HB1455 It is imperative that this bill be passed. Too many people are dieing because of this illicit drug. Our future voters/leaders are being slaughtered by the makers and distributers of this drug. By any definition the making/distribution of this drug is a blantent act of domestic terrorism and should be dealt with accordingly. The only way to get this terrible drug epidemic stopped is to severely punish those that are manufacturing/ distributing this horrible, murderous drug. Please send a message to those that are manufacturing / distributing this horrible drug, that thier actions will not be tolerated. That society as a whole can not condone their actions. Please vote to move this bill forward..our children are suffering, with out your help many will not make it to adulthood. HB 1923 I don't understand how a minor has the mental capacity to refuse inpatient treatment for mental health issues. Is it not a parents/adult job to make decisions on behalf of minors? Minors can not vote, serve in the military or run for political office because we have determined that they do not have the mental capacity to do these things, yet they are allowed to determine whether they need to be admitted to an inpatient mental health facility. How is it that the current law gives a minor these rights and stripes the power away from the parents. As their parents it is our job to insure their future. Please give us the tools we need to do our job to the best of our ability. Move this bill forward, give our children the opportunity to become our future leaders. Thank you

There have too many lives, and especially young lives, lost To this dangerous illicit weapon of mass destruction these drug dealers are hiding in other drugs. Fentanyl. It is heart breaking, and infuriating all at the same time. We have to hold the ones distributing, making, and selling accountable for this crime. It is a poisoning by any rights of the definition of that word. Poisoning is a crime and is murder. Dealing drugs is a crime and harsher laws and punishments need to be in place for this. We are three days away from the one year angelversarey of my niece, Makayla Cox. Poisoned with a fake Percocet pill. Disguised to look as such. Was nothing of the sort, pure Fentanyl. 01/06/07-01/22/22 Let’s bring justice to the people who did this.

I lost my 23yo daughter Kaitlyn to Fentanyl poisoning 1-15-21. There needs to be changes in order to hold those responsible for these deaths. Detectives did very little in investigating into who gave her / sold her the Fentanyl. They had her cellphone and simply asked us if we knew the password. Case closed a few days after her death. Why? She left behind 2 very precious and confused little girls that miss their mother terribly and are now at ages 5 & 6 in therapy.

Comments Document

An average of 300 people die a day due to illicit fentanyl. Illicit fentanyl is being laced in all drugs, and the users of these drugs are unaware that they are ingesting something other than what they purchased. It takes as little as 2ng’s of illicit fentanyl to kill a person. The number of deaths due to illicit fentanyl is astronomically increasing each year. Those who are supplying, giving, distributing these drugs that have been poisoned must be held accountable for the deaths they are causing. If someone ingesting any other illicit drug that did not contain illicit fentanyl, they would have the chance to obtain help and hopefully recover. Bower, with illicit fentanyl there is no chance for this, as many are dying, teens who are experiments, first time users, etc. before they even have the chance to get help! My daughter, Makayla Cox, died from a pill she thought was Percocet, and was pure fentanyl, just 2 shorts weeks after turning 16, on Jan 22, 2022.

The City of Portsmouth supports these bills as will be amended in subcommitte today. We ask that you please pass the bill as amended. Thank you

NO- I do not support this bill! Excluding anyone is prejudice! Men/woman are working hard to change their life and you continue to strip all hope of that!

I ask that you vote "NO" to move to pass this piece of legislation into law. I feel that this is an unjust way of undoing the bill that was passed in 2020 by the previous administration to help unite families. Many inmates were given calculation sheets stating they were being released early due to the credit. Many of these families had prepared for them to be released only to find out the rug was pulled from under them at the last minute. It was absolutely cruel and disheartening not to destroy the hope and dreams of these families but now you want to ensure inmates do not receive any credit at all. Under the previous administration had this been a factor it would have never made it into law. I strongly feel that a lot is this undoing is financially motivated to line the pockets of politicians that have times to the prison system.

