House Floor

Will the house come to order? Mister Clerk, please call the roll.

[Roll Call] Madam Speaker, 50 Members are present. One is not present.

Item number two, reading of the journal. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I move we dispense with the reading of the journal of the 41st through the 43rd days and prove approve the same as the read throughout.

Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

It has been moved and seconded that journal days 41 through 43 be approved. Any discussion? If not, we will be taking a voice vote. All those in favor say Aye.

All those opposed say no. The motion is carried. Journal days 41 through 43 are approved. Item number three, messages from the governor. Mister Clerk, are there any messages from the governor?

Madam Speaker, there are none.

Item number four, Senate communications. Mister Clerk, are there any Senate communications?

Yes, Madam Speaker. If you and the Members will turn your attention to the addendum to today's order of the day, we are in receipt of a communication informing the House that the Senate has disagreed to the amendments proposed by the House

to the noted Senate Concurrent Resolutions. We are in further receipt of a communication informing the house the Senate has appointed conferees to the noted Senate Concurrent Resolutions.

Finally, we are in receipt of communications informing the house that the Senate has appointed conferees to the noted house and Senate bills.

Members, are there any introductions? Representative Marten.

Thank you, Speaker. April is Medicaid awareness this month, which for Hawaii means Quest Awareness Month. Quest covers one third of our keiki, most of our very low income residents, and people needing services other forms of insurance don't provide,

such as care for kupuna and people with disabilities. What our constituents that rely on QUEST for their health care need to know this year is that there's federal policy changes that purposefully make it harder to qualify,

like more frequent eligibility renewals and requirements for documented work, training, or volunteer hours. Our visitors here today are doing what they can to communicate this, but they ask us to inform our constituents as well.

I would like to recognize, if you could just call when your organization is called, the advocates here behind this initiative are MedQuest, AlohaCare, Department of Health, Hawaii Primary Care Association, Papa Oololokahi, Hawaii Community Foundation,

American Cancer Society Action Network, Hawaii Children's Action Network, Pacific Government Relations, Kaumu Kapili Church, and Indivisible Hawaii. May I please enter their names into the journal and members please welcome our guests.

Representative Lee.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In the gallery today, we have some kind human beings and some advocates from the Coalition for Tobacco Free Hawaii, Nate Hicks, Sai Shibata, Gregory Cocheril, Scott Sentred, Kevin Ramirez, and Don Weisman.

Please stand and be recognized, and welcome to your House of Representatives.

Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I wanted to, introduce a few at advocates and activists who are in the gallery today, including one of our LGBTIQ commissioners, Michael Golojuch junior, please stand and be recognized and welcome to your House of Representatives.

We also, we also have Madeline and says, who is, an advocate and outreach worker with the Hawaii health and harm reduction. Welcome to your House of Representatives.

And one final round of introductions I want to introduce, to, staff members of the ACLU of Hawaii, Mandy Fernandez and Josh Frost. Welcome to your House of Representatives.

There are no further introductions. Recess. Subject to the call of the Chair.

Will the house come to order? Before we begin the order of the day, I think we have some late introductions.

Representative Keohokapu-Lee Loy.

Thank you, madam speaker. In the gallery, we have some good looking cowboys for sure. In the gallery, we have Senator Tim Richards, his wife Terry Richards, and the kids, AR and Ruby Richards here today. Welcome to your House of Representatives.

Representative Quinlan.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I see a dear friend in the gallery today and I know he won't like me doing this, but Brian Miyamoto, the Executive Director of the Farm Bureau, he has helped out so much.

So many of my farmers to recover from the devastating floods in the White Louis. So, Brian, welcome to your House of Representatives.

Representative Chun.

Thank you, Speaker. Members, today is cattlemen's at the Capitol Day. And in the gallery, we have some of our members from the Hawaii Cattlemen's Council from across the state who are visiting us. So I just want to recognize them. Please rise.

Welcome to your House of Representatives and permission to insert their names into the journal.

So ordered.

Thank you.

Okay. Let's move on to the order of the day. Item number five, final reading.

