'S IN THE BILL.
THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE THAT
THIS IS A SIMPLE,
STRAIGHTFORWARD BILL, AND THERE
ARE OTHER BILLS THAT ARE A
LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED. I THINK
THIS IS A TERRIBLY COMPLICATED
PROBLEM THAT NEEDS A VERY
COMPLICATED SOLUTION, AND SO,
AND I OBVIOUSLY THINK THAT
BECAUSE I HAVE A BILL, THAT DOES
THAT, THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE
TALKING ABOUT A LITTLE BIT LATER
ON THIS MORNING. AND SO, I THINK
THERE'S SOME OVERLAP, IN OUR
BILLS. AND THEN I THINK THERE'S
ALSO SOME COMPLIMENTS IN OUR
BILLS, AND SO, YOU KNOW,
DEFINITELY SUPPORT, THE, THE
GOAL THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO
ACCOMPLISH, JUST WANT TO KIND OF
STATE ON THE RECORD THAT I THINK
WE NEED TO DO MORE THAN THIS AS
WELL TO ADDRESS THE, THE REAL
CONCERN OF, MISINFORMATION,
DISINFORMATION, MANIPULATED
MEDIA, WITH THE INTENT OF
DECEIVING VOTERS, BUT APPRECIATE
THE BILL AND HAPPY TO SUPPORT
IT. THANK YOU. THANK ASSEMBLY
MEMBER SALIH. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR, YEAH, I, I SHARE THE
OPPOSITION'S CONCERNS WITH THE
FIRST AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS. I
THINK THIS BILL GOES TOO FAR IN
EXTENDING LIABILITY TO
PUBLISHERS AND PEOPLE WHO ARE
NOT INVOLVED IN DIRECTLY
CREATING THE CONTENT. I DON'T
THINK IT'S FAIR. AND I ALSO, I
GET REALLY CONCERNED WHEN I HEAR
PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT SAY THINGS
LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO PROTECT US
FROM DISINFORMATION. THE
GOVERNMENT IS NOT THE ARBITER OF
TRUTH. YOU ARE THE PEOPLE ARE
THE GOVERNMENT'S NOT IN THE
BUSINESS OF SAYING WHAT'S FACT
AND WHAT'S FICTION. SO I'M VERY
CONCERNED WITH EFFORTS TO CHILL
FREE SPEECH. IT'S VERY, IT'S
VERY ANTI DEMOCRATIC. SO FOR
THAT, I WON'T BE OPPOSING THIS
BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S
NARROWLY TAILORED ENOUGH TO
GUARD AGAINST, VIOLATIONS OF THE
FIRST AMENDMENT. BUT THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM
COMMITTEE MEMBERS? COMMENTS
SEEING AND HEARING. NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CARILLO YOU MAY CLOSE. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I LOOK FORWARD
TO THE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
STAKEHOLDERS AS THIS BILL
ADVANCES TO ENSURE THAT THE
STRONGEST POSSIBLE EFFORTS TO
PRESERVE FREE EXPRESSION WHILE
ENSURING THAT CALIFORNIANS HAVE
FAITH IN THEIR DEMOCRACY
CONTINUES TO BE, AT THE AT THE
FOREFRONT OF THE CONVERSATION.
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AN I VOTE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE, YOU
KNOW, WE HAVE JUST BEGUN A
MONUMENTAL ELECTION YEAR, AND WE
DO SO WITH OUR DEMOCRACY ALREADY
WEAKENED, WITH TRUST IN
INSTITUTIONS AND MEDIA AT ALL
TIME LOWS, WITH TRUTH UNDER
ASSAULT AND WITH DEEP VOTER
PARTICIPATION DISPARITIES
LEAVING CERTAIN COMMUNITIES OUT
OF OUR ELECTORATE. AND THIS
CHALLENGING LANDSCAPE, WE
CONFRONT OUR FIRST AI ELECTION,
WHERE GENERATIVE AI DEEPFAKES
WITH WILL FLOOD POLITICAL
DISCOURSE, LEAVING VOTERS
UNCERTAIN ABOUT THE AUTHENTICITY
OF IMAGES, AUDIO AND VIDEOS.
EASY TO ACCESS TOOLS AND POWER
CAMPAIGNS, CONSPIRACY THEORISTS,
FOREIGN ENTITIES AND ONLINE
TROLLS TO DECEIVE AND
DESTABILIZE OUR INFORMATION
NETWORKS. INSTANCES OF
GENERATIVE AI, DEEPFAKES AND
DISINFORMATION HAVE ALREADY
INFLUENCED ELECTIONS GLOBALLY,
INCLUDING BANGLADESH AND
SLOVAKIA, DOMESTICALLY AND
CHICAGO. AS YOU POINTED OUT AND
ELSEWHERE, THE AMERICAN PUBLIC
REMAINS ILL PREPARED FOR THIS
EVOLVING THREAT. HERE'S WHAT WE
KNOW ABOUT AI THE TECHNOLOGY IS
CHANGING RAPIDLY. THIS IS THE
FIRST TOOL IN HUMAN HISTORY THAT
CAN MAKE DECISIONS BY ITSELF.
REMEMBER OPEN THE POD BAY DOORS,
HAL. THIS IS THE FIRST TOOL IN
HUMAN HISTORY THAT CAN CREATE
NEW IDEAS BY ITSELF. WE ARE
LEARNING TO USE AI AND IT IS
LEARNING TO USE US. ITS
POTENTIAL TO DISRUPT HUMAN
SOCIETY IS IMMENSE. FROM
ECONOMICS TO DEMOCRACY. WE HAVE
THREE BILLS BEFORE US TODAY THAT
ADDRESS THE ISSUE AND IMPACTS OF
AI ON OUR ELECTIONS. OUR VERY
DEMOCRACY. I BELIEVE WE NEED TO
ADDRESS THE POTENTIAL OF
DIGITALLY CREATED IMAGES, AUDIO
AND VIDEOS THAT ARE MATERIALLY
DECEPTIVE AND WITH ROBUST
REGULATION OF ITS DEPLOYMENT. I
HAVE A BILL ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BERMAN HAS A BILL. AND THANK
YOU, ASSEMBLY MEMBER CARRILLO,
FOR YOUR BILL. AB 2355, AS
AMENDED, APPLIES TO MATERIALS
THAT WERE GENERATED IN WHOLE OR
SUBSTANTIALLY USING AI TO TARGET
THOSE DECEPTIVE MATERIALS. WE
DON'T WANT OUR VOTERS TO GET
DISCLAIMER FATIGUE, SO WE WANT
TO USE THAT DISCLAIMER ONLY WHEN
NECESSARY TO ENCOURAGE VOTERS TO
QUESTION WHAT THEY ARE SEEING
AND HEARING. I BELIEVE WE DO
NEED TO DEFEND OUR DEMOCRACY
WITH MORE, MORE THAN WITH THAN
JUST DISCLAIMERS. BUT AS STATED
EARLIER, AI IS CHANGING RAPIDLY
AND WE NEED AN ARMY TO ENSURE IT
DOES NOT DESTROY OUR DEMOCRACY.
SO THEREFORE, I SUPPORT ALL
THESE BILLS RELATED TO AI MOVING
OUT OF THIS COMMITTEE TO BE
FURTHER STUDIED AND DEBATED IN
THEIR FUTURE COMMITTEES, AND,
AND SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION
ON THIS BILL. I'LL MOVE IT. MOVE
BY BERMAN SECONDED BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER WEBER. AND SECRETARY, YOU
MAY CALL THE ROLL AB 2355 BY
WENDY CARRILLO. THE MOTION IS
DUE PASS AS AMENDED, AND BE RE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION.
PELLERIN I, PELLERIN I, LACKEY
I, LACKEY I, BENNETT BERMAN I,
BERMAN I CERVANTES EASILY KNOW
EASILY KNOW FLO WEBER WEBER I.
DO YOU WANT TO PUT IT ON CALL.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT ON
CALL. BUT AND IT WOULD BE DO
PASS AS AMENDED TO PRIVACY AND
CONSUMER PROTECTION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. NEXT. YEAH. I MIGHT
HAVE TO DO ONE RUN AWAY AND THEN
DO THE OTHER. OKAY I JUST WANT
YOU TO KNOW. 20. CALL. OKAY.
LET'S SEE. SO WE'RE GOING TO DO,
2642 THE PEACE ACT. OKAY YOU MAY
BEGIN. WE'LL SEE IF I HAVE TIME
TO DO THE OTHER ONE BEFORE
RUNNING TO A PROBES. I KNOW I
GOT TO GET THERE TOO. FIRST, I
WOULD LIKE TO THANK COMMITTEE
STAFF FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS
BILL. I WILL BE ACCEPTING THE
AMENDMENTS THAT ARE OUTLINED IN
THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS. DUE TO
THE ALARMING RISE IN THREATS AND
ATTACKS AGAINST ELECTION AND
POLL WORKERS, THERE'S BEEN A
NATIONWIDE EXODUS OF WORKERS
FROM THE JOB IN THE 2024
ELECTION, 44% OF VOTERS IN
CALIFORNIA WILL HAVE A DIFFERENT
ELECTION ADMINISTRATOR THAN THEY
HAD IN THE 2020 ELECTION IN THE
PEACE ACT, WHICH IS THE
PROTECTING ELECTIONS FROM ARMED
COERCION AND EXTREMISM ACT,
WOULD STRENGTHEN AND SUPPLEMENT
CALIFORNIA'S EXISTING ANTI
INTIMIDATION LAWS BY PROVIDING
EXPLICIT CIVIL PROTECTIONS FOR
BOTH ELECTION WORKERS AND FOR
VOTERS. ADDITIONALLY AB 2642
WOULD CREATE AN IMPORTANT
PRESUMPTION THAT PEOPLE WHO
OPENLY CARRY FIREARMS AROUND
ELECTION ACTIVITIES DO SO FOR
THE PURPOSE OF INTIMIDATION. A
VOTER OR ELECTION OFFICIAL THAT
FEELS OR FELT THREATENED,
INTIMIDATED, OR COERCED WOULD BE
ABLE TO SEEK EQUITABLE RELIEF.
CALIFORNIA HAS LONG BEEN AT THE
FOREFRONT OF STRENGTHENING
ELECTION SECURITY AND
ACCESSIBILITY. THIS BILL IS A
CONTINUATION OF CALIFORNIA'S
ESSENTIAL PRO-DEMOCRACY EFFORTS
BY PROVIDING CRITICAL LEGAL
PROTECTIONS TO VOTERS AND
ELECTION WORKERS. I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE, AND WITH ME
TODAY ARE ROBIN SANDERS WITH THE
BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND
DORA ROSE FROM THE LEAGUE OF
WOMEN VOTERS. YOU EACH HAVE TWO
MINUTES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, MADAM CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS ROBIN SANDERS, AND I'M
AN ATTORNEY AT THE BRENNAN
CENTER FOR JUSTICE, WHICH IS AN
ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO
PROTECTING AND STRENGTHENING
DEMOCRACY. I OFFER OUR SUPPORT
OF AB 2642. CALIFORNIA WOULD BE
THE FIRST STATE IN THE COUNTRY
TO ENACT A LAW THAT EXPLICITLY
EMPOWERS ELECTION OFFICIALS TO
SUE AND SEEK MONETARY DAMAGES OR
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF IF THEY
EXPERIENCE INTIMIDATION OR
THREATS AS A RESULT OF DOING
THEIR JOB. THIS CAN BE A
SIGNIFICANT DETERRENT AGAINST
INTIMIDATION, ABUSE, AND
HARASSMENT. THE BILL WOULD ALSO
MAKE CALIFORNIA THE FIRST STATE
TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE INTIMIDATING
EFFECT OF OPENLY CARRIED
FIREARMS IN VOTING AND ELECTION
SETTINGS. THIS BILL IS ALSO
SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE IT
RECOGNIZES THE HISTORICAL
TARGETING OF BLACK AMERICANS AND
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR THROUGH
INTIMIDATING AND OTHER VIOLENT
SCHEMES TO SUPPRESS THEIR
POLITICAL POWER AND SILENCE
THEIR VOICES. ALTHOUGH
CALIFORNIA ALREADY PROHIBITS
GUNS AT THE POLLS, SOME
COMMUNITIES IN CALIFORNIA HAVE
ALREADY EXPRESSED LONG
EXPERIENCE THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT
OR ELECTED OFFICIALS
UNWILLINGNESS TO ENFORCE GUN
LAWS THAT THEY DISLIKE. THIS CAN
LEAVE BLACK AMERICANS AND PEOPLE
OF COLOR VULNERABLE AND
UNPROTECTED. CRITICALLY, THIS
LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE THEM. THOSE
WHO HAVE ENDURED A PATTERN OF
BRUTALIZATION AT THE HANDS OF
LAW ENFORCEMENT TO RELY ON LAW
ENFORCEMENT TO PROTECT
THEMSELVES AGAINST UNLAWFUL ACTS
OF INTIMIDATION AND VIOLENCE.
THIS WOULD ADDRESS A DEEP ROOTED
PROBLEM STEMMING FROM AMERICA'S
LEGACY OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
IN ELECTIONS AND EMPOWERS THOSE
WHO ARE MOST VULNERABLE TO THE
HARMS THAT THIS BILL OUTLAWS. IN
CONCLUSION, AB 2642 PROVIDES
CALIFORNIA A LEADER FOR OTHER
STATES IN MANY WAYS WITH ANOTHER
ESSENTIAL TOOL IN ITS TOOLBOX TO
ENSURE OUR ELECTIONS REMAIN
PEACEFUL AND DEMOCRATIC. THANK
YOU. AND I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
YOUR AYE VOTE FOR THIS BILL.