We should be giving incarcerated people an opportunity to better themselves in the process of working towards something that will significantly affect their future. Many of our incarcerated friends are serving ridiculously long sentences for something they did at a young age - the human brain doesn’t fully develop until a persons mid twenties. We’re talking about people who made mistakes at a young age who will never be able to show how they’ve grown - people should be given the opportunity to use our prison systems as they were originally intended: To rehabilitate and learn from their mistakes. Putting a restriction on who is able to earn their way back to a normal life is unfair and unjust

No! I’m against this bill

No. Stop this bill

No! PLEASE STOP THIS BILL

I hope you all will vote NO against this bill. My husband has been incarcerated 22 years since the age of 18. He went in as a immature kid. He has double stacked use of firearms with a felony and got 3 years each which gave a extra 6 years for his crime he already got 20 years for and has completed that "violent" time. Many have similar double stacked charges if not more for this same offense and it's not right! Please be VOTE NO FOR HB1603. Thank You!

I left a comment but the page shut down so I'm not sure if it was sent. I apologize if this is a duplicate. Please vote no to exclusions of earned time credits for the incarcerated. We need real rehabilitation not mass incarceration. These individuals are further traumatized by a broken system. When this bill was repealed it stripped hundreds of people of their right to freedom and plans they had made with their families for jobs, travel, weddings, and reunions. The lawsuits stemming from this will cost thousands of taxpayer dollars. Please reinstate what was already granted. People deserve the right to rehabilitate and earn good time. That's the whole point of the incarceration rehabilitation system is it not? By saying that inmates cannot earn good time, they're basically stating that their rehabilitation efforts are a failure. (Which they mostly are any way) take time to talk to prisoners about what really goes on behind the bars and walls of the prison system. The drugs are brought in by the guards. The guards are having sex with the inmates. There are drugs everywhere throughout the prison system, gangs, horrible violence, corruption. Inmates will not talk about what is really happening for fear of retaliation by both the institution and other inmates. We need an immense and complete overhaul of the department of corrections in Virginia. We need mental health treatment, substance use treatment and trauma treatment. Not further violence and solitary confinement and having them living in fear of being attacked 24/7.

Please vote NO on #1603. It would be so unfair to exclude persons.

I oppose this bill, for so many reasons! I believe everyone EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO EARN ESC credits no matter what the crime is because it restores Hope encourages people to take classes and work hard to improve themselves and gives them some extra reasons to rehabilitate themselves! I also am a victim of a serious crime unfortunate the man that robbed me was never charged ! But if he was I would have agreed with him earning extra credits for turning his life around! This is bad Legislation … I’m not an attorney, but a lot of you are and I don’t understand how you don’t see that this bill would open up the opportunity for so many to file lawsuits against the state of Virginia and cost taxpayers millions of dollars!

I represent the Valley Justice Coalition and we strongly oppose this bill. According to the Impact Statement for HB1603, there will be a cost of over a half million dollars EACH year in preparation for the lawsuits the bill is expected to generate. Assuming the State will lose at least some of these lawsuits, this could eventually cost taxpayers millions of dollars. As your constituents, we are appalled that you have such little regard for taxpayers' dollars. Vote NO against HB1603.

I write to ask you vote NO on HB 1603. The bill as written would unfairly affect many people who deserve an earlier release than this provides. In particular, I note that in paragraph 18 it would reduce the available sentencing credits for ANY felony “involving a firearm” – regardless of the circumstances. This is far too broad and would unjustly deny many people a chance at earlier release who pose no threat to society. It is not unusual for someone to be charged with a felony “involving a firearm” even if the firearm was NOT part of the crime at issue but, for instance, simply located in a dwelling or car where an arrest took place. Moreover, there are still a good number of felonies that are based on marijuana that involve circumstances likely to be legal in the near future. Being incarcerated and having a loved one incarcerated is emotionally, mentally and physically damaging. The current Earned Sentence Credit Bill that is active and in place now, is fair. It already disqualifies violent offenders. Serving more jail time should not be the answer. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter. Alexis Laplace Woodbridge, VA 22192

