Assembly Standing Committee on Health

Bonta. Waldron. Aguiar-Curry. Arambula. Wendy Carrillo. Flora. Vince Fong. Haney. Jones Sawyer. Maienschein. McCarty. Joe Patterson. Rodriguez. Santiago. Schiavo. Weber.

Thank you. Secretary has established a quorum. With that, Dr. Weber, you may proceed on AB 1316.

Thank you.

Sorry, AB 82.

Thank you, Chair and committee. I will be presenting AB 82 this morning. AB 82 will ban the sale of diet pills to minors unless prescribed by a physician. This bill would establish an ID check for the sale of dietary supplements and drugs to prevent minors from purchasing them. Eating disorders are a serious public health problem facing people of all races, ages, and genders, but it's especially troubling for our young people.

While California is at the forefront of regulations concerning weight loss, dietary supplements, and diet pills, we do not prohibit the sale of these products to minors despite well-documented dangers. Recent studies from the University of Minnesota School of Public Health and Stanford University found that individuals using diet pills and laxatives were more likely to be diagnosed with and develop serious eating disorders.

Additionally, as noted in this committee analysis, these supplements are regulated as food and, therefore, do not undergo the rigorous scientific evaluation from the FDA that other drugs are subjected to. Therefore, weight loss drugs and supplements have been found to be laced with pesticides, heavy metals, anabolic steroids, and pharmaceuticals that can cause strokes, cancers, and severe liver injury resulting in transplants, none of which we want our most vulnerable exposed to.

23,000 Americans are sent to the emergency room every year due to dietary supplements, and 25% of those are specifically weight loss supplements. One study showed that 11% of teens have already reported using dietary supplements specifically for weight loss, and we know that teens are especially targeted by these pills due to self-image issues that most adolescents have. These teens turn to quick measures without considering the long-lasting impacts that these diet pills and supplements could have on their bodies.

A study published as recent as 2020 reported that adolescents and young adult women who use over-the-counter diet pills have six times the risk of being diagnosed with an eating disorder within the next three years compared to those that never use these diet pills. It is extremely important that we pass this bill so that we can prevent our already vulnerable youth from unnecessary health problems and eating disorders associated with weight loss supplements and over-the-counter diet pills.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote, and with me today is Jessica Marquez, who will read the testimony on behalf of Kate Rogers from GENup, who is, unfortunately, in a different committee at this time, giving testimony.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Jessica. I'll be reading on behalf of our witness. My name is Kate Rodgers. I'm currently a junior at UCLA, and I serve as Director of Policy for Generation Up. GENup is an entirely student-led advocacy organization focusing on advancing educational equity through the legislative process. I'm honored to be here today to represent GENup and testify in support of Assembly Bill 82.

AB 82 prevents the sale of over-the-counter diet pills and supplements to minors across the state. In light of the ongoing youth mental health crisis, this legislation is important now more than ever. I, like many other teenagers during the pandemic, turned towards excessive exercise and restrictive eating to cope with social isolation. I know firsthand the long-term mental and physical effects of dieting, and I am not alone. According to the University of Michigan Medical School, eating disorders in teens more than doubled during the pandemic.

Access to weight loss products and diet supplements only makes it easier for young people to fall into dangerous habits. Not only do these products encourage unhealthy behaviors, they are also unsafe. If used in excess, weight loss pills can result in serious health consequences, including death. It is time for the legislature to take the necessary steps to prevent diet pill retailers and manufacturers from profiting off of the rise of disordered eating in California's teenagers.

On behalf of the 4000 associated members of GENup, I strongly urge you to protect California youth and respectfully request your aye vote on AB 82 today. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Without any other primary witnesses and support, we'll now move to any additional witnesses in support who are in the hearing room, who want to offer in a me-too. Seeing none, are there - oh, there we go.

[Unaudiable]

Thank you. We'll now move to witnesses in opposition. Primary witnesses in opposition or who are not in support. We'll have two minutes for each witness in opposition and, sorry, three minutes for each witness in opposition. Please go ahead and begin.