MORNING, CHAIR MEMBERS, I'M DORA
ROSE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR WITH THE
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF
CALIFORNIA, A PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION FOR ELECTION INTIMIDATION
WOULD BE A REALLY IMPORTANT NEW
LEGAL TOOL TO PROTECT ONE OF OUR
MOST FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS. YOU
KNOW, WE'RE ALL HERE BECAUSE WE
BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY, RIGHT? WE
BELIEVE IN THE RULE OF LAW.
THAT'S OUR BREAD AND BUTTER IN
THIS, IN IN THIS, IN THIS
BUILDING. AND WHAT DEFINES
DEMOCRACY ARE ELECTIONS THAT ARE
FREE FROM VIOLENCE, FREE FROM
THREATS. THREE FREE FROM
INTIMIDATION. IN FACT, IT IS THE
ONE THING THAT REALLY SEPARATES
DEMOCRACY FROM AUTOCRACY. AND,
YOU KNOW, MAKE NO MISTAKE, EVERY
DICTATORSHIP HAS ELECTIONS,
EVERY DICTATORSHIP HAS
ELECTIONS. WHAT DISTINGUISHES
THEM FROM US IS THAT WE CAN VOTE
WITHOUT FEAR THAT,
UNFORTUNATELY, IS STARTING TO
SHIFT. THAT FUNDAMENTAL PROMISE
OF AMERICANS BEING ABLE TO VOTE
WITHOUT FEAR, THAT IS STARTING
TO SHIFT A PRIVATE RIGHT OF
ACTION IS THE SINGLE MOST
EFFECTIVE TOOL FOR DISCOURAGING
SOCIALLY DESTRUCTIVE BEHAVIOR
AND CIVIL SOCIETY. AND WHAT AB
2642 DOES IS TO USE THIS TOOL TO
SAFEGUARD DEMOCRACY ITSELF.
STUDIES SHOW THAT, AS WAS
INDICATED BY ROBIN, THAT SOME
PEOPLE DON'T FEEL SAFE AT THE
POLLING PLACES, ESPECIALLY
LATINO, BLACK AND YOUNG VOTERS.
AND AS YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD,
THIS HARKENS BACK TO JIM CROW,
THE TERROR OF JIM CROW. ELECTION
INTIMIDATION IS MAKING A
COMEBACK IN CALIFORNIA. WE HAVE
THE CHANCE TO STOP IT. IT'S NOT
JUST VOTERS THAT ARE IMPACTED BY
THIS ATMOSPHERE OF INTIMIDATION.
IT'S ELECTION ADMINISTRATORS AS
WELL. AND IT'S THE THOUSANDS OF
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTER MEMBERS
AND OTHER CIVICALLY MINDED
PEOPLE WHO WAKE UP IN THOSE WE
HOURS OF ELECTION DAY AND MAKE
THEIR WAY, MAKE THEIR PILGRIMAGE
TO THE POLLS TO ACT AS POLL
WORKERS. ELECTION JOBS ARE
REALLY MODESTLY PAID. THEY
REQUIRE LONG, HARD HOURS THAT
ARE DIFFICULT. AND IN AN
INCREASINGLY POLITICALLY CHARGED
ATMOSPHERE, ONCE YOU ADD
INTIMIDATION AND THE THREAT OF
VIOLENCE TO THAT EQUATION, IT'S
A RARE PERSON WHO'S GOING TO
WANT TO TAKE UP THE JOB. AS
YOU'VE HEARD FROM ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BERMAN, WE'VE HEARD A
LOT. WE HAVE LOST A HUGE NUMBER
OF OUR MOST EXPERIENCED ELECTION
WORKERS RIGHT OVER THE RECENT
YEARS. IN 2024, WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE 44% OF OUR ADMINISTRATORS
IN CALIFORNIA TO BE NEW TO THE
JOB. THINK ABOUT THAT. ONCE YOU
START LOSING THAT EXPERIENCE,
BASE ELECTIONS ARE GOING TO
BECOME MORE CONFUSED, MORE
CHAOTIC, MORE UNPREDICTABLE, AND
THOSE WHO WANT TO UPEND OUR
DEMOCRACY WILL HAVE ACCOMPLISHED
THEIR OBJECTIVES BY THE SIMPLE
ACT OF FOMENTING FEAR. AB 2642
IS GOING TO GIVE ORDINARY PEOPLE
A WAY TO FIGHT BACK AND TO
PROTECT OUR RIGHT TO VOTE IN
PEACE. WE SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM WHO
WOULD LIKE TO REGISTER THEIR
SUPPORT? YOUR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION, PLEASE. GOOD
MORNING, JAMIE MINER, ON BEHALF
OF THE GIFFORDS LAW CENTER TO
PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE, A PROUD
CO-SPONSOR OF THE BILL AND
REALLY APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS.
PLEASE DO SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING. RUTH DAWSON WITH
THE ACLU CALIFORNIA ACTION AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ANDY LEE
BIRNBAUM, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
PROUD SUPPORTER AND CHAU WITH
THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT DANIEL
PEARL ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AND STRONG
SUPPORT. JESSA COOPER,
VOLUNTEER, MOMS DEMAND ACTION IN
SUPPORT CHERYL DAVIS, VOLUNTEER
WITH MOMS DEMAND ACTION IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ARE
THERE ANY PRIMARY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL? SEEING
NONE, ANYONE IN OPPOSITION THAT
JUST WANTS TO REGISTER THEIR
NAME AND AFFILIATION? SEEING
NONE. I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE, MISTER LACKEY. YEAH.
FIRST OF ALL, LET ME SAY THAT I
DO SUPPORT THE IDEA OF
PROTECTING ELECTION OFFICIALS
FROM HARM AND INTIMIDATION. BUT
I BELIEVE THAT A PUBLIC, A PRA
IS A TOOL TO DEMAND TRANSPARENCY
AND DEMOCRACY ENCOURAGES
TRANSPARENCY. IT'S A VERY, VERY,
VERY INTEGRAL PART OF DEMOCRACY
IS BEING TRANSPARENT. AND I
THINK IT'S UNACCEPTABLE FOR
SOMEONE TO BE WORRIED. WE TALK
ABOUT WORRYING SOMEONE BEING
WORRIED TO BEING SUED FOR PILING
UP, FOR FILING A PRA REQUEST. I
FIND THAT TO BE DISTASTEFUL. AND
SO THEREFORE I CAN'T SUPPORT
THIS MEASURE. THANK YOU, MR.
VICE CHAIR. I APPRECIATE YOUR
CONCERNS. I WOULD ARGUE THIS
BILL IS VERY NARROWLY TAILORED
TO ADDRESS LEGITIMATE THREATS OF
VOTER INTIMIDATION. NOT TO YOUR
POINT. REASONABLE PUBLIC RECORDS
REQUESTS. UNDER THIS BILL, THE
INDIVIDUAL WOULD NEED TO PROVE
THE REQUESTS ARE INTIMIDATING,
NOT MERELY SEEKING GOVERNMENT
TRANSPARENCY. SO I AGREE WITH
THE POINTS THAT YOU MADE. HAPPY
TO CONTINUE CHATTING WITH YOU,
TO SEE IF THERE, AMENDMENTS THAT
WE CAN MAKE TO THE BILL TO
ADDRESS YOUR CONCERN WITHOUT,
YOU KNOW, WEAKENING THE
UNDERLYING INTENT. I JUST THINK
THAT'S A DANGEROUS DISTINCTION.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU DRAW
THE LINE, SO. THANK YOU.
UNDERSTOOD ASSEMBLY MEMBER SALIH
, THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I HAVE
A FEW QUESTIONS, JUST PICKING UP
ON MY COLLEAGUE THERE, IT IS
STATED IN YOUR PREAMBLE HERE
THAT EXAMPLES OF INTIMIDATION
INCLUDE INUNDATING ELECTION
OFFICIALS WITH PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT REQUESTS. SO IS IT YOUR
TESTIMONY THAT IN ORDER TO BE
FOUND IN VIOLATION OF THIS, YOU
HAVE TO HAVE THE INTENT TO
INTIMIDATE? BECAUSE IT WAS
UNCLEAR TO ME IN YOUR BILL OF
WHETHER WHAT THE MENS REA, WHAT
THE INTENT REQUIREMENT IS OF THE
PERSON WHO'S BEING ACCUSED OF
THIS. YEAH. SO THAT'S
UNDOUBTEDLY A LONGER
CONVERSATION THAT I'LL HAVE IN
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, WHERE THE
BILL WILL GO IF THIS BILL PASSES
OUT OF THE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE.
BUT HAPPY TO DEFER, TO MY
SPONSORS IF THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL
THOUGHTS ON THAT. BUT IT IS, YOU
KNOW, CLEAR THAT THE INTENT IS
FOR IT TO BE INTIMIDATING, NOT
JUST, ANNOYING, BUT ACTUALLY
INTIMIDATING, PUBLIC RECORDS
REQUESTS. YEAH, I CAN ELABORATE
ON THAT. SO I AGREE WITH BOTH OF
YOU THAT PUBLIC RECORDS ACT
REQUESTS ARE PROTECTED FORM OF
FREE SPEECH, AND THAT IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR INDIVIDUALS TO BE
ABLE TO SEEK GOVERNMENT
TRANSPARENCY, BUT OUR POSITION
IS THAT WE BELIEVE COURTS ARE
FULLY CAPABLE OF DISTINGUISHING
BETWEEN, IN GOOD FAITH,
LEGITIMATE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT
REQUESTS AND THOSE THAT ARE
INTENDED TO INTIMIDATE AND
HARASS. AND SO, IN THE INQUIRY,
IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR THE
COURT TO LOOK AT THAT AND TO SEE
IF IT ACTUALLY DID HAVE AN
INTIMIDATING EFFECT, SO WE THINK
THAT COURTS ARE FULLY CAPABLE OF
MAKING THAT DISTINCTION. THE
LANGUAGE YOU GUYS USE IS REALLY
SCARY. I MEAN, BECAUSE IN YOUR
OPENING REMARKS, ASSEMBLYMAN,
YOU SAID IF AN ELECTION WORKER
FEELS OR FELT THREATENED AND YOU
JUST SAID IF IT HAS AN
INTIMIDATING EFFECT. BUT HOLD
ON, THAT IS REALLY CONCERNING TO
ME BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING
AT IS HOW SOMEONE RECEIVES OR
PERCEIVES COMMENTS OR ACTIONS OF
OTHERS, NOT WHAT'S IN THE
PERSON'S INTENT. AND THAT'S
GENERALLY WHEN WE DO CRIMINAL
LAW, WE FOCUS ON THE PERSON'S
INTENT, THEIR MENS REA. NOT NOT
THAT. SO I DO HAVE I DO HAVE TWO
CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. BUT LET ME
LET ME MOVE ON TO SOME OTHER
QUESTIONS, YOU GUYS HAVE MADE
SOME REALLY, REALLY SERIOUS
ALLEGATIONS THAT PEOPLE ARE
BEING INTIMIDATED FROM VOTING,
ESPECIALLY BASED ON RACE OR
OTHER CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE
PROTECTED. DO YOU HAVE ANY
EXAMPLES OF THAT IN CALIFORNIA,
WHERE THAT THAT HAS HAPPENED
RECENTLY? BECAUSE I'M NOT AWARE
OF THAT. AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW
ABOUT IT. I DON'T HAVE SPECIFIC
EXAMPLES, HANDY ABOUT
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE GONE ON THE
RECORD AND SAID THEY'RE
INTIMIDATED IN CALIFORNIA FROM
VOTING, BUT AS I STATED IN MY
OPENING REMARKS, THAT'S BEEN
HISTORICAL, THERE'S HISTORICAL
EVIDENCE OF THAT, AND THERE'S
STILL CONTEMPORARY EVIDENCE,
THAT INDIVIDUALS OF COLOR AND
COMMUNITIES OF COLOR HAVE BEEN
INTIMIDATED, WHEN THEY'RE
VOTING. AND AS I SAID, THERE'S A
DOCUMENTED, LONG DOCUMENTED
HISTORY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, NOT
PROPERLY ENFORCING LAWS TO
PROTECT INDIVIDUALS FROM THAT
INTIMIDATION. THÀNH I HAVE LET
ME I LIKE TO ALSO TO RESPOND TO
YOUR QUESTION. THANK YOU, MR.
SEELEY. I ALSO THINK THAT THERE
ARE DEFINITELY EXAMPLES IN OTHER
STATES RECENTLY IN RECENT
ELECTIONS, AND I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT FOR CALIFORNIA LAW TO
TRY TO LOOK OUT ACROSS THE
COUNTRY TO IDENTIFY WHAT MIGHT
BE COMING OUR WAY AND TO GET
AHEAD OF IT AND SO YOU'VE SEEN
THIS IN NEIGHBORING STATES. I
BELIEVE THERE WERE INSTANCES IN
ARIZONA IN 2020 AND 2022, YOU'VE
SEEN THIS, I BELIEVE, POSSIBLY
IN GEORGIA IN 2020 AS WELL. AND
SO I THINK THIS IS A REAL AND
LEGITIMATE THREAT IN, IN THE
UNITED STATES. AND ONE THAT I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
CALIFORNIA LAW PROTECTS
CALIFORNIA VOTERS BEFORE IT
HAPPENS HERE. HISTORICALLY, NO
DOUBT, THERE HAS BEEN
INTIMIDATION ON BLACK VOTERS AND
OTHER VOTERS. THAT'S NO DOUBT.