I would like for you to hear me please. I was molested at the age of 5 years old, because my mother wanted her drugs amd men more than me. I was 10 years when I started using drugs and alcohol. By 11 I was told by my grandmother where my mom was so I Hitch hike from. CHICAGO to Cleveland to find her. I dropped out of school in the 6th grade the streets taught me how to read and write. The state trooper picked me up and did a APB for my mom. When found she told them that's not my child you can do whatever you want with her. Now I'm homeless, on drugs amd my parents doesn't want me. I remember being in that bathroom when a GROWN man forced me on my knees and said to me " You're not a little girl anymore you are a grown woman. For 2 weeks in that apartment all the men had their way with me. Now I was being sexually exploited. For 31 years I lived this way. I walked around with 8 pairs of socks because I never had any shoes. My childhood was taken away from me. I can never get that back. There are so many young kids out there who can be saved save them. As of August 6th 2010 which is my date of Grace 2019 I got my High school diploma, graduated college with my associates degree in social work in 2022, I am a publisher author of 31 Years in the Desert, many accomplishments. I will never be able to have children physically this is another reason I stand and not be silent. After 31 Years of hell I walk with my head held high. Something needs to be done to the sex traffickers, not the victims. Why should we be punished with felony records, can't get housing in a neighborhood like you live in. I had to pay double rent because I had prostitution charges. Where is the justice? I hope whoever reads this finds it in their hearts to make the right decisions moving forward. Thank you Castanita Fitzpatrick A Butterfly Gets Her Wings Back LLC. 214.535.3034 abutterflygetsherwings@gmail.com

Vote NO to HB1603! The Earned Sentence Credit bill was studied, investigated, vetted & debated twice and what came from that was a law with the ability to highlight those who have taken full advantage of all programs & requirements of their incarceration & EXCEL! The disgraceful budget amendment stripped enough away. It broke people’s hearts inside and outside of the prison walls, but now this is an attempt to further punish someone who is already serving their time honorably and have made valuable changes to themselves before they knew they could get ESC, and they deserve to be credited what they worked so hard for! Do you realize this makes prison less safe by continually excluding and taking things away from people who have EARNED their good time? It is not given to them, it is EARNED. Put yourself in their shoes for one second! Imagine working hard for no reason at all other than to benefit yourself, being promised you would be rewarded when you least expected it, and then watching quietly while it is snatched away from you! They have no voice right now, but I do! They are not the sum of their worst day but the product of learned lessons through life, maturity & growth achieved while serving their time. VOTE NO!

I absolutely and unequivocally DO NOT support this bill.

Hi

I think its appalling that you are attempting to take away EARNED sentencing credits from men and women who has done their fiduciary duties to rehabilitate themselves while incarcerated. Lawmakers has got to stop singling out individuals based on their offenses and allow them to be seen and deemed rehabilitated for who they are today. The sentencing credits is not a point system given to an individual, it's a system that's earned through hard work, dedication and mindset changes in behavior over years of incarceration. I OPPOSE this bill that would attempt to remove the right for these men and women to receive credits they have earned by remaining infraction free and are not deemed a threat to public safety. Please vote NO for this bill of legislation.

ESC- is a bill that was give then pulled back at the hands of our government, our jails and prisons are overcrowded, understaffed and more over these men and women deserve to have the opportunity for less time after sentencing, DOC is the worlds second largest industry we are manufacturing Criminals more than all other countries combined yet we say we are the land of the free… I believe this bill will provide structure but also allow reduced sentences by credits earned Im in support of this bills it will not only help the incarcerated people but their families who suffer behind incarceration

Pleaae vote no. This isn't fair to no violent offenders who have rehabilitated and changed their lives completely. My husband has served nearly 25 years in the VADOC, and this will hinder his chances of coming hime early. Not everyone who receives a firearm charge is violent. If you review a lot of cases, you will see that sometimes, they were given a firearm charge because of a circumstantial event or the way the charges were filed. It's not always because they were violent people. This needs to be reviewed and reworded, if nothing else. Please, consider the people who deserve to go home, and the families that need them??? Please vote NO!??