So sorry. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, Members. Happy New Year. Hope you all had pleasant holidays and saw your families. Robert Moutrie for the California Chamber of Commerce. We are opposed, but I want to be very clear. We are not opposed to restrictions on prescriptions on these drugs. We're not opposed to the policy here at all. We are not associated with the opposition statement in the analysis from the National Prox Association. We are opposed on a very narrow ground.

I've spoken to the author's office about this related to the bill, as written, presently requires us to change policy, which is, again, not our issue around these drugs, but includes a line saying that if a staff member fails to do what we all want, fails to check IDs, fails to insist on a prescription, we cannot discipline them for failing to do that.

And we just believe that in order for us to effectuate the bill, we have to be able to discipline staff who don't do what you and we want. So we plan to propose amends in that, we've already spoken, expect to have those amends shortly and hope to remove opposition when that time comes. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next witness?

Great, thank you, Chair and Members. Anthony Samson with Samson Advisors here on behalf of the Council for Responsible Nutrition. CRN is a leading association representing the dietary supplement and functional food manufacturers and ingredients suppliers. CRN actually removed its opposition to this very bill in the form of 1341, introduced a couple of years ago that after long negotiations and discussions with Assemblymember Christina Garcia, the author at the time, we were able to remove opposition before that made it to the Governor's desk.

Unfortunately, the Governor vetoed that bill and, in September of 2022, then convened a Department of Public Health working group to examine the issues involved and a task force with developing a report on their findings. CRN was able to participate as an observer in those discussions, and those recommendations were due at the end of last year but have not yet been released.

We would have enjoyed having a conversation about those recommendations here today, but anxiously await those to be released and appreciate the Assemblymember's willingness to continue engaging in productive dialogue with CRN as it continues through the process.

We believe that there is a way to narrowly tailor this policy that will achieve the goals of the author while ensuring that legitimate, safe, and regulated dietary supplements remain available in the marketplace and that retailers have clear direction from an appropriate public health authority as to which products are affected by the restrictions. So again, we were neutral on 1341 when it was in the same form. We understand that CDPH intends to release those recommendations, and we're looking forward to a productive dialogue moving forward on those. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other witnesses in the hearing room in opposition? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to committee for questions or comments. Assemblymember Aguiar-Curry?

Is it your intent, Assemblymember, is that once we get the stakeholder group has that information, the report, will you be amending the bill if necessary?

Yes. We too were anxiously anticipating the release of the report as they were supposed to have it at the end of last year, but unfortunately it wasn't there and so we do plan on taking a look at it, amending our bill as necessary once they do finally release him. Thank you.

Thank you, Assembly Member Schiavo.

I just wanted to thank the author for bringing this know this is a really important issue as a mom of a daughter and a stepdaughter. I know how challenging these times are for our young girls and young kids and would be happy to sign on as a co-author if you'll have me.

Thank you. Seeing no other comment from the Committee, we have Assemblymember Arambula, Dr. Arambula, who offered a motion. The motion is to due pass to Judiciary, and a second by Assemblymember Aguiar-Curry. With that, you may close.

Well, I want to thank again the Committee staff and you all for allowing for us to present this bill today. I want to thank my supporter here in absence, but also those who came to speak. I do look forward to working with the chamber. We just heard about the concerns a few days ago and worked with you all before with that same concern on a previous bill.

And I am very confident that we'll be able to work come to a reasonable conclusion that will allow you all to become neutral. But this is a very important bill for the health of our adolescents and they are the future of this state. And so with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote on AB 82.

Thank you. Secretary, can you call the roll?

[Roll call]

That Bill passes with a vote of nine to zero.

Thank you. With that, we will move on to AB 1316, Ms. Irwin's Bill presented by assembly member Ward today. Please go. Come join us. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Members. I'm pleased to present AB 1316 today, which I've joint author with Assemblymember Erwin. As the number of Californians presenting in a psychiatric crisis continues to increase, hospital emergency departments have become a critical part of the safety net for individuals who desperately need psychiatric treatment.