MY CONCERN IS IT'S SORT OF THE
NARRATIVE OF THIS BILL AND THE
PRESENTATION IS SOMEHOW THAT
THIS IS HAPPENING IN CALIFORNIA
AND I JUST I THINK CALIFORNIA,
WE ACTUALLY DO A REALLY GOOD JOB
OF PROTECTING PEOPLE'S CIVIL
RIGHTS. AND SO I DON'T I DON'T
WANT TO PUT A FALSE NARRATIVE
OUT THERE THAT THERE ARE CASES
WHERE PEOPLE ARE BEING
INTIMIDATED FROM VOTING BASED ON
THEIR RACE. I DON'T WANT TO
SCARE PEOPLE. IF THAT'S NOT
HAPPENING IN CALIFORNIA. YEAH,
YEAH. AND SO THAT'S MY CONCERN
ON THAT. UNDERSTOOD WHAT I WANT
TO SAY TOO, ALSO, I THINK THESE
CONCERNS ARE MITIGATED BECAUSE
NOW ALMOST EVERYONE IS VOTING BY
MAIL, RIGHT? IN CALIFORNIA. I
MEAN, THIS LAST ELECTION, I MEAN
TOOK A MONTH TO, TO COUNT, THE
PRIMARIES. SO THAT'S ANOTHER
LEVEL WHERE, YOU KNOW, THAT
ELIMINATES ANY POTENTIAL
COERCION BECAUSE THERE'S NO
LONGER PEOPLE COLLECTING AT A
SPECIFIC PLACE TO VOTE, LIKE A
POLLING PLACE. I UNDERSTAND
THEY'RE STILL VOTING CENTERS AND
PEOPLE CAN GO THERE, BUT,
PRIMARILY MOST PEOPLE ARE VOTING
BY MAIL NOW. AND, YOU KNOW, MY
OVERALL COMMENT IS I THINK
EVERYTHING YOU'VE DESCRIBED IS
ALREADY ILLEGAL FROM MY
PERSPECTIVE. I MEAN, YOU HAVE
ELECTION CODE SECTION 18502A,
WHICH PROTECTS INTIMIDATION OF
ELECTION WORKERS. THAT'S ALREADY
A FELONY. AS YOU MENTIONED, IT'S
ALREADY A CRIME TO OPENLY CARRY
A WEAPON AT A VOTING CENTER. AND
SO I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT ALL OF
THIS IS NECESSARY, AND I DO I'M
VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE FIRST
AMENDMENT, THE RIGHT TO PETITION
YOUR GOVERNMENT FOR GRIEVANCES,
THAT ALSO WHAT SEPARATES US FROM
DICTATORSHIPS IS BEING ABLE TO,
COMPLAIN AND SEEK, GRIEVANCES
FROM YOUR GOVERNMENT WITHOUT
FEAR OR INTIMIDATION, THAT
YOU'RE GOING TO BE SUED BY A
GOVERNMENT WORKER. I MEAN,
YOU'RE WEAPONIZING GOVERNMENT
WORKERS AGAINST THE CITIZENS OF
THE STATE. SO FOR THAT REASON, I
WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS
BILL. BUT, I APPRECIATE YOU YOU
GUYS BEING HERE. THANK YOU.
THANKS. AND I THINK WITNESS HAS
ONE COMMENT. YEAH. I WANTED TO
ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THINGS. SO
THIS BILL IS ACTUALLY
DISTINGUISHABLE FROM OTHER LAWS
THAT ARE ON THE BOOKS. I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE BOTH
CRIMINAL AND CIVIL PROTECTIONS
AGAINST INTIMIDATION. AS YOU
KNOW, THIS IS A CIVIL CAUSE OF
ACTION. SO IT IS DISTINGUISHABLE
AND ONE OF THE MAIN FEATURES OF
THIS BILL IS THAT IT ALLOWS FOR
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE VICTIMS,
INCLUDING ELECTION OFFICIALS AND
ELECTION WORKERS, AS WELL AS
VOTERS, TO HAVE A PRIVATE RIGHT
OF ACTION TO ENFORCE THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS BILL.
CRIMINAL LAWS, AS YOU KNOW, ARE
CAN ONLY BE ENFORCED BY THOSE
WHO ARE TASKED WITH THAT ROLE.
AND SO IT IS AN IMPORTANT
DISTINCTION THAT THIS CREATES A
CIVIL CAUSE OF ACTION AND A
PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION. AND IT
ALSO EMPOWERS THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL TO FILE PUBLIC SUITS ON
BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC. AND THEN
TO YOUR POINT ABOUT, THE
INTIMIDATION OR THE PRIVATE
RIGHT OF ACTION, PRIVATE, PRA
REQUESTS, IT IS IMPORTANT AGAIN,
TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS LAW
DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING ABOUT
EXISTING PRA LAWS. SO PEOPLE ARE
STILL ABLE TO SEEK PUBLIC
RECORDS IF THEY SO CHOOSE.
INDIVIDUALS ARE STILL, OBVIOUSLY
INDIVIDUALS IF THEY BELIEVE THAT
THE RECORD, THE REQUESTS ARE
EXCESSIVE AND THAT THEY ARE
INTIMIDATING OR HARASSING, THEY
DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO FILE AN
ACTION. BUT AGAIN, COURTS ARE
PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF
DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THOSE
THAT ARE LEGITIMATE AND THOSE
THAT ARE HARASSING. BUT, MA'AM,
HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SUED? IT'S A
IT IS NOT AN EASY I MEAN, IF YOU
HAVE THE GOVERNMENT THAT SAYS WE
THINK YOU'RE FILING TOO MANY
PARAS AND YOU HAVE TO DEFEND
YOURSELF IN COURT, THAT IS NOT I
MEAN, A LOT OF PEOPLE, FRANKLY,
WON'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD AN
ATTORNEY. THEY HAVE TO DEFEND
THEMSELVES IN COURT AND THEY GOT
TO MAKE LEGAL ARGUMENTS TO A
JUDGE. SO JUST THE RISK OF BEING
PLACED IN THAT POSITION IS GOING
TO HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON ON
PEOPLE REDRESSING THEIR
GOVERNMENT. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS. I BELIEVE YOU'RE
SINCERE. YEAH, BUT I JUST I'M
NOT THERE AND I CAN'T SUPPORT
IT. SO THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS FROM ASSEMBLY MEMBER
WEBER? GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU
ALL SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. I
JUST WANTED TO CHIME IN AND
REALLY THANK YOU FOR THIS, BILL,
AND THANK, YOU KNOW, THOSE WHO
ARE SUPPORTERS OF THIS BILL, AS
YOU STATED, WE DO SEE, VERY
TROUBLING TREND ACROSS THIS
NATION. THÀNH, TO DO ALL THAT
PEOPLE CAN DO TO IMPACT THE
ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO EXERCISE
THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE, WHETHER
IT'S CHANGING LAWS, MAKING IT
MORE DIFFICULT OR PEOPLE
ACTUALLY FEELING INTIMIDATED
WHEN THEY GO TO THE POLLS, AND
ALSO INTIMIDATION OF THOSE THAT
WORK AT THE POLLS. AND I THINK
THAT YOU HIGHLIGHTED THAT WHEN
YOU TALKED ABOUT THE DECREASE IN
PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO
BE POLL WORKERS, AND THERE HAVE
BEEN ISSUES WITH IN CALIFORNIA
WHERE THERE HAVE BEEN ISSUES OF
VOTER INTIMIDATION. YOU CAN LOOK
AT, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN COUNTIES
LIKE SHASTA COUNTY. SO IT MAY
NOT NECESSARILY BE IN YOURS, BUT
IT HAS HAPPENED. AND, YOU KNOW,
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO
NEED TO GET ON TOP OF BEFORE IT
BECOMES A BIGGER ISSUE, WE DO
NOT WANT TO LOOK UP AND SAY, OH
MY GOODNESS, WE SHOULD HAVE DONE
SOMETHING WHEN WE HAD THE
OPPORTUNITY. SO I WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR THAT. YES, A LOT OF
PEOPLE DO DO MAIL IN VOTERS, BUT
THERE ARE PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF
THAT STILL GO TO THE POLLS EVERY
ELECTION DAY. I GET MY MAIL IN
BALLOT, HAVE SINCE I'VE BEEN A
REGISTERED VOTER, BUT I ENJOY
BEING ABLE TO GO AND TAKE MY
KIDS TO THE POLLS TO SO THAT
THEY CAN SEE THAT ONCE THEY TURN
18, THIS IS A RIGHT THAT THEY
MUST, DO EVERY ELECTION. AND SO
I JUST REALLY WANT TO THANK YOU
FOR THIS, IT IS AN ISSUE HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. IT IS AN ISSUE
THROUGHOUT THIS COUNTRY. AND
WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS TRYING TO
PREVENT IT FROM BECOMING A
BIGGER ISSUE. AND WITH THAT, I'D
LIKE TO MOVE THE BILL. ALL
RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS
SEEING NONE. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BERMAN, YOU MAY CLOSE. YEAH, I
APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS. I
APPRECIATE THE DIALOG. YOU KNOW,
WE'LL DEFINITELY TAKE A LOOK AND
SEE IF THERE ARE OTHER THINGS
THAT WE CAN DO TO TIGHTEN UP THE
LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS CONCERNS
THAT FOLKS HAVE THAT DON'T
REALLY THAT AREN'T THE CORE OF
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET AT IN
THIS, IN THIS BILL AND WITH THAT
RESPECT, TO ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR BRINGING THIS IMPORTANT BILL
FORWARD. I HAVE FIRST HAND
KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE WITH
THE VERY ISSUES THAT YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT IN THIS BILL AND
PREVENTING. SO THANK YOU SO
MUCH, THIS BILL CREATES CRUCIAL,
PROTECTIONS THAT ALLOW OUR
ELECTION WORKERS AND OFFICIALS
AND VOTERS TO SUE FOR CIVIL
DAMAGES IF THEY ENCOUNTER
INTIMIDATING, THREATENING, OR OR
COERCIVE BEHAVIOR, AT VOTING AND
ELECTION SITES. SO I'M
RECOMMENDING SUPPORT. AND THIS
IS A DO PASS, AS AMENDED AND
REREFERRED TO JUDICIARY. WE HAVE
A MOTION BY SOME MEMBER WEBER.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND SECOND BY
CERVANTES? MADAM SECRETARY,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. ON AB 2642
BERMAN PELLERIN. AYE. PELLERIN.
AYE. LACKEY. NO. LACKEY NO.
BENNETT. BERMAN. AYE. BERMAN
AYE. CERVANTES. CERVANTES. AYE.
ASALI ASALI. NO. LO LO. AYE.
WEBER. WEBER. AYE. IT'S OUT 5 TO
2. WE'LL ALLOW OTHER MEMBERS TO
SIGN ON. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
WE'LL GO AHEAD NOW AND MOVE TO,
I CAN I CAN ACTUALLY GO. YEAH.
OKAY. SOMEBODY ELSE IS
PRESENTING FOR ME. SO PERFECT.
PERFECT. OKAY. IT I THINK YOUR
SECOND BILL. SO YOUR, YOUR AB
2655. GREAT JUST GIVE THIS A
SECOND FOR MY WITNESSES.
ASSUMING I HAVE WITNESSES AND I
DO. HELLO SO, FIVE YEARS AGO.
SO, AS SOME FOLKS WHO WERE IN
THE LEGISLATURE AT THAT TIME
MIGHT REMEMBER, I AUTHORED THE
FIRST FIRST ELECTION RELATED
DEEPFAKE BILL IN THE COUNTRY, I
DID THIS AFTER WATCHING, JORDAN
PEELE. THE ACTOR AND DIRECTOR,
CREATED A DEEPFAKE OF PRESIDENT
OBAMA IN 2018. AND IT WAS FUNNY,
BUT IT ALSO REALLY SET OFF ALARM
BELLS FOR ME AS IT WAS CLEAR AND
EASY TO SEE. HEY, HOW THIS
PROMISING TECHNOLOGY COULD COULD
BE ABUSED BY BAD ACTORS,
ESPECIALLY TO INFLUENCE OUR
ELECTIONS, HOWEVER, THE
POTENTIAL HARM WAS FAIRLY
LIMITED BACK THEN AS THE
TECHNOLOGY TO MAKE A DEEPFAKE
WAS VERY EXPENSIVE. IT WASN'T
WIDELY AVAILABLE, BUT AS WE'VE
SEEN IN JUST A FEW SHORT YEARS,
THE TECHNOLOGY HAS GOTTEN
BETTER, IT'S GOTTEN CHEAPER, AND
IT'S GOTTEN MUCH MORE ACCESSIBLE
, MAKING IT VERY EASY TO MAKE A
REALISTIC DEEPFAKE IN A COUPLE
OF MINUTES ON YOUR PHONE. AS A
RESULT, WE'RE SEEING I USED TO
UNDERMINE ELECTIONS ACROSS THE
WORLD, AND HERE IN AMERICA, AS
TECHNOLOGY CHANGES, SO TOO MUST
OUR LAWS. THEREFORE, I'M
AUTHORING AB 2006 55 TO PROTECT
ELECTION INTEGRITY BY REGULATING
THE ONLINE SPREAD OF AI
GENERATED DISINFORMATION AND
DEEPFAKES MEANT TO INFLUENCE AN
ELECTION WITH TODAY'S
SOPHISTICATED DEEPFAKES, VOTERS
MAY NOT KNOW WHAT IMAGES, AUDIO
OR VIDEO THEY CAN TRUST. IMAGINE
IF A FAKE VIDEO APPEARED ONLINE
OF AN ELECTED OFFICIAL SAYING OR
DOING SOMETHING THEY NEITHER
SAID NOR DID LIKE ACCEPTING A
BRIBE OR SAYING THAT THEY'D
HACKED VOTING MACHINES TO ENSURE
THEIR VICTORY. THIS DECEPTIVE
BUT HYPER REALISTIC CONTENT CAN
UNDERMINE VOTERS FAITH IN OUR
ELECTION INTEGRITY. ACCORDINGLY,
AB 2655 WOULD, FOR A LIMITED
PERIOD OF TIME, IMMEDIATELY
BEFORE AND AFTER AN ELECTION,
REQUIRE LARGE ONLINE PLATFORMS
IF THEY KNOW OR SHOULD KNOW THAT
THE CONTENT MEETS THE TEST IN
THE BILL TO RESTRICT THE
DISTRIBUTION OF MATERIALLY
DECEPTIVE AND DIGITALLY ALTERED
OR CREATED IMAGES, AUDIO OR
VIDEO MEANT TO INFLUENCE THE
ELECTION FOR LESS HARMFUL YET
STILL MATERIALLY DECEPTIVE AND
MODIFIED CONTENT. THE BILL WOULD
REQUIRE THE PLATFORMS TO LABEL
OTHER AI CREATED OR MODIFIED
ELECTION DISINFORMATION,
DISINFORMATION MEANT TO
INFLUENCE. IN BOTH INSTANCES,
THE BILL DOES NOT DEMAND
PERFECTION IN WHAT IT SAYS IS
THAT PLATFORMS MUST ACT IF THEY
KNOW OR SHOULD KNOW, USING BEST
AVAILABLE TOOLS THAT THE CONTENT
MEETS THE TEST IN THE BILL. THE
BILL DOESN'T ALLOW PLATFORMS TO
BURY THEIR HEAD IN THE SAND, BUT
IF THEY GENUINELY DON'T KNOW,
THEN THERE IS NO OBLIGATION.