Members there will be three motions one to agree to the Senate amendments one to suspend the rules for final reading by consent and one to pass the House bills on final reading Representative Kahaloa for the motion to agree

Madam Speaker I move to agree to the amendments made by the Senate to House Bill number 389 House Draft 1, House Bill number 469, House Draft 2, House Bill number 1510, House Draft 2, House Bill number 1573, House Draft 3,

House Bill number 1705, House Draft 1. House Bill number 1858, House Draft 2. House Bill number 1875, House Draft 2. House Bill number 1946, House Draft 2. House Bill number 1961, House Draft 2.

House Bill number 1962, House Draft 2. House Bill number 2001, House Draft 2. House Bill number 2093, House Bill number 2096, House Draft 2, and House Bill number 2097, House Draft 1.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any discussion? Members, we will be taking a voice vote. All those in favor say Aye. All those opposed say no. The motion is carried. Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules of the House in order to consider certain House bills for final reading by consent calendar.

Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any questions? All those in favor, signify by saying Aye. All those opposed, say no. The motion is carried.

Representative Kahaloa.

Madam Speaker, I move that said house bills with Senate drafts as listed on pages one through four pass final reading.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any discussion on these items beginning with HB number 389. On the top of oh, Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you Madam Speaker. With reservations. So ordered.

On the top of page two, House Bill number 469. House Bill number 1510, Representative Garcia.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

And permission to insert written comments in the journal.

So ordered. Thank you. House Bill number 1573. House Bill number 1705. HB number 1858.

Representative Garcia.

1705.

K. Go ahead.

With reservations.

So ordered. HB 1858.

Representative Pierick.

Reservations.

So ordered. On the top of page three, House Bill number 1875, 1946, 1961. Representative Garcia.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you Madam Speaker. This bill, prohibits persons from interfering with an with another person's access to or from a healthcare facility or disrupting the normal functioning of of a healthcare facility and makes violations a petty misdemeanor.

Madam Speaker, this bill is absolutely not necessary. There are adequate laws both on the federal and state levels that protect people's right of entry. In 1994, the US Congress passed the FACE Act.

The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. And this adequately protects on a federal level these protections to accessing clinics and healthcare facilities.

On the state level, HRS 707 to 715, addresses threatening people and harassment in H, in HRS 711 through 1106. Also, there is state law that addresses blocking entrances and access. HRS 8852-1.

It is illegal to obstruct access to any public or private place so that there is no free passage. We already have laws to protect people from accessing healthcare facilities, to enter facilities.

This bill was introduced because of people who are going after pro life protesters, who are exercising their first amendment rights and liberties to free speech and protest on a public sidewalk.

We've all seen the pro life protesters near the planned parenthood facility on on Beretania Street. These people are simply praying, they're holding signs, they're standing on their own religious convictions and belief.

No one is being harassed, taunted, spat on, like some people said in in the health committee. That is absolutely false. And as I said before during third reading, when I asked planned parenthood, how many police reports were filed?

How many times did did officers have to come down to hold back these pro life protesters from blocking entrance? It doesn't happen madam speaker.

This bill is purely political and is going after pro life protesters. We again, we already have adequate laws on the federal and state levels to protect people. This is not needed. No vote.

Representative Iwamoto.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you. And I'd like to ask before I forget to be able to add comments into the record, but I also would like to add some comments here as well.

Please proceed.

Thank you very much. At first I was gonna, stand and speak, in support with reservations. But as I gathered my thoughts, I'm like, woah, my the weighing the purported benefits of this bill versus what I'm afraid could be the harms caused by this bill.

And I did speak about it when I voted on third reading and I was hoping that my comments would be addressed in conference committee. But as we see here, the, we are voting on what's before us.

There are three areas of concern. One is the potential chilling effects on free speech. The inclusion of a reckless, conduct, which is the minimum amount of mens rea or intentionality. It requires almost no intention, you're just reckless.

Finally, the imposition of mandatory minimums. We've taken away judicial discretion from the courts and there must be a mandatory minimum sentence in prison, for a violation of this. I have other concerns such as there's no definition.

This adds a chapter to the health code of our statutes. So there's no actual definition of what it means to impede free passage. What does that mean?

If somebody's carrying a sign and you have to duck underneath the sign, for instance, if you're both walking on a three foot sidewalk and they're carrying a sign and you walk underneath, did I just impede somebody's passage to the health care facility?