In recent years, though, counties have instructed hospitals to hold a patient in the emergency Department if the patient is on an involuntary psychiatric hold, or if the patient has MediCal, leading to an unnecessary, prolonged stay in the emergency Department. In fact, data suggests that about 25% of individuals brought to the emergency Department in psychiatric crisis remain there after three days. This has led to valuable ED space being taken up in the hospitals across the state.

AB 1316 would address this issue, clarifying that hospitals may arrange a timely and appropriate transfer for patients requiring inpatient psychiatric care to the first available bed at an inpatient facility, regardless of payer preference. The Bill also clarifies that MediCal managed care plans must pay hospital emergency departments for the care they provide to MediCal beneficiaries experiencing a mental health crisis. This would codify an existing DHCs policy that sought to ensure that hospitals are paid for the mental health care services they provide.

With me to testify in support of this Bill is Kirsten Barlow, Vice President of the policy at the California Hospital Association.

Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to present this Bill, and thank you for being here to represent Assemblywoman Irwin today. You did a great job of explaining what the Bill does. So I'm not going to go back through a description of what we're aiming to achieve here, but really to point out a couple of things.

When in the case of counties asking a hospital emergency room to hold on to a patient because they're on an involuntary hold or because they have MediCal, that's really treating patients with a psychiatric emergency very differently than an emergency room physician would be treating any other kind of medical emergency.

And so we really want to make sure that our hospitals know that they are empowered to really get patients to the right level of care as quickly as possible, the same way that we would with any other medical emergency that presents in the emergency room. Under federal laws, hospitals are obligated, in fact, to make those transfers timely without ever asking anything about the person's insurance. In terms of ensuring that we clear up who pays for the Medi Cal visit.

We learned just by doing research that over time, we've been really unclear with our bifurcated Medi Cal system in determining whether the county mental health departments or the Medi Cal managed care plans are supposed to pay for ER visits when a person comes in a psychiatric emergency, because, as you know, the counties have a role to play for people with a serious mental illness, and the plans have a role to play with people with mild and moderate.

And so it's our understanding that the Department of Healthcare Services, in its new contracts with the Medi Cal managed care plans, wants to really clear this up once and for all and ensure that it's clear that for any type of medical emergency, including psychiatric, that the Medi Cal managed care plans pay for that visit. Again, thank you. And we urge your aye vote

Thank you. We will move to any witnesses. Additional witnesses in the room who would like to offer a me too. Seeing none. Are there any witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. We'll bring it back to Committee. We do have a motion do pass to approach by Assembly Member Flora. Seconded by Assemblymember Waldron. Comments from the Committee secretary, please. You may close.

Respectfully request your aye vote.

Thank you. Secretary, please call the roll.

Roll Call

That Bill passes with a vote of 12 to zero. Thank you so much. We will move on now to AB 941. Assembly Member Waldron.

Sitting in the hot seat here. Senator Wiener is expected to join us shortly, if he can get here in time. Thank you, Madam Chair and Members of the Committee. I really can't express enough in words how much I appreciate the work of the Committee on the amendments and the work that Judy put into this prior to her retirement. So I definitely support the Committee amendments and the way the Bill is in print. Currently. As we know, California is experiencing a severe mental health crisis with rising rates of anxiety, depression, substance use, posttraumatic stress disorder, suicide, and other debilitating conditions. My Bill, AB 941, proposes a solution to this crisis through the exploration of the therapeutic possibilities of psychedelic assisted therapy. We need the data, the research, and the recommendations of experts in this promising field of therapeutics. Having the data and protocol recommendations will help us in legislating good policy regarding the use of psychedelics in clinical settings. AB 941 will create a work group under the California Health and Human Services Agency to study and recommend a framework for the clinical therapeutic use of psychedelic substances. These therapies have the potential to save countless lives. What this Bill does not do is decriminalize any psychedelics. This is a true study Bill. No one will be treated with psychedelics under this Bill. Nonaddictive natural psychedelic plants and fungi show significant potential in addressing various mental health conditions such as post traumatic stress disorder, suicidal tendencies, end of life anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders. It is also particularly beneficial to those on the front lines, such as our veterans and first responders. In fact, I first got involved with this issue, having met with Navy SEALs regarding the success that they had in these therapies, but they have to go across the border in order to get it. A study by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies found that 88% of participants with severe posttraumatic stress disorder experienced a clinically significant reduction in post traumatic stress scores after MDMA assisted therapy. Additionally, 67% of participants in the MDMA study group no longer met the criteria for posttraumatic stress two months after the sessions. The promising research on psychedelic substances, their nonaddictive nature, and the success stories from states like Oregon and Colorado show the urgency of exploring these innovative therapies. It's time for California to step up. Through the work group, AB 941 professionally licensed providers can identify specific conditions suitable for psychedelic assisted therapy based on extensive research. And above all, AB 941 is proactive and forward thinking approach to the mental health crisis in California and key to unlocking the therapeutic potential of psychedelics for use in clinical settings. I'm proud to have Senator Wiener here to co present with me as he has been a leader in this policy space for many years, and I am very thankful for the partnership this important issue has created. Thank you.