MOREOVER, THE BILL IS NOT TRYING
TO ADDRESS HOT BUTTON
CONTROVERSIES OR INFLAMMATORY
CLAIMS, JUST THE DEPICTION OF
DEMONSTRABLY UNTRUE AND PROVABLY
FALSE CONTENT. IMPORTANTLY, THE
BILL DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR ANY
MONETARY PENALTY AGAINST ONLINE
PLATFORMS THAT FAIL TO COMPLY
WITH THE BILL'S REQUIREMENTS.
INSTEAD THE ONLY PENALTY IS THAT
A COURT WILL ORDER THE PLATFORMS
TO DO WHAT THE BILL REQUIRES. I
REALIZE THAT THIS BILL IS
ATTEMPTING TO LEGISLATE IN AN
ARENA WHERE TECHNOLOGY AND THE
LAW ARE FAST EVOLVING, AND THAT
CAN BE CHALLENGING ON MANY
LEVELS. BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT
WE CAN AFFORD TO TAKE A WAIT AND
SEE APPROACH. I'VE HAD GOOD
CONVERSATIONS WITH WITH
PLATFORMS I'VE AMENDED THE BILL
BASED ON FEEDBACK, AND I'LL
CONTINUE TO DO SO SHOULD THE
BILL MOVE FORWARD TODAY.
THEREFORE, I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN AYE VOTE, AND I'M JOINED
TODAY BY LEORA GERSHON, ONE
SIDED POLICY DIRECTOR, AND DAVID
EVAN HARRIS, A LECTURER AT UC
BERKELEY AND FORMER TECH SECTOR
RESEARCHER. MAY I PROCEED? THANK
YOU, MR. VICE CHAIR AND MEMBERS,
I'M LAURA GERSHENSON. I'M THE
POLICY DIRECTOR AT THE
CALIFORNIA INITIATIVE FOR
TECHNOLOGY AND DEMOCRACY, WHICH
IS A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA
COMMON CAUSE AS ELECTED
OFFICIALS, YOU ARE ALL KEENLY
AWARE OF THE THREAT POSED BY
DEEPFAKES. CONSIDER A DEEPFAKE
OF YOU HUGGING THE OPPOSING
PARTY'S PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
THAT GOES VIRAL WEEKS BEFORE AN
ELECTION, OR A FAKE VIDEO OF YOU
ACCEPTING A BRIBE THAT'S
FORWARDED AROUND YOUR DISTRICT
DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION. WHILE
DISINFORMATION HAS BEEN AROUND
FOREVER, AI GENERATED DEEPFAKES
CAN NOW BE CREATED VIRTUALLY
INSTANTLY, AT NO COST, AND SENT
TO MILLIONS IN A MATTER OF
SECONDS. ONCE DISINFORMATION
SPREADS, IT'S NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE
TO GET IT OUT ONCE IT'S OUT
THERE. LABEL OR NOT, IT'S OUT
THERE. THIS IS THREAT IS NOT
IMAGINARY. GENERATIVE AI HAS
BEEN USED AROUND THE WORLD AND
EVEN IN THE UNITED STATES TO
IMPACT ELECTIONS. OBVIOUSLY, THE
INFAMOUS ROBO CALL AB 2655 SEEKS
TO STRIKE THE RIGHT BALANCE BY
SEEKING TO BAN ONLY FOR A
STRICTLY LIMITED TIME AROUND THE
ELECTIONS. THE ONLINE SPREAD OF
THE WORST OF THE DEEPFAKES.
THAT'S THE CANDIDATE DOING OR
SAYING SOMETHING THEY DID NOT DO
OR SAY, OR AN ELECTED OFFICIAL
DOING OR SOMETHING DOING OR
SAYING SOMETHING THEY DID NOT
DO. SAME THING WITH AN ELECTIONS
OFFICIAL. AGAIN, AN ELECTION
OFFICIALS A DAY BEFORE THE
ELECTION SAYING YOU CAN'T VOTE,
ALL VOTING MACHINES ARE HACKED.
THIS WOULD OBVIOUSLY HAVE A
CLEAR IMPACT ON AN ELECTION AND
IS DEMONSTRABLY FALSE.
ASSEMBLING BERMAN HAS WORKED
DILIGENTLY TO ENSURE THAT AB
2655 APPROACH IS VERY NARROWLY
TAILORED, AND DOES NOT EXTEND TO
HOT BUTTON CONTROVERSIES OR
THINGS THAT ARE NOT DEMONSTRABLY
FALSE. IT'S NOT A MATTER OF
OPINION. IT EITHER HAPPENED OR
IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. THE BILL IS
RESPECTFUL OF THE FIRST
AMENDMENT. IT'S NARROWLY
TAILORED TO SERVE A COMPELLING
GOVERNMENT INTEREST. AND IT IS.
AND IT ALSO UNDERSTANDS THE
REACH OF SECTION 230 OF THE
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY
ACT. WILL THIS BILL STOP ALL
ELECTION DISINFORMATION? NO, BUT
IT'S PART OF A MULTI-PRONGED
APPROACH TO ADDRESS WHAT CLEARLY
IS A CRISIS IN OUR DEMOCRACY.
AND THE ALTERNATIVE OF WAITING
FOR PERFECTION IS SIMPLY NOT
ENOUGH TO THAT WE SHOULD ACCEPT
TO PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY AND OUR
FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS. WE HOPE
YOU CAN SUPPORT AB 2655. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR. VICE CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. MY NAME IS DAVID
HARRIS AND I AM A SENIOR POLICY
ADVISOR TO CITED. I PREVIOUSLY
WORKED FOR CLOSE TO FIVE YEARS
AT FACEBOOK AND META ON THE
CIVIC INTEGRITY, MISINFORMATION
AND RESPONSIBLE AI TEAMS. I AM
ALSO AN ADVISOR TO FOR A NUMBER
OF DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS
BEYOND CITED, I HAVE ADVISED THE
EUROPEAN UNION ON THE EU. I ACT.
I HAVE ADVISED THE WHITE HOUSE
ON THE WHITE HOUSE'S EXECUTIVE
ORDER ON AI, AND I'M A MEMBER OF
A NATO TASK FORCE ON AI AND
DISINFORMATION ON, ON ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BERMAN'S BILL 2655. I AM
STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF THIS BILL.
THIS BILL ONLY APPLIES TO THE
LARGEST ONLINE PLATFORMS, SUCH
AS THE ONES OPERATED BY MY
FORMER EMPLOYER, THAT HAVE
WONDERFUL RESOURCES INSIDE OF
THEIR COMPANIES TO ENFORCE A
BILL LIKE THIS, YOU ONLY NEED TO
LOOK TO OTHER CATEGORIES OF
CURRENTLY ILLEGAL CONTENT, SUCH
AS CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE, MATERIAL
OR TERRORIST CONTENT, WHICH THEY
ARE ABLE TO REMOVE VERY
EFFECTIVELY. AND THOSE ARE IN
NOT NECESSARILY ANY, MORE EASIER
TO REMOVE OR SIMPLER THAN
ELECTION DISINFORMATION. THE
NOTION THAT IT'S TOO DIFFICULT
TO REMOVE THIS IS FALSE. BEYOND
THAT, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
US TO REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THE
MAJOR AI COMPANIES TODAY HAVE
ALREADY ASKED FOR MORE
REGULATION OF AI, AND I THINK
THAT IS AN IMPORTANT SIGN THAT
WE KNOW THAT THE INDUSTRY IS
STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF PUTTING
REGULATIONS IN PLACE THAT
PROTECT OUR ELECTIONS AND
PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACIES WHEN WE
FAIL TO REGULATE AI, WHAT WE DO
IS WE PUNISH THE COMPANIES THAT
ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING. WE
PUNISH THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE
GOING OUT OF THEIR WAY TO SPEND
MORE MONEY, TO HIRE MORE STAFF,
AND TO BUILD TEAMS AND
TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE ABLE TO
REMOVE THIS TYPE OF CONTENT.
THEIR SHAREHOLDER, THOSE WHO
WANT THEM TO MAXIMIZE THEIR
PROFITS, ARE NOT PLEASED IF THEY
ARE THE ONLY COMPANIES IN THE
SPACE THAT ARE SPENDING THE
MONEY TO DO THE RIGHT THING. AND
IT'S FOR THAT REASON THAT I
THINK WE SHOULD HEED THE CALL OF
TECH COMPANY CEOS CALLING FOR
REGULATION OF AI, AND THAT I AM
STRONGLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL
. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE
ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO
TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION BEFORE WE
MOVE FORWARD WITH THE GROUP
OPPOSITION? PLEASE COME FORWARD
TO THE TABLE HERE AND YOU'LL
HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO EXPRESS
YOUR OPPOSITION.
YOU MAY PROCEED. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, CHAIR PELLER AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS KARA BUNDER, TESTIFYING
ON BEHALF OF THE COMPUTER AND
COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION TO AB 2655. CTIA IS
AN INTERNATIONAL NOT FOR PROFIT
TRADE ASSOCIATION WITH ABOUT TWO
DOZEN MEMBERS FROM A RANGE OF
COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY
FIRMS. CTIA AND ITS MEMBERS TAKE
SERIOUSLY THE IMPACT DECEPTIVE
CONTENT MAY HAVE ON ELECTIONS.
MANY OF OUR MEMBERS ARE WORKING
TO IMPLEMENT TOOLS TO BETTER
DETECT AND LABEL AI GENERATED
CONTENT, AND USING A COMBINATION
OF AI AND HUMAN REVIEW, THEY
MODERATE CONTENT IN VIOLATION OF
THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE,
INCLUDING CONTENT THAT IS
ILLEGAL AND POTENTIALLY HARMFUL.
BUT THE TOOLS THAT ARE CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE ARE NOT ALWAYS
RELIABLE. ARE ACCURATE. JUST AS
SPAM FILTERS SOMETIMES MISLABEL
LEGITIMATE EMAILS. AND WHILE
SUCH TECHNOLOGY IS EVOLVING, SO
ARE THE MEANS FOR BAD ACTORS TO
EVADE SUCH DETECTION. I WOULD
SAY THAT THIS DIFFERS FROM THE
EXAMPLES THAT WERE SHARED
EARLIER REGARDING CSAM, BECAUSE
THERE ARE DATABASES THAT HAVE
HASHING VALUES THAT ALLOW
PLATFORMS TO BETTER DETECT THESE
MATERIALS, IN ADDITION TO WHAT
THEY USE TO DETECT COPYRIGHT
INFRINGEMENT, WHICH ARE AGAIN
BASED ON ROBUST DATABASES OF
AVAILABLE INFORMATION. BECAUSE
COVERED PLATFORMS ARE NOT PRIVY
TO THE INTENT AND CONTEXT TO
WHICH A PIECE OF CONTENT IS
USED, THEY COULD INADVERTENTLY
OVER BLOCK OR OVER LABEL CONTENT
. THIS COULD RESULT IN USER
FRUSTRATION AND SUPPRESSION OF
POLITICAL SPEECH. POLITICAL
SPEECH WAS AT THE CORE OF WHY
OUR FIRST AMENDMENT WAS
ESTABLISHED, AND IT IS CRITICAL
TO MAINTAIN THOSE PROTECTIONS.
AND WHILE THE BILL EXEMPTS
SATIRE AND PARODY, IT'S UNCLEAR
WHO GETS TO DECIDE WHAT
CONSTITUTES THOSE USES. FACED
WITH POTENTIAL LIABILITY,
COVERED PLATFORMS MAY CHOOSE TO
PROHIBIT ALL DIGITALLY ALTERED
CONTENT, CUTTING OFF MANY
VALUABLE AND HELPFUL USES. THESE
TOOLS CAN BE USED BY CAMPAIGNS
TO REACH VOTERS WITH HIGH
QUALITY CONTENT AT LOWER COSTS,
OR TO TRANSLATE SPEECH INTO
MULTIPLE LANGUAGES TO FOSTER A
MORE ACCESSIBLE DEMOCRATIC
PROCESS. FURTHER, USERS MAY
WEAPONIZE THE REQUIRED REPORTING
MECHANISM TO SUPPRESS SPEECH
THAT THEY DISAGREE WITH. FOR
EXAMPLE, UNDER THE DIGITAL
MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT, THERE
WERE STUDIES DESCRIBING
POLITICAL AD TAKEDOWNS ON BOTH
SIDES OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM.