NO

I cannot begin to express the level of intelligence and maturity of this individual but the fact that he has turned his life around speaks for itself he pushes nothing but encouragement, love, and peace into the world. I am humbly asking for his release as he does not deserve to be punished and persecuted in innocence. I can guarantee within his release he will have nothing but a heavy positive effect on those around him and the general community he deserves to live a normal life he deserves to work a job and be there for his children and grandchildren. He has served more than enough time of sufferation at the hands of the Virginia department of corrections when is enough, enough? When has a man paid his debt? Take my words and the fact that he has been reforming for the last 20 years from any negative habits or behaviors he once portrayed into consideration. Sincerely Anderson,

Vote NO to HB1603. VADOC's main goal and focus should be rehabilitation. Taking away the opportunity for incarcerated men and woman to earn reduced time for working towards being better is wrong. Some are actually taking the time to better themselves. Have families to come home to, children they have sadly missed important milestones, so many factors that make a person to strive to be better. No one knows what the full circumstances are when a person committed any crime. We as community members in the commonwealth need to be proactive in helping these men and woman get home where they belong. Let's also include the terrible language of this bill. Inmates have no access to firearms while in confinement, so where does that language apply? There ARE so MANY errors with this bill proposal. Also, you have majority of inmates who have mixed charges, so non firearm related charges are still eligible. OR does the 1 charge that is firearm related reduce to zero? I think there should be concrete clarification on all points of this bill. Until all things are clarified and written without any confusion this is a definite NO

Please Vote No & Do Not support this bill. Not all people who have been convicted are violent. It’s unfair to someone who has worked hard to turn their life around, to be denied a chance at early release..

I oppose this. I believe people deserve a second chance and should be rehabilitated so they can come home to their families

No

Thier are thousands of inmates that got a boat load of time they don't deserve, People can and do change their lives..

I DO NOT support HB 1603.

Please vote NO. If a person is behaving enough to earn good time they should be allowed to have it. Thank you

I would like you to vote no on this bill as taking away good time essentially takes away the hope of the imprisoned. It isn't ethical or right at all.

I'm writing to you all on behalf of my husband, Marcus Conrad Ingram, Inmate #1090850 in the Virginia Department of Corrections. Mr. Ingram has been incarcerated for over 17 years, having been sentenced to a total of 32 years for armed robbery with mace in 3 jurisdictions. Because he had mace, his charges of put him in the “violent offender” category, therefore he isn't eligible for Earned Sentence Credits yet, but I'm hoping this bill will be such that he qualifies. No one was seriously injured during the robberies, and while we agree that incarceration was necessary, 32 years is more than excessive. The sentencing Judge, Judge Weckstein, said he was going to “make an example of” Mr. Ingram, and sentenced him to 32 years. After his original sentence, Mr. Ingram’s lawyer filed a motion to reduce his sentence on 6/19/07, again outlining the conditions under which Mr. Ingram was suffering at the time of the crimes, to include major depressive disorder, alcohol abuse, ajd drug abuse. Mr. Ingram is extremely remorseful for his actions and can be a valuable member of society if given the chance. He's missed most of his children's lives and has certainly been humbled by his experience. He has employable skills, job offers lined up, and a stable home environment with me upon his release.

No!!!

Being the man home to his family

Please vote NO!!?? everyone deserves a second chance, and people change. Not all firearms charges are violent.

HB 1603. I’m voting no! If these inmates have been given “good time”, they should be allowed to keep it whether you stop adding to it or not. Some have worked very hard to try to get back to society, families and friends. Please don’t hinder the ones who are successfully going through their incarceration without incident! Thank you.

I think they should vote against this. This bill is hindering thousands of people from receiving their good time and getting them back home to their families whom miss and love them dearly!

Statistically speaking Virginia has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the country. However incarcerated men and women, many who are black and brown, remain imprisoned under unfathomable conditions. Despite these circumstances these same men and women have worked hard to EARN their good time by staying infraction free, participating in programs, and overall changing their lives around. Please be a voice for the preferably unheard and recognize that HB 1603 is NOT the answer to curbing violent crimes involving firearms. Vote NO today!