Thank you, Assembly Member Waldron. Welcome, Senator Wiener.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So I'm here in full support of AB 941. Assembly Member Waldron and I are partnering together this year in the space of psychedelic therapy. Later this month, or early February, we'll be introducing a Senate Bill to legalize and create a structure for psychedelic assisted therapy in line with the governor's veto message of our psychedelic decriminalization last year. We're grateful that the Governor didn't simply say no, but indicated what he would say yes to, which was a therapeutic focus Bill. So we're going to introduce that Bill. Assemblymember Waldron and I will be partnering on that. And I would ask that you support advancing this Bill today. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any other witnesses in support.

Madam Chair and members, Anthony Molina with new approach advocacy here in support on the Bill, and we continue to look forward to working with Senate Member Waldron and Senator Weiner on this very important issue. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any primary witnesses in opposition in the hearing room? Are there any witnesses who. Are any additional witnesses in opposition? Seeing none. We'll bring it back to Committee. Assembly Member Carrillo.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and it's good to see you in that position. Congratulations. To the Senator and the Assembly Member, I want to just say I applaud your tenacity and courage in continuing to bring this Bill forward. I think the intention of what you're trying to move forward is compassionate treatment for individuals. And I still remember the testimony by the 9/11, September 11, firefighters that came from New York and other places to testify on the importance of how some substances have helped through PTSD. My concern then and my concern now, and I'm glad that you're doing the working group, has always been the distribution of substances. Public safety continues to be a priority to all of us as the state experiences a housing, homelessness and fentanyl crisis. I want to make sure that we are creating innovative solutions for some of our biggest issues related to mental health and how some substances can be helpful and supportive in that, my concern is just simply on the medical personnel needed to be able to do these treatments, as well as ensuring that the public street sale of certain substances isn't harmful to individuals and that we're not creating an opportunity for there to be more "drugs on the street", but that we're actually creating the clinical approaches necessary for some hallucinogenics. So I'm happy to help support the conversation to move forward, but for me personally, and I know it's a concern shared by many others, it's until we have that public safety component on lock, until we have the medical professionals behind it supporting it, until we have the legalized sale of certain products, then it's still going to be very difficult to move forward. So I applaud your courage and the commitment and the intent to support and help individuals in need. But I worry about the public safety aspect in the overall conversation. Thank you.

Just comment. Thank you so much for that, because it is a concern for all of us. One of the things that this Bill will authorize this work group to do is look at who are the folks in the clinical settings that would be licensed to do the therapeutic studies, what type of licensure is needed, so that we can be sure that the experienced people in this are actually doing the hands on clinical therapies. So that's really important. One of the things that we've had to go up against as we work through these issues is where is the data on this? Where is the research? Anything that's documented. And I think what we need as a foundation is to get all of that put together in one place. So this work group would be comprised of folks who are working in the clinical settings, those who are experienced with the use of these type of therapies, or at least the drugs themselves, they're all natural, to allow for the best policy decisions by us. It's really hard for us. We're not the doctors and the Clinicians to make the decisions. So bringing together the researchers and the policymakers is the best way to achieve the results that we're trying to achieve and to hopefully save lives in that. And the goal is to do this in a clinical setting. So this Bill, as I said, doesn't decriminalize anything or put anything out there. It's really a way to get the data, get the information, and bring it back to us as the policymakers so that we can move forward with the best decision.