AFTER RECEIVING REPORTS OF
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT, MANY OF
THESE CASES WERE ULTIMATELY
DEEMED FAIR USE, BUT PLATFORMS
WERE INCLINED TO IN TAKING DOWN
THE CONTENT LEST THEY FACE
POTENTIAL LIABILITY.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR LABELING.
LABELING AI GENERATED ELECTION
CONTENT, AND LIABILITY FOR
DECEPTIVE CONTENT SHOULD REST
WITH THE ENTITY THAT PUTS FORTH
SUCH MATERIAL. THE ENTITY THAT
IS MOST AWARE OF THE INTENT AND
CONTEXT FOR WHICH THE CONTENT
WAS CREATED AND SHARED. ON
BEHALF OF CTIA, I APPRECIATE
YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR
COMMENTS AND I WELCOME ANY
QUESTIONS. OKAY, HI ONCE AGAIN,
COMMITTEE TRACY, WITH OAKLAND
PRIVACY, WE ARE IN RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION TO AB 2655. AND WE
WANTED TO SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS
FROM A CIVIL SOCIETY, FROM A
CIVIL SOCIETY PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE
NOT A TECH COMPANY AND WE DON'T
WORK FOR THEM OR SPEAK FOR THEM,
I ALSO WANT TO SAY TO ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BERMAN, WHEN I WAS
TALKING ABOUT THE FULL SPECTRUM
OF AI BILLS AND THAT SOME WERE
EXTREMELY COMPLEX, I HONESTLY
WAS TALKING ABOUT ALL THE BILLS,
INCLUDING ALGORITHMS AND RISK
ASSESSMENTS AND SIX DIFFERENT
WATERMARKING BILLS AND SO ON,
NOT SIMPLY THIS BILL. I DIDN'T
WANT YOU TO TAKE THAT THE WRONG
WAY, SO THIS BILL CHARGES LARGE
ONLINE PLATFORMS WITH SCANNING
ALL CONTENT POSTED TO THEIR
SITES WITH DEEPFAKE DETECTION
TOOLS FOR FOUR MONTHS PRECEDING
A VOTE. SO IF WE INCLUDE
PRIMARIES, THAT'S PROBABLY 60 TO
75% OF THE TIME, BECAUSE WE HAVE
ELECTIONS EVERY YEAR, SOMETIMES
TWICE A YEAR, WE DO THINK THAT
IS A BIT OF A PRIVACY PROBLEM,
IT'S ALSO QUESTIONABLE HOW WELL
THESE TOOLS WORK. JUST LAST WEEK
, A PROMINENT DISINFORMATION
EXPERT SAID IN THE NEW YORK
TIMES, EVEN USING THE BEST TOOLS
YOU CAN'T BE SURE. AND HE WAS
MAKING THOSE TOOLS AS, AS, AS AS
HE SAID THAT. SO HE WOULD KNOW,
THE BILL'S LANGUAGE SORT OF
OFFERS THAT A TECHNOLOGY COMPANY
SHOULD BE THE JUDGE, JURY AND
EXECUTIONER, DESPITE NO FORMAL
TRAINING IN IN FIRST AMENDMENT
AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. THE
STUFF IS ALWAYS A SORT OF, YOU
KNOW, PUSH ME, PULL YOU IN TERMS
OF BALANCING THE EQUITIES. AND
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WE DON'T
THINK TIKTOK OR META, WOULD
BALANCE THEM AS WELL AS A JUDGE.
AND WE DON'T REALLY WANT YOU
DOING THAT. THE BILL IS, YOU
KNOW, SO FUNDAMENTAL, SO
FUNDAMENTALLY, THE BILL IS
RELYING ON TWO IMPRECISE
MEASURES TECHNICALLY, YOU KNOW,
TECHNICAL SCANNING PROGRAMS THAT
DON'T NECESSARILY WORK VERY WELL
IN UNVETTED REPORTS FROM THE
PUBLIC, CANDIDATES, OFFICIALS,
CAMPAIGNS, AND EVEN CHAOS
ACTORS, WE DON'T THINK ANY
TECHNOLOGY PLATFORM CAN BE
EXPECTED TO KNOW EVERYTHING THAT
EVERY CANDIDATE RUNNING FOR
OFFICE IN EVERY CALIFORNIA CITY,
COUNTY AND, YOU KNOW, ACROSS THE
STATE WHERE THEY SAID AND WHAT
THEY WENT. I MEAN, THERE ARE
SOME OBVIOUS EXAMPLES THAT WERE
PROVIDED, BUT IN A LOT OF LOCAL
RACES, THIS IS GOING TO BE
SOMETHING FAIRLY SUBTLE. AND WE
DON'T, YOU KNOW, OR IT CAN BE
FAIRLY SUBTLE AND WE DON'T
NECESSARILY BELIEVE THAT TIKTOK
META OR INSTAGRAM WILL ACTUALLY
KNOW, WHAT WAS SAID AND WHERE
CANDIDATES WERE SO BASICALLY
WE'RE USING IMPRECISE MEASURES
TO POWER A POTENTIALLY BROAD
CENSORSHIP REGIME OF BLOCKING
CONTENT. AND WE REALLY CAN'T
SUPPORT THAT EVEN UNDER THE
GUISE OF DEFENDING DEMOCRACY. SO
WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THE
COMMITTEE AND THE LEGISLATURE
NOT GO DOWN THIS PARTICULAR
ROUTE. WE THINK THERE ARE A LOT
OF THINGS THAT THE LEGISLATURE
CAN DO THAT STOP SOMEWHAT SHORT
OF, A BROAD CENSORSHIP REGIME
FOR ONLINE CONTENT. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. OKAY. THIS IS NOW THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE IN THE
AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO
EXPRESS SUPPORT IF YOU COULD
EXPRESS YOUR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION. WE'D LOVE TO HEAR
FROM YOU. LUIS MILLER,
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
CLEAN MONEY CAMPAIGN AND
INDIVISIBLE CALIFORNIA STATE
STRONG IN STRONG SUPPORT. HI,
EVAN MINTAIN WITH VOICES FOR
PROGRESS. STANDING IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THIS CRITICAL BILL.
GOOD MORNING. Þ FRANCO, ON
BEHALF OF THE ASIAN LAW CAUCUS
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. ARE
THERE ANY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT
WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS OPPOSITION
? THÀNH, PLEASE COME FORWARD,
EXPRESS YOUR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION. DYLAN HOFFMAN, ON
BEHALF OF TECHNET, RESPECTFULLY
OPPOSED. THANKS THANK YOU. OKAY.
WE'LL NOW BRING IT BACK TO
COMMITTEE. ANYBODY WHO WOULD
LIKE TO EXPRESS ANY, POINTS OF
CLARITY OR. YES, GO AHEAD.
QUESTIONS WOULD DISCOVER, LIKE,
IF YOU USE CHATGPT TO REWRITE
TEXT, LIKE, DOES IT COVER TEXT
OR IS ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT
PHOTOS AND VIDEOS? MY
UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S IMAGES,
AUDIO, VIDEO. BUT IT WOULD COVER
DEMONSTRABLY FALSE TEXT THAT,
THAT THAT COULD BE TOLD. SO
AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A BILL THAT
SEEKS PERFECTION. AND TEXT IS I
MEAN, YOU'VE POINTED OUT THE
HARDEST THING TO GO. RIGHT. BUT
CAN YOU IMAGINE A TEXT THAT GOES
OUT THAT SAYS, ALTHOUGH WE DON'T
COVER WEB MESSAGING THAT WAS
REMOVED, BUT BUT SOME CONTENT
THAT GOES OUT THAT SAYS THIS,
THIS PERSON SAID SOMETHING
FALSE. SO YOU CAN AGAIN, IT
DEPENDS WHAT. AND WHEN I SAY
TEXT I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT TEXT.
NO, NO I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE
TALKING. YES, YES YES WRITTEN
WORDS. YES. BUT BUT THE BUT THE
SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS WOULD
HAVE TO KNOW THAT IT IS FALSE
AND IT IS NOT A PERFECT SCIENCE.
THIS THIS FIGURING OUT IS IT IS
IT FALSE OR IS IT NOT? IT'S KIND
OF THIS WHACK A MOLE THING, AS,
AS YOU EXPRESSED SO WELL, WE ARE
GETTING MUCH BETTER WITH TOOLS
TO DETERMINE WHAT'S FALSE. AND
THEN THE BAD ACTORS ARE GOING TO
GET BETTER. SO IT'S GOING TO GO
LIKE THIS. BUT THERE ARE SOME
VERY GOOD TOOLS AND THEY
CONTINUE TO GET BETTER. AND THEY
ARE GETTING BETTER AT TEXT. BUT
TEXT IS PROBABLY THE HARDEST TO
DETECT. OKAY. SO I'M JUST
CURIOUS. I MEAN, IF MY OPPONENT
PUTS UP AN AD, IT SAYS BILL IS
SALLY SUPPORTS INSURRECTION, YOU
KNOW, AND THEY USED AI TO
GENERATE THAT. AND I'M GOING TO
SAY I'VE NEVER SUPPORTED
INSURRECTION, BUT THEY'RE MAKING
THAT ARGUMENT BASED ON. SO IT'S
A VERY, VERY, VERY COMPLICATED
AREA. SO WOULD THAT BE THAT'S
TRICKIER. WOULD THAT BE BECAUSE
WHAT WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO
SUPPORT INSURRECTION. SO I THINK
THAT'S I DON'T THINK THAT'S
DEMONSTRABLY FALSE. IF THEY HAVE
A PICTURE OF YOU WITH A
PITCHFORK. RIGHT. ENTERING THE
CAPITOL ON JANUARY 6TH AND YOU
WERE NOT THERE AND YOU DIDN'T DO
THAT, THAT'S DEMONSTRABLY FALSE,
THAT THAT WOULD BE COVERED. BUT
YOU SEE HOW THIS IS. BUT BUT
AGAIN, WE'RE IT'S NOT AN EXACT
SCIENCE, BUT WHAT WE'RE TRYING
TO DO IN THE BILL IS PUT VERY
CLEAR GUARDRAILS. WE UNDERSTAND
VERY WELL THE LIMITS OF THE
FIRST AMENDMENT AND THE
PROTECTIONS OF THE FIRST
AMENDMENT PROVIDES. BUT SO THAT
PICTURE OF YOU AND, YOU KNOW,
MAYBE IT'S CARTOONISH AND IT'S
NOT OBVIOUS THAT IT'S YOU THAT'S
ONE THING. BUT IF IT LOOKS
EXACTLY LIKE YOU AND IT GOES OUT
TWO DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION,
IT'S OUT. THERE'S NOTHING YOU
CAN DO. I RECOGNIZE THE CONCERN
I DO, I JUST IT'S JUST A VERY
STICKY THING WITH THE FIRST
AMENDMENT AND ALSO WITH ASKING
PRIVATE COMPANIES TO BE THE
ENFORCER, ESSENTIALLY. AND SO
I'M JUST GOING TO SAY FOR THE
RECORD, I LIKE THE TWITTER MODEL
WHERE THEY USE THE COMMUNITY TO
SORT OF REGULATE, INFORMATION ON
THERE. AND SO COMMUNITY NOTES IS
SOMETHING THEY HAVE WHERE ANYONE
CAN SAY THIS IS FALSE. AND I
ACTUALLY SEE IT A LOT. EVEN ELON
MUSK GETS FACT CHECKED BY HIS
OWN COMMUNITY. SO I TEND TO LIKE
THAT MODEL WHERE IT'S THE PUBLIC
. IT'S THE CROWD. SOURCING IS
KIND OF DOING THE MODERATING,
THEN MAKING AN INDIVIDUAL
COMPANY OR PERSON THE ARBITER OF
WHAT'S DISINFORMATION. SO, BUT I
APPRECIATE IT, MADAM CHAIR,
THAT'S THAT'S ALL I HAD. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS? WHAT? I
WANT TO EXCUSE ME, SO I WANT TO
JUST FIRST START OFF BY THANKING
THE AUTHOR, AND THOSE WHO
PROVIDED TESTIMONY TODAY, I
BELIEVE THAT WE DO NEED TO HAVE
GUARDRAILS AND STRIKE A BALANCE
AS BEST AS WE CAN, TO STOP THE
SPREAD OF DEEP FAKES AND
MISINFORMATION. DISINFORMATION
IN OUR ELECTIONS, AND JUST TO
PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY. SO TODAY,
I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS BILL.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
ASSEMBLYMEMBER LACKEY? YEAH, I
DO CLEARLY BELIEVE THAT, DEEP
FAKES ARE ARE A THREAT TO TRUTH.
HOWEVER WHAT KEEPS SOMEBODY FROM
SUING A WEBSITE OR PLATFORM IN
ITS CURRENT SITUATION WITHOUT
THIS BILL, I DON'T I'M NOT AWARE
OF ANY, LEGAL REMEDY OR PROCESS
FOR SOMEBODY TO BE ABLE TO DO
THAT, SO I THINK THAT'S THAT'S
WHERE THIS BILL IS SORT OF NOVEL
, AND, AND TRIES TO CREATE AN
AVENUE FOR FOLKS TO BE ABLE TO
SEEK THAT REDRESS AND JUST SO
YOU KNOW, I, I'M NOT IN A
POSITION TO ACTUALLY SUPPORT
THIS BILL AT THIS POINT JUST
BECAUSE I HAVE MY COLLEAGUE HAS
EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS THAT I
DO SHARE, AND I THINK IT'S A
LITTLE TOO NUANCED. AND I THINK
IT IT JEOPARDIZES SOMETHING THAT
WE HOLD VERY SACRED. YEAH. NO, I
I'LL, I'LL, I'LL WAIT. ANY OTHER
COMMENTS FROM OKAY. WELL NO
OTHER COMMENTS. SEE. NO OTHER
COMMENTS. ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BERMAN, YOU MAY CLOSE. YEAH, I
APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION. I
ALSO APPRECIATE HOW COMPLEX THIS
IS, AND I DON'T BY ANY STRETCH
THINK THAT WE HAVE THE PERFECT
SOLUTION TODAY, I THINK THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO
HOPE TO TRY TO ACHIEVE BY THE
END OF THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.