My fiance got sentence to 5 years in prison. He will be out in 2025. I want him to get out early for good behavior. He hasn't been in any trouble since he been in prison. I need him out & give him a chance.

Comments Document

Attached you will find my speech that I hope you will consider prior to todays meeting. Thank you.

Please, vote NO!??? Not everyone convinced of a firearm offense is violent. To categorize them all as violent, is ridiculous, and unfair. There are thousands of families who need their loved ones home. There are thousands of men and women who have been over sentenced because of a firearm charge. Please consider the men and women affected by this decision. The families torn apart, the financial burden, the incarcerated individuals who have served 20, 30, and 40 year in the VADOC, who deserves a second chance, and deserve to be reunited with their families, but are hindered from doing so, because of the language, and labeling in this bill. Please ask yourself, if this is how you would want to be labeled and treated, if you made a poor choice as, a teenager??? ... Or if your son, daughter, or loved one was locked away with no hope for 30, 40, or 50 years. ESC was earned, and taking it away from people who have earned it, is unfair, unconscionable, and cruel. Please, let our loved ones have a chance to come home?? Thank you.

Not everyone convinced of a firearm offense is violent. To categorize them all as violent, is ridiculous, and unfair. There are thousands of families who need their loved ones home. There are thousands of men and women who have been over sentenced because of a firearm charge. Please consider the men and women affected by this decision. The families torn apart, the financial burden, the incarcerated individuals who have served 20, 30, and 40 year in the VADOC, who deserves a second chance, and deserve to be reunited with their families, but are hindered from doing so, because of the language, and labeling in this bill. Please ask yourself, if this is how you would want to be labeled and treated, if you made a poor choice as, a teenager??? ... Or if your son, daughter, or loved one was locked away with no hope for 30, 40, or 50 years. ESC was earned, and taking it away from people who have earned it, is unfair, unconscionable, and cruel. Please, let our loved ones have a chance to come home??

Please vote NO FOR HB1603 - we should be including more people to have the chance to earn their way home sooner! Prison is about rehabilitation and growing and learning from past mistakes, give our loved ones the chance to show that they’ve grown! It’s called EARNED sentence credits for a reason!!!

Hello, I am one of the founders and Executive Director of Ignite Justice, a local non-profit organization that works with incarcerated individuals and their families. I’m here today to ask you to vote no to House Bill 1603, which will amend and reenact the Earned Sentence Credit. Virginia consistently has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the country. According to recidivism studies including ones conducted by the Virginia Department of Corrections, individuals with violent crimes as their most serious offense are far less likely to re-offend than non-violent. Earned good time credit can increase accountability and rehabilitation. It has been shown that incentives like increased earned good time, leads to increased participation in programs, which in turn further decreases recidivism rates and increases safety at correctional facilities. It is difficult to remain infraction-free inside of these prisons and they have done that. This is earned good time. Earned good time credit can increase accountability and rehabilitation. In my over 10 years of experience working with incarcerated individuals, I have learned that people are capable of great change. The men and women who will be affected by this bill, have shown that they have changed. They have worked hard to rehabilitate themselves and to come back into society. I have seen men and women who served their time come home and make a deep impact in their communities, working to prevent the next generation from following the same path. These are the types of men and women we are keeping inside of prisons by passing this bill. This bill is purely punitive. Again I’m asking this committee to vote no to this bill. Thank you, Jennifer Dalton Founder/ Executive Director jdalton@ignite-justice.org 804-485-3314

My husband is incarcerated for a robbery charge in which nobody was hurt and no weapon was involved but because it is a robbery charge he is excluded and considered a violent criminal. Our 16 year old son and only child was murdered over the summer and this is some thing neither my husband or I should be dealing with alone and away from each other. I need my husband home with me. He has remained out of trouble and done what he is supposed to be doing. And I can speak from both sides and I can tell you right now the person who killed our son if he does his time changes his life for the better and feels remorse then I am absolutely okay with him being let out earlier if he has done everything he is supposed to do and earned that chance. People change just like people make mistakes and learn from them.