Dr. Weber.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Before I go to what I was going to ask, I just want to piggyback off of something you just said. You said this is going to be done in a clinical setting. What clinical setting are you referring to?

So this will not do any of that. This just is the research part of it to come up with those. What is the best clinical setting for it.? Where would this occur? What would the standards be for whoever the clinician is that would be doing it? What would the education levels be? All of those things, because right now we don't have that. There are folks who are doing it, but they're not in this country. They either come from here and go over the border to do it, or they're in Germany, because it's not something that we've been doing here or is allowed in the United States at this point. So this work group will be studying that issue and bringing those recommendations to us.

Okay, so I guess I'm still confused, just maybe with the language that you're using. Because when I think of clinic, when I think of trials, I'm thinking of people that actually sign up for clinical trials. You have those that are tested, that you compare to those that are untested. You monitor them for a while, but this work group isn't going to have that. So what exactly is it that they'll be researching to create, to bring forth to the Legislature in 2026?

So there are studies out there, but they're kind of random and they're out there. We have to bring them all to one place. Like the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies had done a study recently regarding PTSD. So we have that information. But there are also people, as I mentioned, the Navy SEALs and those who are getting these therapeutic remedies administered to them now and showing results. And it's a way that we can bring what those groups have put together into this one work group so we can figure out the best source of recommendation to us as we move forward. There's been some significant achievements with it. And in order for us to be able to move forward with the therapies, we have to have this data. We have to have the knowledge of how it can best be administered, because the people that have come forward and said that it has helped them has been significant. People with suicidal thoughts now no longer have that. And the way they use these therapies to help them go back into the situation and deal with their trauma, with someone whose license and experience is really eye opening and innovative, and we want to be able to look at it. And that's what this Bill does. It doesn't authorize the therapeutic use or anything at all. It allows us to look at what the potentials are, try to get the data, try to get the information so that we can answer your questions. But without that, we're kind of still stumbling in the dark a little bit. So it's really the first step in order to look and see the potential.

You know, I've spoken with Senator Wiener about this many times as far as where is the data, especially in certain patient populations, like pregnant patients. Right. But I think some of the lingo that you were saying was just kind of tripping me up. And I guess my other question is, seeing that it was in June of 2023 that the FDA came out with the guidelines for clinical trials in this particular area, how are we going to have the data, the evidence based scientific data that we use in the medical community by 2026 to say, yes, what you've done in this work group is something that we should adopt here in California? And are we also anticipating that by 2026, that the FDA would have come out and approved these medications at the same time?

So I think there are two things here. There is federally FDA approved medicines, specific medicines for specific purposes, and that is on the track that it's on, which is good. The FDA has yet to approve anything cannabis related for medicine, so I'm hoping that that will happen. But this is a complementary track in terms of people using psychedelics under the supervision of a professional, like a therapist, which they are doing right now. Many, many people are doing that right now. And what we are planning to do with the Senate Bill is to try to actually create that structure in terms of that therapeutic use. It doesn't need to be a doctor situation that becomes, with physicians and prescribing, that'll be driven by the FDA. But in terms of having a therapeutic setting, which, again, is happening right now, there are some very talented therapists out there. They're in the shadows right now because we have not brought them out of the shadows, and that's what we want to do. So none of this is the perfect way that we would want to do it in the perfect, rational world, where we would probably never have banned these substances in the first place, and we would not have shut down the research 50 years ago. But we're doing it in California. We're not waiting for the Federal Government to bless it. We've learned in the past that that's not necessarily the best way to go. We are rooting for the Federal Government to get it together and for the FDA to approve these therapies. But at the same time, we want to make sure that our folks, including our first responders who are suffering, have access, not in the shadows, but in the sunlight, to therapies that, as you'll recall from the 911 firefighter who's here is literally saving people's lives and stopping them from killing themselves.