YES, AND EVEN THEN, I HAVE NO
DOUBT THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS
WILL PROBABLY BE LITIGATED IN
THE COURTS, AND THERE'S A LOT
OF, YOU KNOW, INTERESTING, YOU
KNOW, PRECEDENT, YOU KNOW,
DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT'LL BE CURIOUS
TO SEE HOW, LIKE I MENTIONED IN
MY OPENING COMMENTS, THIS IS
EVER EVOLVING, AND AS TECHNOLOGY
CHANGES AND FRANKLY, AS CERTAIN
SUPREME COURT JUSTICES CHANGE,
WE DON'T KNOW HOW THE SUPREME
COURT MIGHT, OPINE ON, YOU KNOW,
THE INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY AND
MANIPULATED CONTENT AND THE
IMPACT THAT THAT HAS ON OUR
ELECTIONS AND WHAT SCRUTINY THAT
APPLY AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS.
SO IT'S A REALLY FASCINATING
BILL. IT PROBABLY ONE OF THE
MORE CHALLENGING ONES I'VE GOT
THIS YEAR, AND IT'S SOMETHING
THAT WE'RE GOING TO KEEP ON
HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
OPPOSITION TO, TRY TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE ARE, ARE, ADDRESSING THE
CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE OR THAT I
HAVE, ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THIS
TYPE OF CONTENT ON OUR ELECTIONS
AND ON OUR VOTERS WITHOUT
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, AND
DOING IT IN A WAY THAT'S AS EASY
AS POSSIBLE FOR THE PLATFORMS TO
IMPLEMENT, SO WITH THAT,
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND I
DO APPRECIATE YOUR LEADERSHIP IN
THIS ISSUE, YOU WERE OUT THERE
EARLY ON, THE FIRST IN THE
NATION. I REALLY WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR THAT FORESIGHT, THE
THREAT POSED TO OUR ELECTORAL
SYSTEM AND TO OUR DEMOCRACY BY
DEEPFAKES AND OTHER MISLEADING
CONTENT IS SUBSTANTIAL AND HAS
BEEN SUPERCHARGED BY TOOLS LIKE
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE THAT
MAKE IT EASIER AND CHEAPER THAN
EVER TO CREATE CONVINCINGLY
REALISTIC BUT DECEPTIVE IMAGES,
AUDIO AND VIDEO. AND PART OF THE
SOLUTION FOR PROTECTING AGAINST
THE DECEPTIVE MATERIAL IS TO GO
AFTER THOSE WHO CREATE AND
DISSEMINATE THAT MATERIAL, WHICH
IS WHY, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE DOING
THIS BILL. SO THANK YOU. BUT
ANOTHER CRUCIAL PIECE OF THE
PUZZLE IS TO ADDRESS THE HARMS
THAT THESE MATERIALS PRESENT IS
TO LIMIT THE TOOLS THAT BAD
ACTORS HAVE FOR SPREADING
DISINFORMATION SO RAPIDLY AND AT
SUCH LITTLE COST. SO I KNOW THAT
THE AUTHOR TAKES ALL THIS
SERIOUSLY. THE CONSTITUTIONAL
AND LOGISTICAL CHALLENGES AND
REGULATING THIS AREA, AND I'M
CONFIDENT THAT YOU'RE OPEN TO
CONTINUING TO REFINE THE BILL AS
IT MOVES THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO
WITH THAT, I'M RECOMMENDING
SUPPORT. DO I HAVE A MOTION?
MOTION MOTION BY CERVANTES?
SECOND BY ME. ASSEMBLYMEMBERS,
MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON AB 2655 BY BERMAN. THE
MOTION IS DO PASS AND BE RE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
JUDICIARY. PELLERIN I, PELLERIN
I LACKEY NOT VOTING LACKEY AND
NOT VOTING BENNET BERMAN. BERMAN
AYE. CERVANTES. CERVANTES. AYE.
ASAELI ASAELI. NØ. LOW. WEBER
WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THAT BILL ON
CALL, AND WE'RE GOING TO ROUND
UP OUR ABSENT MEMBERS. SO THANK
YOU. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO
ASSEMBLY MEMBER CERVANTES AND
YOUR BILL, 1807.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT ASSEMBLY
BILL 1807 TODAY. THIS BILL WILL
MAKE UPDATES TO THE EXISTING
RIVERSIDE COUNTY CITIZENS
REDISTRICTING COMMISSION. AS YOU
KNOW, GOVERNOR NEWSOM SIGNED MY
BILL, AB 1307 INTO LAW IN 2022.
THIS BILL SIMPLY CREATE, IT WAS
CREATED THE REDISTRICTING
COMMISSION FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
WHICH IS EMPOWERED TO REDRAW
DISTRICT BOUNDARIES TO THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS. THE INTRODUCTION OF
AB 1307 REALLY KICKED OFF THE
CURRENT WAVE OF COUNTY
REDISTRICTING COMMISSION BILLS
THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY SEEING IN
RECENT YEARS, THIS COMMITTEE HAS
APPROVED INDEPENDENT
REDISTRICTING COMMISSIONS FOR
FRESNO, KERN, ORANGE AND
SACRAMENTO COUNTIES, AND THE
GOVERNOR HAS SIGNED ALL THOSE
BILLS INTO LAW. HOWEVER AB 34 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER VALENCIA AND
SENATE BILL 314 BY SENATOR ASHBY
CONTAIN USEFUL INNOVATIONS THAT
NONE OF THE PREVIOUS COUNTY
REDISTRICTING COMMISSION BILLS
INCLUDED BOTH THOSE BILLS WERE
SIGNED INTO LAW BY GOVERNOR
NEWSOM LAST YEAR, SO THE PURPOSE
OF MY BILL 1807 IS TO
INCORPORATE THOSE PROVISIONS TO
THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY CITIZENS
REDISTRICTING COMMISSION. THOSE
INCLUDE UPDATING THE
REDISTRICTING CRITERIA TO
REFLECT THE CHANGES MADE BY THE
ENACTMENT OF THE FAIR MAPS ACT
OF 2023, WHICH ASSEMBLY MEMBER
BRIAN AND I AUTHORED. AB 1807
WOULD ALSO IMPOSE STRONGER
PROHIBITIONS ON THE ABILITY OF
COMMISSIONERS TO HAVE
COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT
REDISTRICTING ISSUES OUTSIDE OF
A PUBLIC MEETING OF THE
COMMISSION THÀNH. THE BILL WOULD
ALSO REQUIRE THE COMMISSION TO
TRANSLATE BOTH ON ITS WEBSITE
AND MANY OF THE WRITTEN MATERIAL
IT DISTRIBUTES INTO LANGUAGES
SPOKEN BY AT LEAST 3% OF THE
TOTAL VOTING AGE. RESIDENTS OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY. THE BILL ALSO
IMPOSE MORE RESTRICTIONS ON THE
ACTIVITIES OF COMMISSIONERS.
COMMISSIONERS WILL ALSO BE
PROHIBITED FROM RECEIVING A
NONCOMPETITIVE BID CONTRACT FROM
RIVERSIDE COUNTY. FINALLY, WHILE
SERVING ON THE COMMISSION,
COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE BARRED
FROM ENDORSING, WORKING FOR, OR
MAKING FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TO THE CAMPAIGNS OF A CANDIDATE
FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY. SO THESE UPDATES TO AB
1307 WILL MAKE THE REDISTRICTING
PROCESS FOR OUR BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS FAIRER, MORE
ACCESSIBLE AND MORE TRANSPARENT
AND RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE'LL
GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO YOUR
PRIMARY WITNESS. OH, ANY PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? ANYBODY
WHO WANTS TO REGISTER SUPPORT
FOR THE BILL. VOTERS OF
CALIFORNIA IN VERY STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
ANY PRIMARY WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION? ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO
REGISTER OPPOSITION, SEEING
NONE. WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. ANY QUESTIONS?
COMMENTS WE HAVE A MOTION. WELL,
LET'S GO AHEAD, YOU MAY CLOSE.
I'M SORRY. OH, WAIT, WAIT. WE
HAVE A QUESTION. OKAY. I'M JUST
CURIOUS. WHAT IS. FIRST OFF, WHY
DON'T WE JUST DO ONE LAW THAT
REGULATES ALL COUNTIES? WHY ARE
WE DOING, LIKE, JUST RIVERSIDE?
I KNOW WE BOTH REPRESENT
RIVERSIDE RIGHT THERE. SO THAT
HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED BEFORE AND
HAS BEEN VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR,
WHICH IS WHY YOU'RE SEEING THIS
PIECEMEAL APPROACH, WHICH IS WHY
I DID INTRODUCE MY BILL AND WHY
WE SEE SUBSEQUENT BILLS FALLING
INTO THIS SPACE. BUT GREAT
QUESTION. AND I KNOW THAT THE
CHAIR ALSO, IS INTERESTED IN
THAT SAME. YEAH, I JUST I DON'T
I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW,
RIVERSIDE SHOULD HAVE ONE SET OF
RULES AND ORANGE COUNTY HAS
ANOTHER OR WHATEVER. SO I'M
CURIOUS, THE 14 COMMISSION
MEMBERS KNOW WHAT THE
COMPOSITION IS OF THE YES. YEP.
THE POLITICAL MAKEUP OF THE
COMMISSION MUST REFLECT THE
POLITICAL PREFERENCES OF
RIVERSIDE COUNTY VOTERS,
INCLUDING NO PARTY PREFERENCE
VOTERS, AS DETERMINED BY THE
REGISTRATION FIGURES FROM THE
LAST STATEWIDE ELECTION. OKAY,
DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS, BY
CHANCE? WELL, I DON'T HAVE THAT
ON ME, BUT I KNOW THAT IT IS
PROBABLY IN THE ANALYSIS. OKAY
AND THEN, WOULD YOU BE WILLING
TO MIRROR THE LANGUAGE OF THE
STATEWIDE RECOMMISSIONING?
COMMISSION REDISTRICTING
COMMISSION, WHICH SAYS IT
REQUIRES A MAJORITY OF
REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH PARTIES
IN ORDER TO PASS. SO MY
UNDERSTANDING, FOR STATEWIDE
REDISTRICTING COMMISSIONS IS YOU
NEED AT LEAST THREE OF THE FIVE
REPUBLICANS AND THREE OF THE
FIVE DEMOCRATS TO AGREE ON THE
MAPS WHERE THE WAY THIS IS
WRITTEN IS. IT'S SORT OF A
SIMPLE MAJORITY. SO
THEORETICALLY, YOU COULD APPROVE
MAPS WITHOUT A SINGLE VOTE OF
THE OPPOSITE PARTY. SO YOU
CONSIDER SO WHEN IT COMES TO ARE
YOU TALKING ABOUT THE ACTUAL
VOTE REQUIREMENT? YES. ON THE TO
PASS THE MAPS. YEAH. THERE IS NO
REQUIREMENT ABOUT THE PARTIZAN
MAKEUP OF THE VOTE. I'M SORRY.
MY MIC SPIN OFF. THE PUBLIC'S
BEEN DENIED ALL MY QUESTIONS. MY
LAST QUESTION, FOR THE RECORD,
WAS IS, IT'S 14 SEATS COMPOSED,
MY QUESTION IS, WOULD YOU BE
WILLING TO MIRROR, THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATEWIDE
REDISTRICTING COMMISSION, WHICH
REQUIRES A MAJORITY OF THE
MEMBERS FROM BOTH PARTIES TO
APPROVE THE MAPS? SO AT THE
MOMENT, NO OTHER, BILL HAS DONE
THAT. AND SO NO OTHER COUNTY
COMMISSION REDISTRICTING
COMMITTEE DOES THAT, NINE OF THE
COMMISSIONERS CONSTITUTE A
QUORUM, AND THERE'S NO
REQUIREMENT ABOUT PARTIZAN
MAKEUP, JUST THE REQUIREMENTS
ABOUT REFLECTING THE POLITICAL
PREFERENCES OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY
VOTERS. AND EVEN THEN, WE DO
HAVE WE DO ENSURE THAT THERE'S
AT LEAST ONE COMMISSIONER MUST
RESIDE IN EACH OF THE FIVE
EXISTING SUPERVISORIAL
DISTRICTS. AND SO, THAT'S
CURRENTLY WHERE MY BILL IS AT.
AND HAPPY TO HAVE FURTHER
CONVERSATION AS WE MOVE THROUGH
THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. JUST
BECAUSE OTHERS HAVEN'T DONE
RIGHT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T DO
IT RIGHT. AND I JUST WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT IT'S VIEWED
BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU
WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE CONFIDENCE
IN THESE PROCESSES. SO WE DON'T
BREED THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU
KNOW, WE DON'T BREED SKEPTICISM
INTO THE SYSTEM OR A CYNICISM,
IF YOU WILL. AND SO, YOU KNOW,
BY MIRRORING WHAT WE DO
STATEWIDE, I JUST THINK IT WILL
BE VIEWED MORE OF A NONPARTISAN
COMMISSION. SO IF THERE'S IF IT
REQUIRES CONSENSUS FROM BOTH
SIDES, I THINK YOUR BILL WOULD
BE STRONGER AND I WOULD SUPPORT
IT. SO I'M JUST ASKING YOU TO
CONSIDER THAT. BUT AS STATED, I
DON'T THINK IT WILL BE FAIR. BUT
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS
QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE. ASSEMBLY
MEMBER CERVANTES, YOU MAY CLOSE,
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE
COMMITTEE TO JUST TAKING A LOOK
AT THIS BILL AND FURTHER
ENHANCING A FAIR, MORE
TRANSPARENT PROCESS. I CERTAINLY
LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING ON
ENGAGEMENT AND, MAKING SURE THAT
AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVE A
PUBLIC, TRANSPARENT PROCESS FOR
THE VOTERS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY.