We'll find out when they take me to court. And if I did, if the court does say, yes, you did impede, not have to pay for their attorneys. That's a lot. That's a lot.

And also what's happening here in the way the bill is written, I'm really concerned not with the with the criminal as much as the civil remedies addressed in this.

Here under civil remedies of this bill, it says aggrieved party shall not be required to allege or prove actual damages to prevail. Civil remedies basically normally is a tort. Most torts require a showing of damages.

Like, you can't just bring people to court just because, you want to. You need to actually show that it's worth the the injury was so grievous that it justifies taking this matter to court.

Finally, for me, the main concern, the purported injury that could happen is the chilling effect on labor. As many know, I was part of a community effort. We did a sit in in front of Kapiolani Women and Children's Hospital.

This could have a chilling effect on the next time we stand in solidarity with nurses who are looking out for safe staffing ratios.

If the community members sit as we sat in a driveway, that might be considered impeding, and now the employer group at the hospital can sue us individually, and whether right or wrong, we still have to face a lawsuit.

We saw the employer group at that hospital spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on advert on advertisements. Imagine if they spent all that money on legal fees just to just to silence the voice of labor.

So for this reason, I did decide to vote in opposition even though my friends at Planned Parenthood might be disappointed with me. Friends don't let friends drive drunk, and friends don't let friends curtail the free speech of others. Thank you.

Representative Hussey.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. With reservations and request to insert written comments.

So ordered. Thank you. Representative Shimizu.

I rise in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I wanna thank the previous speakers for their points, which I agree with.

You know, Madam Speaker, at my committee hearing, we heard and received opposing, even contradictory testimony regarding incidents at what I believe was a, Planned Parenthood facility, which maybe this bill is addressing.

However, my thoughts go to another scenario where there is a dispute of some kind at another medical facility. And there are various people there expressing themselves in dispute against this facility.

Say doctors, nurses, healthcare workers, medical students, patients, all kinds of regular people who are now subject to this new law.

And maybe some passionate mom or medical student is now found to be interfering with an aggrieved party and found to be in violation on their first offense. This person is now subject to a $250 fine and 24 consecutive hours in jail.

This bill states regarding criminal penalties that a violator, a violator shall be guilty of a petty misdemeanor and shall be punished as follows.

For a first time offense, a fine of no less than $250 and a term of imprisonment of at least 24 consecutive hours.

So now we're putting this mom, who maybe lost a child in a procedure, and lost her mind for a moment, she will be put in jail for expressing herself against something that she firmly believes in. Is this what we really wanna do?

As was previously mentioned, in addition to this, an aggrieved party can bring litigation against this passionate mother. The bill does state. An aggrieved party may bring a civil suit.

A aggrieved party shall not be required to to allege or prove actual damage to prevail. I don't know, but somehow that doesn't make sense to me.

Madam Speaker, I agree there is a point where free speech and expression may cross the line with unacceptable physical interference or verbal abuse.

But I would offer to you that there are existing laws in place that adequately address these situations. My colleague did, share some of them. We all know we are dealing with Excuse me. Let me go back.

What I would offer to you that there are existing laws in place that adequately address these situations. Are they perfect? Probably not. We all know how difficult it is to arrive at a perfect bill.

We are all dealing with imperfect people that are dynamic and in multiple shades of emotions, reactions, thoughts, and actions.

And we wouldn't want to or should not add and put in a broad stroke that will not thoughtfully, specifically, or properly address one of many atypical or different situations like our passionate mom.

For these reasons, Madam Speaker, I respectfully ask that we defer this bill to protect those unintended consequences. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

K. Representative Takayama.

Madam Speaker in support.

Please proceed.

Madam Speaker, no person should be forced to endure harassment, intimidation, threats, or physical obstruction when seeking or providing medical care.

For many in our community, there are already many obstacles to seeking, and accessing health care, and we should not compound those problems.

People who are act exercising their freedom of speech in a peaceful manner have no reason to be threatened or alarmed as long as they do not obstruct or impede the access of other people seeking to enter or leave health care facilities.

For those reasons, I urge Members to support this bill. It's sends a strong message that Hawaii will not tolerate conduct that endangers public health or interferes with medical services. Thank you.

Representative Alcos.

Madam Speaker, in opposition.

Please proceed.