Yes, and I appreciate that. I guess my concern is what we've talked about before. No, physicians don't necessarily have to prescribe these medications or even necessarily be in this space. However, you do need to have some kind of studies that show its effectiveness and side effects and who should not be and potential long term consequences. And so I think, once again, my concern in this space is we're putting a group of people together to do a study, which is great, but what is the material that they will be studying from, and how valid is that material that they're looking at?

So just operating from the baseline today. So today, let's say you're a pregnant individual who says, someone told me that I might benefit from using mushrooms. What do you do today? You go on the Internet, you look it up. You hope that maybe you know someone who hopefully knows what they're talking about, and then you sort of figure it out, and it may be awesome or it may not be. I think we want to get to a point where in California, you can have people who are actually certified by the state as individuals who know what they're talking about so that you can say, oh, I can go to this person. State of California has said they have gone through the training and have the knowledge that they need, and I can ask them, I have this particular mental health condition. Will this be helpful or harmful to me? I am pregnant. Will this be helpful or harmful? And that compared to where we are now, whereas you have no one that you can know for sure is the right person, I think that is a market improvement, and I think that's where we want to go.

Again, I look at what data are we looking at and what is the validity of that data? Were these actually randomized controlled trials, or is it all anecdotal stories from individuals? And we don't have these stories from people who actually had negative side effects or long term consequences. And so I think that you can't control what everybody does, but when the state says it's okay to do it, I do think that people assume at that point that it is safe. And so, I just want to make sure that, at least for me, when I'm looking at something and when I'm supporting something, where is the data health wise? And that's why I'm saying this group, which I think is great, but what are they going to be looking at? What kind of studies are they going to be evaluating, especially given the fact that the regulations or the guidelines of how these clinical trials should be done just came out in June of 2023.

I just want to say that the group would be made up of research scientists with expertise in clinical studies and drug approval process under the FDA, as well as University researchers with expertise in psychedelics. I, as a Legislator, can't speak to where the studies are or anything, but these folks that we want to put on this work group would be knowledgeable about what studies are out there, as well as persons with expertise in psychedelic therapy, medicine and public health, drug policy, harm reduction, youth drug education, and law enforcement folks would all be in this work group because it is important. We need the studies. That's what this is about. We need the studies. We need the research. It would really be difficult for us as policymakers to move forward without those studies. So that's what we're trying to achieve with this.

And just to be clear, there are already a number of peer reviewed studies in places like the New England Journal of Medicine. So I don't want anyone to walk away thinking there are no scientific peer reviewed studies. There are. The FDA has its own type of study in terms of approval of actual pharmaceutical interventions, but that doesn't mean that there aren't existing studies. There are.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments from the Committee? Assembly Member Schiavo?

So the guidelines that just came out in June, do you have an update or any information on if there are studies planned coming from those guidelines or, I mean, between two and a half years from now? It seems like there could probably be a study that happens or multiple studies that happen, and now that there's guidelines, it makes it a little bit easier for folks to do that. I just don't know if you have any updated information on where that's going.

I'll just start off and then let the Senator. Our goal is to build upon that. And as the Governor also indicated, we need the framework in order to move forward. So we have those guidelines. We need to make them work with the types of policies that we're trying to do. And that's why we want to bring the experts together to actually build upon what those guidelines were.

There are groups that have been developing psychedelic based pharmaceutical products for years, and those have been in process. They now have the structure from the FDA. And so that will all be moving forward, and that's great. So at some point, I don't know when. At some point, that will mean that physicians will be able to write a prescription of the specific pharmaceutical for a specific condition. What we're talking about here is really a parallel track to that, because this is about people under the supervision of some sort of therapist, most likely, and this will be in the Senate Bill, in something certified by the state being able to use a product in a safe, controlled setting, not on their own, and it will not be dependent on the FDA approving a particular product. That may be the end goal, and I hope we get there. But there are also people who, they may not be in a situation where they need to have a physician overseeing every aspect of it. They can do it with a therapist. And that's been working well for a lot of people for decades. And we want to take it out of the shadows and into the sunlight.