I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOUR
LEADERSHIP AND KNOWLEDGE IN THIS
AREA. AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD TODAY, I KNOW
IT'S HARD TO DO A ONE SIZE FITS
ALL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
BECAUSE WE HAVE VERY DIFFERENT
COUNTIES, BUT IT IS SOMETHING TO
MAYBE LOOK AT IN THE FUTURE TO
SEE IF THERE'S SOME PROVISIONS
THAT CAN BE CONSISTENT AMONG ALL
THE DIFFERENT REDISTRICTING
COMMISSIONS. BUT WITH THAT BEING
SAID, I SUPPORT THE EFFORTS TO
EXPAND THE USE OF CITIZENS
REDISTRICTING COMMISSIONS, AND I
APPLAUD YOUR EFFORTS AND THIS
BILL TO ALIGN THE REDISTRICTING
CRITERIA USED IN RIVERSIDE
COUNTY WITH THE CRITERIA THAT IS
OTHERWISE REQUIRED TO BE USED
FOR LOCAL REDISTRICTING UNDER
STATE LAW. SO MY RECOMMENDATION
IS A SUPPORT. WE HAVE A MOTION
BY SOME MEMBER BERMAN. I'M GOING
TO GO AHEAD. AND SECOND THAT,
MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL ON AB 1807 BY CERVANTES.
THE MOTION IS DO PASS AND BE
REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
LOCAL GOVERNMENT. PELLERIN I,
PELLERIN I LACKEY NO. LACKEY NO.
BENNETT BERMAN I BERMAN I
CERVANTES I CERVANTES I AS-SALIH
ASALI. NO LO. WEBER THAT BILL
WILL BE ON CALL. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. AND NOW OUR LAST BILL IS
MINE. AB 2839.
I'M SORRY. IT'S HARD. YOU MAY
PROCEED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. THIS YEAR, CALIFORNIA
IS ENTERING ITS FIRST EVER
ELECTION, DURING WHICH
DISINFORMATION POWERED BY
GENERATIVE AI WILL POLLUTE OUR
INFORMATION ECOSYSTEMS LIKE
NEVER BEFORE. AND MILLIONS OF
VOTERS WILL NOT KNOW WHAT
IMAGES, AUDIO, OR VIDEOS THEY
CAN TRUST. SOME OF YOU HAVE
PROBABLY HEARD ABOUT THE
ROBOCALL THAT WAS DISSEMINATED
BACK IN JANUARY OF PRESIDENT
BIDEN, WHICH ENCOURAGED VOTERS
NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
PRIMARY ELECTION IN NEW
HAMPSHIRE. THAT AI GENERATED
ROBOCALL WAS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF
A NEFARIOUS USE OF GENERATIVE AI
, WHICH SEEKS TO DISRUPT OUR
ELECTIONS. THIS TYPE OF ELECTION
DISRUPTION IS NOT NEW, BUT THE
MEANS OF DISSEMINATING
DISINFORMATION ABOUT AN ELECTION
IS MUCH MORE SOPHISTICATED DUE
TO THE ACCESS TO GENERATIVE AI
PLATFORMS. IMAGINE ANOTHER
EXAMPLE IN WHICH A DEEP FAKE TV
AD DEPICTS AN ELECTION OFFICIAL
SAYING THAT THEY RIGGED THE
VOTES IN FAVOR OF ONE CANDIDATE,
OR A MAILER SHOWING FALSE IMAGES
OF TAMPERED BALLOTS. TODAY, IT
CAN BE DIFFICULT FOR THE AVERAGE
PERSON TO KNOW WHICH IMAGES
BEFORE THEM ARE REAL OR
FABRICATED. THIS TYPE OF
ELECTION RELATED DISINFORMATION
CAN DRAMATICALLY AFFECT VOTER
BEHAVIOR AND UNDERMINE FAITH IN
OUR ELECTIONS, EVEN IF THEY ARE
LATER DEBUNKED. AB 2839
ADDRESSES THIS GROWING THREAT BY
PROHIBITING BAD ACTORS FROM
DISTRIBUTING DIGITALLY ALTERED
MAILERS, ROBOCALLS, AND VIDEO
ADVERTISEMENTS THAT ARE
DECEPTIVE TO VOTERS AND DEPICT
FALSE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO
CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR OFFICE.
AN OFFICER CONDUCTING AN
ELECTION, AN ELECTED OFFICIAL,
OR VOTING EQUIPMENT, AND THE
BILL HAS BEEN CAREFULLY DRAFTED.
EXCUSE ME TO RESPECT THE FIRST
AMENDMENT, SPECIFICALLY, THE
MATERIALS COVERED BY THIS BILL
WOULD HAVE TO BE DIGITALLY
ALTERED, MATERIALLY DECEPTIVE,
AND WOULD BE DISTRIBUTED WITHIN
120 DAYS BEFORE AN ELECTION AND
60 DAYS AFTER, INCLUSIVE. LASTLY
THIS BILL PROVIDES A FAST TRACK
FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF TO STOP
VIOLATIONS OF THE BILL, MEMBERS
GETTING THE RIGHT INFORMATION TO
VOTERS IS CRUCIAL TO A
FUNCTIONING DEMOCRACY, AND IT
BECOMES VERY DIFFICULT TO ENSURE
THE INTEGRITY OF THE ELECTION
WHEN CONVINCING DEEPFAKES ARE
SPREAD ONLINE, BY PHONE OR
THROUGH THE MAIL TO
INTENTIONALLY MISINFORM THE
PUBLIC WITH ME TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT TODAY IS LARA
GERSHENSON, REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA INITIATIVE FOR
TECHNOLOGY AND DEMOCRACY. AND
EVAN MINTON REPRESENTING VOICES
FOR PROGRESS. YOU MAY PROCEED,
MA'AM. THANK YOU, MR. VICE CHAIR
AND MEMBERS. I'M LAURA
GERSHENSON AGAIN, POLICY
DIRECTOR AT THE CALIFORNIA
INITIATIVE FOR TECHNOLOGY AND
DEMOCRACY, WHICH IS A PROJECT OF
CALIFORNIA COMMON CAUSE. WHILE
ELECTION DISINFORMATION AND
DEEPFAKES ARE OFTEN SPREAD BY
SOCIAL MEDIA AND DISCUSSED THAT
IN THE LAST BILL, THEY CAN GO
VIRAL THE OLD FASHIONED WAY.
MAILERS TV ADS, ROBOCALLS
CONSIDER A DEEP FAKE IMAGE OF A
CANDIDATE ACCEPTING A BRIBE. IT
GOES VIRAL THROUGH A MAILER THIS
TIME INSTEAD OF ONLINE. MIGHT BE
A LITTLE MORE EXPENSIVE, BUT
IT'S THE SAME NEGATIVE THING,
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. AN ISSUE
THAT WAS RAISED IS IT ENOUGH TO
LABEL IT? IS IT ENOUGH TO SIMPLY
SAY THIS WAS A AI GENERATED?
IMAGINE THIS IS A PICTURE OF YOU
ACCEPTING THAT BRIBE. AND IT
SAYS IN RELATIVELY SMALL WRITING
AT THE BOTTOM, THIS IS AI
GENERATED. WOULD YOU IS THAT
ENOUGH OR WOULD YOU SIMPLY WANT
THAT NOT TO BE PART OF THE
ECOSYSTEM AT ALL? IT'S
DEMONSTRABLY FALSE. IT'S
DESIGNED TO IMPACT UNFAIRLY THE
ELECTION, AND IT'S DONE WITHIN A
SHORT PERIOD OF TIME OF THE
ELECTION. EXACTLY. DESIGNED TO
CHANGE THE RESULTS OF THE
ELECTION. THIS BILL IS DESIGNED
TO PREVENT THAT AND TO SIMPLY
SAY THE WORST OF THE WORST. THE
VIDEOS, THE VIDEOS ON TV, THE
IMAGES, THE ABSOLUTELY,
DEMONSTRABLY FALSE IMAGES THAT
ARE DESIGNED TO PREVENT PEOPLE
FROM VOTING ARE SIMPLY BANNED
FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME
AROUND THE ELECTION. AGAIN, AS
THE AUTHOR STATED IT, THE BILL
IS DESIGNED TO RECOGNIZE THE
LIMITS OF THE FIRST, THE
PROTECTIONS OF THE FIRST
AMENDMENT, AND MAKE SURE THAT WE
ARE NOT BROADLY BANNING BANNING
CONTENT BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO
THAT. BUT WHAT WE CAN DO, THE
FIRST AMENDMENT IS NOT ABSOLUTE,
AND WHAT WE CAN DO IS PROTECT
THE CITIZENS OF THIS STATE AND
PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY BY
BANNING, FOR THE SHORT PERIOD OF
TIME, THE WORST OF THE WORST,
THAT CONGRESS HAS NOT ACTED TO
PROTECT OUR DEMOCRACY FROM
EMERGING DIGITAL THREATS.
DESPITE THE GRAVE RISKS OF THE
2024 ELECTIONS, IT FALLS TO
CALIFORNIA TO LEAD IN THE
PROTECTION OF VOTERS AND THE
PROTECTION OF OUR DEMOCRACY. AND
WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF AB
2839. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YOU
MAY PROCEED. HI, MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS EVAN MINTON. I'M WITH
VOICES FOR PROGRESS, VÆ FOR P
GALVANIZES THE ADVOCACY OF
BUSINESS LEADERS, ENTREPRENEURS,
PHILANTHROPISTS AND OTHER
PROMINENT INDIVIDUALS WHO UNITE
TO CHAMPION A HEALTHY CLIMATE
AND ENVIRONMENT, STRENGTHEN OUR
DEMOCRACY AND ENSURE ECONOMIC
AND SOCIAL JUSTICE FOR ALL.
IMAGINE A MAILER GOING OUT JUST
DAYS BEFORE FOR YOUR NEXT
ELECTION WITH AN INCREDIBLY
CONVINCING AI GENERATED PICTURE
OF YOU SPEAKING AT AN
ANTI-CHOICE RALLY. OR FOR SOME
OF YOU, AT A PRO-CHOICE RALLY
AND YOU HAVING NO TIME TO
RESPOND, AI POSES UNIQUE AND
SIGNIFICANT THREATS TO OUR
DEMOCRATIC PROCESSES AND
ELECTIONS. IN FACT, THE WORLD
ECONOMIC FORUM RANKS MISINFORMED
, THÀNH AND DISINFORMATION AS
THE NUMBER ONE THREAT THE WORLD
FACES IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS. AI
HAS EVEN GREATER POWER TO AFFECT
STATE AND LOCAL ELECTIONS DUE TO
THE LESSENED ABILITY TO CORRECT
THE RECORD IN AN ERA OF
DECLINING PRESS AND NON
MAINSTREAM NEWS SOURCES ARE
BECOMING INCREASINGLY UTILIZED
TO SPREAD MISINFORMATION, WHICH
HAS A DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON
HISTORICALLY MARGINALIZED
COMMUNITIES AND NON-ENGLISH
SPEAKING COMMUNITIES, AND VOTERS
WHO RELY ON THEM FOR
INFORMATION. VOICES FOR PROGRESS
ADVOCATES FOR TRUTH,
TRANSPARENCY AND TRUST IN OUR
DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM. AND FOR THESE
REASONS, WE HAVE A PRIORITY,
SUPPORT POSITION ON AB 2839 AND
GREATLY URGE YOUR AI VOTE. THANK
YOU, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY
THAT WOULD LIKE TO TESTIFY IN
OPPOSITION? OKAY. WELL THEN
SEEING NONE, WE'LL ASK FOR
SUPPORTERS AND THE CROWD THAT
WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD.
STATE YOUR NAME AND
ORGANIZATION, PLEASE. GOOD
MORNING. LIZZIE KUTSUNA HERE ON
BEHALF OF TECHNET, WITH THE
SUPPORT OF AMENDED POSITION.
THANK YOU. LOUISE MILLER,
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
CLEAN MONEY CAMPAIGN AND
INDIVISIBLE CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
CARABINIERI WITH THE COMPUTER
AND COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION SUPPORT OF AMENDED.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. AUBET
FRANCO. ON BEHALF OF THE ASIAN
LAW CAUCUS AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY IN THE
AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO
EXPRESS OPPOSITION? YOUR NAME
AND ORGANIZATION, SEEING NONE.
WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND
A SECOND. I HAVE A QUESTION.
FIRST OFF, AS EXCUSE ME, AS A
MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE, HOW
DOES THIS BILL DEFINE MÀ? REALLY
DECEPTIVE. I MEAN, I HEARD ALSO
THE TERMS DEMONSTRABLY FALSE OR
MATERIALLY FALSE. I WORRY ABOUT
THE LINE. HOW HOW DO WE MAKE
THAT DISTINCTION? CAN YOU HELP
ME WITH THAT? YEAH. WELL ONE
SECOND. AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO
TRUST WITHOUT READING GLASSES,
THIS IS CAREFULLY DEFINED IN THE
SORRY AND NOT TO INTERRUPT YOU,
BUT I DO HAVE THE QUOTE. THANK
YOU THAT YOU'RE TO HAVE A
FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT
UNDERSTANDING OR IMPRESSION OF
THE EXPRESSIVE CONTENT. THAT IS
THAT ALL IS THAT THE ONLY
DEFINITION THAT YOU HAVE?