I would like to adopt my the words of Kapolei, Representative, and I enter words into the journal.

So ordered. Representative Garcia for the second time.

Second time. In opposition, Madam Speaker.

Please proceed.

Thank you. The Chair of the Health Committee, says that no one should be forced or obstructed to access medical care or facilities. I don't think anybody disagrees with that.

And that is why previous bodies, and legislatures have passed laws to prevent that from happening. Again, I As I said, we already have laws on the books.

HRS 852-1, HRS 115-9, HRS 711-1105, which prevents this from happening. This bill is not needed. It is a political statement. It's a it's a political bill. Again, even if state law fails, federal law protects it as well.

So again, not needed. And the statement is simply, in my opinion, not accurate. No vote.

Moving on to house bill number Representative Ichiyama.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise in support on House Bill 1961.

Please proceed. Thank you.

I rise in support, Madam Speaker, to offer a few clarifications. First and foremost I wanted to clarify that the purpose section of this bill on page one states that this act is not not intended to affect any rights under federal or state law on peaceful expressive conduct

including labor demonstrations or exercising the right to strike. That is clearly mentioned in the purpose clause, Madam Speaker.

This bill attempts to find the balance between people who are exercising their free speech rights as well as the patients who are seeking needed health care. And I think that the bill finds that compromise and that balance.

The bill, in addition to creating criminal offenses, also creates a civil right of action, which does not currently exist. It also allows the attorney general to bring actions to enforce the right of patients to be able to access their health care.

And I would just like to note testimony from the Healthcare Association of Hawaii that represents hospitals and clinics across our state.

They testify that hospitals, clinics, and other care settings must be places where patients, families, and health care professionals can safely enter, deliver, and receive care without fear of obstruction, intimidation, or disruption.

And I know that there have been attempts, madam speaker, to characterize this bill as a political statement on being pro life or pro choice, and I think that is taking a too narrow view of this bill.

Unfortunately, in today's environment, every health care decision is becoming sensitized. Whether you receive a vaccination, whether you receive certain types of screenings, whether you receive, substance abuse or behavioral health care,

those are all becoming politicized and sensitized. And I think we need to make sure that no one is scared, intimidated, or ashamed to receive the care that they need. So for those reasons, I'm in support. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you.

Okay. Representative Iwamoto for the second time.

Yes. Second time in opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. So it was referenced that the, exclusion or exemption for labor was included in the preamble.

However, the reason why it wasn't included into the text, the reason why we can't include that exception into the text of our statute is because it would have been a clear indication that the state is saying one statement of speech is acceptable,

but this, substance of speech is not acceptable. That is where the violation of free speech comes in. When you say this statement is acceptable, but this statement is not, not. That is the exact point I'm making.

And also we heard testimony, are, in support, referencing at the employer groups.

And again, that is my main opposition is this isn't about pro life versus choice. To me, this bill, the fact that it offers civil remedies, which is unprecedented, because we heard a whole list of, criminal statutes cited.

And so this criminalization of the action or behavior is already there. What's new is the civil remedy that these employer groups, these hospital employer groups can now wield against striking nurses who are holding signs or community activists who are doing a sit in.

It's specifically this bill, it's what I'm afraid of is it's specifically designed to silence our voices.

Thank you.

Representative Lowen.

Thank you Madam Speaker. In support, and I just like to adopt the words of the health Chair and the Vice Speaker.

So ordered. Representative Marten.

Same request. Thank you.

So ordered. Representative Kapela.

Same request.

So ordered. Representative Shimizu.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In opposition, second time.

Please proceed.

I'd like to acknowledge what Vice Speaker shared. Obviously, we are not gonna accept physical interference, abuses of freedom of speech.

And as I try to state in my comments, I did not, I did purposely did not take a political stance or a us versus them scenario. I did lay out a very real possible situation that will be caught in the umbrella of this new bill.

And I just would like my colleagues to consider that as we continuously add layers of laws to our society, which may have unintended consequences.

That is my point. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Representative Alcos for the second time.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, this bill, in opposition.

Please proceed.

This bill would affect the pro life people that is out there on the street. And what they're trying to do is just educate that person before they go in, and maybe listen to the heartbeat of the baby. Are you making the right choice?