Thank you. I appreciate this, and I appreciate you bringing this Bill forward. I think at the end of the day, I did not support Senator Weiner's Bill. Last time, though, the veterans who came to, I had my lobby in my office filled with veterans with incredibly powerful stories that moved me to tears about how it really made a difference for them. But I know there are a number of questions still remaining around this, around exactly what this Bill is getting to. Who can prescribe this, administer it, take people through it, because it sounds like it's a very intensive experience, right, where you need to be with someone that you trust to help guide you through that, to get to the other side, and to get past PTSD or whatever it is that you're working through. And so I think that this is a really important step of that process to figure out who's really qualified, what are the guidelines, what is a certification or anything that people need to go through to make sure that this is something that is done in a really therapeutic and safe and supportive way. So I'm happy to support it today because of that. And I think that there's continued conversations that we need to have around other policy beyond this. But I think delving into figuring out how this can make a difference, when people are telling me stories of going to therapy for years and then going to have this experience over a weekend and their lives are completely changed. When people are struggling and we see the high rate of suicide amongst veterans, specifically, as the chair of the Military and Veteran Affairs Committee, you have to look at that seriously, and you have to take it seriously that this is changing people's lives in a really profound and important way so that they can be healthy and thrive. And not to mention stories of how their families were being impacted when people are dealing with alcohol addiction and other things that they were using to kind of deal with the PTSD that they were struggling with, and all of that went away when they went through these treatments. So just thank you for continuing to figure out where the wiggle room is and ways to move this issue forward, because I know at the end of the day, it's really the goal of helping people.

And with that, I just want to remind us that this is really very much responsive to the governor's detail message about what needed to be next steps. I want to appreciate our Vice Chair, Waldron for bringing this forward and Senator Wiener for ensuring that we have an opportunity to continue to do this. I think the strategy of convening a work group to really establish a governing framework for psychedelic assisted therapy is very in keeping with the goals of ensuring that we have a multitude of therapies available to Californians. And with that, I will ask if you'd like to close, and then I will look for a motion.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Committee, for all the questions and discussion. And because we have so many questions and discussions, we really need to bring together experts in the field to help us as we navigate this issue. We don't want to ignore it. The potential could be great. As we've seen, it has helped a lot of people. And when you hear those stories, they are very moving and saving a life is worth it. So I really would hope for your aye vote and appreciate the discussion. Thank you.

Thank you. Do I have a motion to do pass to appropriations? Assemblymember Haney moves. Majority Leader Aguiar Curry seconds. With that secretary, call the role, please.

Bonta. Bonta, aye Waldron. Waldron, aye. Aguiar-Curry. Aguiar-Curry, aye. Arambula. Arambula, aye. Wendy Carrillo. Wendy Carrillo, aye. Flora. Flora, aye. Vince Fong. Haney. Haney, aye. Jones Sawyer. Jones Sawyer, aye. Maienschein. Maienschein, not voting. McCarty. McCarty, aye. Joe Patterson. Joe Patterson, not voting. Rodriguez. Rodriguez, not voting. Santiago. Santiago, aye. Schiavo. Schiavo, aye. Weber.

Thank you. That Bill passes with a vote of 11 to zero. Thank you, Vice Chair. At this time, we've dispensed with the review of the hearing of all of our bills and we will allow for Committee Members to add on or change votes. We'll have Committee Members come to a mic and we'll start with AB 1316. Any add ons for AB 1316?

Maienschein, Maienschein I. McCarty, McCarty I. Rodriguez, Rodriguez I. Santiago, Santiago I.

Next, AB 82. That motion now passes. Bill now passes with 16 to zero. We'll move on to AB 82.

Flora. Maienschein, Maienschein I. McCarty, McCarty I. Rodriguez, Rodriguez I. Santiago, Santiago I.

That Bill now passes with a vote of 13 to zero. We'll move on to AB 941. Waldron.

Vince Fong, Weber.

That Bill still passes with a vote of 11 to zero. With that, can I entertain a motion to adjourn in? Thank you. Some of them were Joe Sawyer, seconded by Schiavo. Thanks so much for our very First Committee with me as chair of our Health Committee. Have a wonderful day.