BECAUSE I STILL FIND THAT TO BE
VERY SUBJECTIVE. IT BEGINS ON IT
BEGINS ON PAGE SIX, LINE 16, AND
IT'S AND IT GOES ON FOR THAT,
THROUGH BASICALLY THROUGH PAGE
SEVEN, LINE 13. AND THEN IT
EXEMPTS OUT WHAT ISN'T SO
MODEST. SO IT SPECIFICALLY
EXEMPTS OUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DO
LIGHTING CHANGES OR SOMETHING
SMALL WITH PHOTOSHOP, WHICH
PROBABLY HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.
BUT THE DEFINITION SAID SO
MATERIALLY DECEPTIVE AND
DIGITALLY MODIFIED OR CREATED
IMAGE OR AUDIO OR VIDEO FILE
MEANS AN IMAGE OR AUDIO VIDEO
FILE THAT HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY
MANIPULATED IN A MANNER SUCH
THAT THE DIGITAL MANIPULATION
APPEARS AUTHENTIC OR GENERATES
APPEARS AUTHENTIC. SO RIGHT.
IT'S NOT A CARTOONISH THING.
AND, THE IMAGE OR VIDEO
REPRESENTS A FALSE PORTRAYAL OF
A CANDIDATE FOR ELECTED OFFICE
AND ELECTION OFFICIALS AND
ELECTED OFFICIALS, OR VOTING
MACHINES. SO IT'S A FALSE
PORTRAYAL. SO IT IS NOT IT'S NOT
QUESTIONABLE. IT'S NOT. MAYBE
THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT
HAPPENED, MAYBE IT WASN'T. IT'S
FALSE. AND THAT AND IN THE LAST
PART, THE FALSE PORTRAYAL WOULD
MAKE A REASONABLE PERSON BELIEVE
IT WAS TRUE. SO IT'S GOT TO HAVE
THAT DECEPTIVE ELEMENT. SO IT'S
FALSE. IT'S GOT TO BE FALSE. AND
IT'S GOT TO LEAD A REASONABLE
PERSON TO BELIEVE THAT IT WAS
TRUE. AND IT HAS TO HAVE BEEN
DIGITALLY MANIPULATED IN A
SIGNIFICANT FASHION. OKAY THANK
YOU. HAVE YOU ACCEPTED THE
AMENDMENTS? YES WE NEED TO GET
THAT ON RECORD. YES, YES. IF YOU
WOULD GO. THANK YOU. I HAVE A
QUESTION. BECAUSE I HAD SOME FUN
MAIL AGAINST ME WHEN I RAN FOR
OFFICE. ONE OF THE MAILERS TOOK
A PICTURE OF ME AND PUT IT IN
DONALD TRUMP'S POCKET LIKE ME,
CUT OUT IN DONALD TRUMP'S
POCKETS, THE BILL OF SALES AND
DONALD TRUMP'S POCKET. I'VE
NEVER BEEN IN HIS POCKET. SO
COULD I USE THIS LAW TO GO AFTER
THE PERSON THAT SENT ME THAT
MAIL? IT WAS DIGITALLY ALTERED.
IT MEETS YOUR DEFINITION. IT'S
FALSE. BUT WOULD A REASONABLE
PERSON THINK THAT YOU ACTUALLY
WERE SITTING IN HIS POCKET?
WELL, THEY MAY THEY MAY THINK
THAT FIGURATIVELY. I'M IN HIS
POCKET, BUT FIGURATIVELY. SO
THAT'S. BUT HOW DO WE
DISTINGUISH THAT? THAT'S VERY
DIFFICULT. IT'S NOT. IT'S YOU'RE
THAT IS A QUESTION OF OPINION.
SOMEONE COULD SAY YOU SUPPORT
HIM. YOU DON'T. THAT'S WERE YOU
LITERALLY HE LITERALLY IN HIS
POCKET. NO ONE WOULD SUGGEST
THAT. AGAIN I GO BACK TO THE
EXAMPLE OF YOU'VE GOT A
PITCHFORK AND YOU'RE ATTACKING
SOMEBODY THAT IS DEMONSTRABLY
FALSE. YOU DIDN'T DO THAT. HERE
IS A PICTURE. AND OKAY,
PITCHFORK, MAYBE THAT WOULD MAKE
IT UNREALISTIC. BUT BUT BUT SAY
BUT USE A REALISTIC WEAPON OR
SAY OR OR YOU'RE STANDING NEXT
TO A VOTING MACHINE SAYING THESE
ARE ALL HACKED, THEY'RE ALL
FALSE. IF YOU DID THAT, THAT'S
FINE. BUT IF YOU DIDN'T DO THAT,
THAT'S DEMONSTRABLE. LET ME ASK
THIS ONE. SO LET'S SAY I'M
RUNNING AGAINST SOMEONE AND THEY
TOOK A LOT OF MONEY FROM A
REALLY SHADY ORGANIZATION OR
PERSON. SO IF I WANT TO DO A
MAILER AND IT SHOWS THEM TAKING
A BAG OF CASH FROM AN ENTITY OR
A PERSON, THAT NEVER PHYSICALLY
HAPPENED, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, THEY
TOOK A CHECK IS THAT GOING TO BE
DEMONSTRATIVE? SO THESE ARE THE
THINGS I WORRY ABOUT BECAUSE
THERE'S A LOT THAT HAPPENS IN
POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS. I MEAN,
WE'RE ALL INVOLVED IN POLITICAL
CAMPAIGNS EVERY EVERY TWO YEARS.
SO WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED
DEMONSTRABLY FALSE IF I
REPRESENT MY OPPONENT TAKING A
BAG OF CASH FROM ANOTHER PERSON?
OKAY. AND THIS THERE ARE GRAY
AREAS. SO YOU'RE WHAT IS IT? YOU
KNOW, A CARTOONISH HERE'S A BIG,
GIANT BAG OF CASH THAT PROBABLY
DOESN'T MEET THE TERMS OF THIS
BILL BECAUSE CARTOONISH, LET'S
SAY IT'S THEM TAKING CASH, OKAY?
I MEAN, AND IF THEY DIDN'T DO
THAT, YOU WOULD HAVE TO COME UP
WITH ANOTHER WAY TO DO IT,
BECAUSE THAT'S YOU'VE CREATED
WHAT APPEARS TO BE AN AUTHENTIC
LOOKING IMAGE. YOU CAN STILL SAY
THE LINE, THEY TOOK A BAG OF
CASH FROM THIS PERSON RIGHT NOW.
WE PUT A DISCLAIMER, RIGHT. I
THINK IT'S CURRENT LAW THAT YOU
WOULD HAVE TO DISCLAIM. THIS IS
A MODEST SIDE IMAGE. SO BUT THIS
TAKES IT A STEP FURTHER. AND
WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE IT UNLAWFUL.
IT WOULD BAN, WELL, UNLOCK. IT
WOULD BAN FOR A STRICTLY LIMITED
TIME CLOSE TO ELECTIONS. THE
ACTUAL CREATING AN IMAGE THAT
LOOKS REAL BUT IS FALSE AND IS
DESIGNED TO INFLUENCE VOTERS
WITH A DECEPTIVELY LOOKING THING
WE DO IS DESIGNED TO INFLUENCE
VOTERS. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND THIS
IS REALLY DIFFICULT. AS AN
ELECTED, MY INSTINCT WOULD BE TO
VOTE FOR THIS BECAUSE MOST TIME
THIS STUFF IS GOING TO BE DONE
AGAINST ME. EXACTLY. BUT I
REALLY BUT I, YOU KNOW, AND SO
BUT I REALLY, REALLY STRUGGLE
WITH THE, WITH THE FIRST
AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS. SO FOR
THAT I JUST, I RESPECTFULLY,
WON'T SUPPORT IT. BUT I AGAIN, I
BELIEVE YOU'RE GENUINE AND
SINCERE IN ADDRESSING THIS
ISSUE. SO I APPRECIATE THE
DIALOG. YEAH, WE'RE REALLY
TRYING TO GET THE BAD ACTORS OUT
THERE AND PUTTING OUT
INFORMATION THAT'S FALSE AND
DECEIVING. AND WE'VE DONE A GOOD
JOB, I THINK, OF DEALING WITH
THE FIRST AMENDMENT PIECE OF
THIS TO MAKE IT, WORKABLE. SO
BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
THANK YOU. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY
OTHER COMMENTS? WE HAVE A
MOTION. EXCUSE ME. WE HAVE A
MOTION. AND A SECOND, PLEASE
CALL FOR THE QUESTION ON AB 2839
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER PELLERIN. THE
MOTION IS TO PASS AS AMENDED AND
BE RE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE
ON JUDICIARY. Kò PELLERIN I,
PELLERIN I LACKEY, NOT VOTING.
LACKEY NOT VOTING. BENNET BERMAN
I BERMAN I CERVANTES. CERVANTES
I EASILY NØ. ASSELIN. NØ. LOW
LOW I WEBER. YOUR BILL IS ON
CALL. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
OKAY. EXCELLENT DOWN. ONE TO GO.
YOU STILL HAVE ONE. YEAH. I'M
JUST. THIS IS REAL LIFE. THAT'S
REALLY NICE. OKAY. SYMBOLIC. ARE
MEMBERS. THE BAG OF CASH IS A
REAL THING. YEAH I WOULD DO
THAT. ACCORDING TO THEM, EVEN
THE BAND. YEAH, BECAUSE. AND
THEN EVEN THOUGH IT'S OKAY.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
ALL RIGHT. WE GOT SEVERAL BILLS
ON CALL, SO WE'RE GOING TO GO
AHEAD AND START WITH THOSE. I'M
GOING TO GET MY GLASSES.
ALTHOUGH YOU MADE THIS VERY NICE
AND BIG FOR ME. I'M GOING TO
LIFT THE CALL ON ITEM FOUR AB
2627 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER PELLERIN
. THE CURRENT VOTE IS 4 TO 1,
WITH ME VOTING AYE. MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. BENNETT HERE.
Ó. AYE. BENNETT. AYE CERVANTES.
CERVANTES. AYE. LOW LOWE. AYE
YEAH. THAT BILL IS OUT 7 TO 1
THE NEXT BILL, I'M GOING TO LET
THE CALL ON ITEM THREE. AB 2355
BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER WENDY
CARRILLO. THE CURRENT VOTE IS 4
TO 1 WITH MYSELF VOTING AYE.
MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. BENNETT. AYE.
BENNETT AYE. CERVANTES.
CERVANTES. AYE. LOWE LOWE. AYE.
7 TO 1. THAT BILL IS OUT. I'M
NOW GOING TO LET THE CALL ON
ITEM SIX AB 2655 BY ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BERMAN. THE CURRENT VOTE
IS 3 TO 1 WITH THE CHAIR VOTING
AYE. MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE
CALL THE ABSENT MEMBERS.
BENNETT. AYE BENNETT. AYE. LOWE
LOWE. AYE. WEBER. THAT BILL IS
OUT 5 TO 1. WE NOW HAVE. I'M
GOING TO LIFT THE CALL ON ITEM
TWO AB. IS THAT 1807 1807 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER CERVANTES. THE
CURRENT VOTE IS 3 TO 2, WITH THE
CHAIR VOTING AYE. MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. BENNETT. AYE
BENNETT. AYE. LOWE. LOWE. AYE.
WEBER THAT BILL IS OUT 5 TO 2.
LAST BILL ON CALL. I'M GOING TO
LIFT THE CALL ON ITEM SEVEN AB
2839 BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER PELLERIN
. THE CURRENT VOTE IS 4 TO 1,
WITH THE CHAIR VOTING AYE. MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE
ABSENT MEMBERS. BENNETT. AYE.
BENNETT AYE. WEBER. AND THAT
BILL IS OUT 5 TO 1. WHAT'S THAT?
OH. OH OH, WE GOT CONSENT AS
WELL. OH, MR. BENNETT AS WELL.
YEP.
CAN WE JUST. CAN WE JUST DO
THAT? WOW. WE'RE WAITING ON
CONSENT FOR ONE MEMBER SO LOW.
YOU GOT TO STAY, THOUGH. WAIT
OKAY, WE'LL LIFT THE CALL ON THE
CONSENT CALENDAR. MADAM
SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
BENNETT. CERVANTES CERVANTES.
AYE. LOW. LOW. AYE MR. OKAY.
WE'RE GOING. WE'RE GOING TO WAIT
FOR MR. BENNETT TO ADD ON TO
THAT ONE. SO WE'LL BE PATIENT
.
WE HAVE AN ABSENT MEMBER HERE TO
ADD ON, MR. BENNETT, ADDING ON
TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR. AYE.
OKAY CAN WE GET ALL THE. I THINK
THERE'S ONE MORE BILL. CAN WE
DOUBLE CHECK? MR. BENNETT ON AB
2642 BY MR. BERMAN BENNETT. AYE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
OKAY. PERFECT. PERFECT. BECAUSE
THEY SAID
.
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
WEBER, WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF
BILLS FOR YOU TO ADD ON. ON AB
1807 BY CERVANTES WEBER. WEBER.
I ON ITEM SIX, AB 2655 BY
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BERMAN WEBER.
WEBER I. AND LAST ITEM SEVEN ON
AB 2839 BY PELLERIN WEBER.
WEBER. I THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT
CONCLUDES THE ITEMS ON THE
COMMITTEE'S AGENDA FOR TODAY.
AND THIS HEARING IS ADJOURNED.
THANK. IT'S LIKE A STROBE LIGHT.
YEAH HEY, BEN. TEN FOR FIFTH
LIGHT STARTED FLASHING DURING
THE HEARING. YEAH THERE'S AN
ELECTRICIAN OUT THERE. AS SOON
AS WE LEAVE, HE'S GOING TO FIX
IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU