The California "Death with Dignity Act"

The California "Death with Dignity Act"
Grassroots Opposition Strong
Legislative Leaders Strongarm

On February 26, 1999, Assemblywoman Dion Aroner (D-Berkeley) introduced AB 1592, otherwise known as the California "Death with Dignity Act" (DWDA). The bill is closely patterned after Oregon's DWDA, which was enacted in 1997. (Oregon is currently only place in the world to have a law that specifically permits physician-assisted suicide).

AB 1592 has passed the Judiciary Committee and the Appropriations Committee. It has not been considered by the full Assembly, but has become what is called a "two-year bill." It is expected to come before the full Assembly in January but could be considered prior to that time.

Assisted suicide advocates claim that the California DWDA, if passed by the legislature, would simply provide dying patients with the means to a dignified death. But the bill has drawn strong opposition from Californians who don't agree.

Protesters Voice Opposition

As hearings and committee votes on AB 1592 were going on, people from across the state -- people who are poor, individuals from all ethnic groups, disabled persons and the elderly -- staged protests outside the capitol. Similar protests were held in front of the Dion Aroner's Berkeley office.

According to the Oakland Tribune, one protest in Sacramento brought Aroner to tears. She complained about the "angry disapproval" that was being expressed. "I'm saddened that in my effort to provide choice, I have been accused of coercing or promoting the deaths of disabled individuals," she said.

But Aroner's sadness at being opposed by groups whose support she has generally enjoyed did not deter her from forging ahead with her plans to make California the second place in the world with a law permitting assisted suicide.

Aroner claims her crusade for assisted suicide is personal. She points to her 86-year-old mother who is in an assisted-living facility as the primary reason for ushering in assisted dying.

State Latino Leaders Pass Resolution Opposing AB 1592

At its 52nd Annual State Convention held in Los Angeles on May 21-23, 1999, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) adopted a resolution condemning the legalization of doctor assisted suicide.

LULAC is the oldest and largest Latino civil rights organization in the United States.

The resolution noted that "many Latinos do not have health care" and that "the poor have a right to live and to receive proper medical care."

It concluded by stating: "We urge a 'NO' vote on AB 1592 because we believe it is unconscionable to talk about legalizing physician-assisted suicide when low-income people do not have access to comprehensive medical care including pain management and hospice care!"

Petitions Signed in Communities Across the State

Thousands of people, representing a diverse spectrum of Californians, signed petitions circulated by the Coalition of Concerned Legal Professionals (CCLP), the Western Service Workers, and others.

The petition stated:

We, the undersigned residents of the State of California, hereby petition our legislative representatives or other governing bodies to uphold the law of the land and promise made to the American people over 30 years ago by President Lyndon Baines Johnson of equal access to health care for all. We call upon our state government to reject any proposed legislation that legalizes or institutionalizes any form of assisted suicide as a medical treatment option.

Today in California over 5 million people have no health insurance and over 18 million patients have "managed care" medical coverage. Last year between $150 and $250 billion was "saved" out of a total United States health-care spending of $1 trillion. In the current era of HMOs and managed care, for the majority of patients, health care profits are no longer maximized by providing services and saving lives, but from cutting costs and denying necessary care.

Oregon has legalized assisted suicide as a medical treatment and now pays for it under its Medicaid rationing program as "comfort care." Assisted suicide becomes the ultimate in cost-savings.

We expect our representatives to find the ways and means to save both lives and money by changing policies and protocols, not by allowing physician-assisted suicide as an option for government, insurance companies, HMOs, hospital management corporations and other institutions to cut costs.

The first April 20 Judiciary Committee vote on AB 1592 was close but the result was clear -- the measure failed by a vote of 8 against, 7 in favor. If that vote had stood, the measure would have been dead, and vulnerable people would have been safe from the threat of assisted suicide as a medical treatment.

But, no sooner had the vote been cast than some members of the committee who favor assisted suicide put pressure on Assemblywoman Audie Bock (the only Green Party Assembly member) who had voted against the bill. Bock reversed her position and, with that, the measure passed 8 to 7 and was sent to the Appropriations Committee.

Appropriations Committee Substitutions and Deceptions

After the Judiciary Committee, the assisted suicide measure went to the Assembly's Appropriations Committee where passage was necessary before the measure could reach the full Assembly.

The Judiciary Committee is chaired by Assemblywoman Carole Migden (D-San Francisco), an advocate of assisted suicide.

(In 1997 Migden conducted hearings on assisted suicide around the state. Among those invited to testify were activists from Oregon who had successfully passed an assisted suicide law in that state. At a Los Angeles hearing on November 17, 1997, Migden discussed the Oregon law, then explained, "We believe this will begin to pave the way for California to consider such a measure.")

Assemblywoman Migden continued her mission of paving the way for assisted suicide during the Appropriations Committee hearings on AB 1592.

With vocal protesters outside and quiet, but visible, opponents inside the hearing room on Wednesday, May 26, Migden postponed the vote on AB 1592 until the next day. Opponents of the measure -- many of whom had come to Sacramento at great personal hardship -- stayed on in the Capitol so that their presence would signal the massive grassroots opposition to the measure.

The following day, Migden announced that the measure would come up for a vote at 3 PM. Shortly after the time scheduled for the vote, she declared that the vote was being postponed again - this time until Friday. Once again, opponents of AB 1592 left the building and made plans to remain in Sacramento for the following day's vote.

However, no sooner had observers left than Migden called the Appropriations Committee back into session and a vote was taken. Among those voting was at least one newly substituted Committee member who favored the bill. The "new" committee member had been substituted at the last minute for a Democratic Assemblyman who was opposed to the measure. AB 1592, which would have failed in a 10 to10 tie vote, passed the Committee in an 11 to 9 vote.

Reports from within the committee indicate that the Assemblyman who was replaced was not informed that he had been replaced and would not be allowed to vote.