Can we help you to navigate your way before you make this choice? You're not trying to stop them, or trying to say you're illegal, or you're gonna go jail, or you're gonna go hell.

They wanna try to protect life and save life. This bill would arrest these people for being on the side of the street or do some kind of crime to hurt them. And, you know, I think that is wrong for people trying to save life.

In our job, what we're doing here is trying to save lives. And this is what these guys are doing so in strong opposition. Thank you.

Representative Souza.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. In support.

Please proceed.

I would like the words of the Vice Speaker inserted into the record as my own.

So ordered. Let's move on to HB 1962. Representative Muraoka.

In opposition.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I just wanna make my stance perfectly clear. I'm against abuse in all forms.

Yeah? But with this bill, the way it's written it's actually written. It's a good bill. I really could support it if we remove the words alleged.

You know, as a I've experienced in this whole divorce proceedings thing and divorce court, different from criminal civil, is the only court where you can make a final decision using accusations, allegedly.

And that could tear families apart. You know, so far so often, an angry wife or an upset husband will weaponize. If this thing gets in, it'll weaponize the fact that he hit me. She hit this. You know?

It becomes an accusation game. And when we are using this in a contested parentage, the kids are the one who suffer. And by allowing that that accusation, that alleged abuse to bypass mediation, it's kinda it's crazy.

I mean, you could really do serious harm to children for a long time to come, You know, take out alleged, and I think this is a great bill. For those reasons, I'm on I'm in opposition.

Moving on. Oh, Representative Pierick.

Thank you. Reservations.

So ordered. Moving on to HB 2001, 2093, 2096, 2097. Representative Kila.

Madam Speaker at the appropriate time, may we please return to HB 1875?

Sure. Let's finish up with 2097. So let's go to HB 1875. Representative Kila.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Reservations, please.

So ordered. Representative Souza.

With reservations.

So ordered. Representative Morikawa for the vote.

Thank you Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, all Majority Members vote aye with the exception of the following on page three. HB number 1875, HD 2 SD 2, Rep Kong votes no. For HB number 1961, HD 2 SD 1, Rep Iwamoto, and Kong vote no.

Representative Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. On the measures before us, all Minority Members vote Aye with the exception of the following. On page two, HB 1510, HD 2, SD 1. Representatives Alcos and Garcia vote no.

On page three, House Bill 1875. House Draft 2. Senate Draft 2. Representatives, Alcos, Garcia, Gedeon, Matsumoto, Muraoka, Shimizu, and Pierick vote no.

On House Bill 1961, House Draft 2, Senate Draft 1. Representatives, Alcos, Cochran, Garcia, Gedeon, Matsumoto, Muraoka, Shimizu and Pierick vote no.

On House Bill 1962, House Draft 2, Senate Draft 1. Representatives Cochran, Garcia, and Muraoka vote no.

Have all votes been cast? Said bills passed final reading. Members, please turn to your digital action sheets by clicking on the action sheet tab on the top of your screen. We will be taking up two motions.

One, to suspend the rules to reconsider our previous action in disagreeing to the Senate amendments, and one to reconsider our previous action and

give notice of the intent to agree Representative Kahaloa for the motion to suspend the rules to reconsider previous action.

Madam Speaker I move to suspend the rules of the House to reconsider action previously taken in disagreeing to amendments made by the Senate to certain House bills.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion. Any questions?

All those in favor say Aye. All those opposed say no. The motion is carried. Representative Kahaloa for the motion to reconsider.

Madam Speaker, I move to reconsider action previously taken in disagreeing to the amendments made by the Senate and to give notice of the intent to agree to the amendments to the following House bills as reference in your digital action sheet.

House Bill number 226 HD 1, House Bill number 2315, House Draft 1, and House Bill number 2343, House Draft 1.

Representative Morikawa.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

Any discussion? All those in favor, say Aye. All those of all those opposed, say no. The motion is carried. Members, these measures will appear on tomorrow's order of the day for agree and final reading.

Item number six, announcements. Members, are there any announcements? K. Seeing none. Representative Morikawa.

Madam speaker, I move that this House stand adjourned until 12:00 noon tomorrow.

Representative Garcia.

Madam Speaker, I second the motion.

All those in favor, say Aye. All those opposed, say no. The motion is carried. The House stands adjourned until twelve noon tomorrow.