My name is Alison Chaffin, I am a special education teacher and higher education professor. I have a passion for prison reform due to the school to prison pipeline. Also, I have a loved one who has served 6 years in his incarceration. But this is not who he is. He is a father, a son, a brother and a member of his community. I'm asking today to please not support HB 1603. The state of the carceral system in Virginia makes it extremely difficult to remain infraction free, these men and women have worked hard to prepare themselves to come, and by that very fact shown that they have changed and earned the right to a second chance. Virginia is one of the highest states to incarcerate our black men and women. This is racist bill that will continue to disproportionately affect our black men and women and our children. Like Reverend Jerome Barber said in the opening, “let’s be a voice for the voiceless” and vote no for HB 1603. Let Virginia lead the way in closing the school to prison pipeline and encourage our men and women behind bars to reform. Thank you.

Please vote NO FOR HB1603 we should be including more people to have the chance to earn yes I WROTE EARN a chance to come home a little sooner!

My name is Emily Shelton. I am the founder of Ignite Justice, a non profit organization that focuses on the incarcerated population and their families. I also am a mother and a wife of someone incarcerated. Supporting earned sentence credits as an incentive provides active accountability, recognizes rehabilitative progress, and contributes to both a constructive correctional culture and gives an offender a positive goal. Research shows that offering these incentives has increased the successful completion of community supervision, participation in programming, decreases our prisons population, improves prison conduct, and contributes to system-wide fiscal savings. Studies also show that earned sentence credit benefits the community by reducing recidivism rates and improving post-release employment opportunities. At this time i am requesting you do not pass hb 1603 and give all violent offenders the opportunity to earn time off their sentencing to help them be productive in society. Thank You, Emily Shelton Ignite Justice-Founder eshelton@ignite-justice.org 804-326-4414

I support HB1615

Virginia Faith and Freedom Coalition strongly supports this bill and thanks the patron for bringing it forward.

A born child, regardless of his or her birth circumstances, should be treated with the dignity of human life. A child born black has dignity. A child born poor has dignity. A child born with a disability has dignity. A child born with medical issues has dignity. A child born alive has dignity.

Please look up mayo clinic illustration of what a 14 week old baby looks like. Consider this same baby at 9 months. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/pregnancy-week-by-week/in-depth/fetal-development/art-20046151 Please vote yes to protect these children born alive. I will follow up with my representatives regarding this HB1795 bill's past travels and progress.

Delegate Freitas' comments during the subcommittee, about those who oppose HB1795, were unprofessional. The inflammatory and accusatory statements was wrong on so many levels. If Delegate Freitas cared about ALL infants and women, he would make sure that his bill addressed special circumstances. Such as, infants who cannot sustain life due to severe physical anomalies. Instead, this bill does NOT address that at all. Infants who cannot sustain life will go through needless pain and suffering if medical personnel are required to "preserve the life and health of a human infant..." How can someone propose a bill and say you are protecting a life when in my case and many others, you are prolonging the inevitable? Please let the medical staff and hospitals do what they are already doing. Taking care of their patients, giving them the best and most appropriate care for their situation. Stop criminalizing the law abiding medical professionals. I oppose HB1795.

My informal surveying of Virginians on this subject reveals absolute disbelief that Virginia Law currently allows violation of equal protection and Hippocratic law, as written. Without change, licensure by the Board of Medicine for midwives and hospitals that must collaborate as appropriate means little when abortion facilities can leave children to suffer on the operating table with impunity. This bill would actually help facilities earn a good reputation and re-equate every medical center in our Commonwealth with sustaining as many lives as possible.

Please pass this bill as soon as possible. v/r, Mr. Calimano

Please vote to save the lives of babies who survive abortion. These babies are human beings, who cannot speak for themselves and so are considered by some to be disposable. But in truth these babies have have as much right to life as any other human being, every other American citizen. Without the right to life there is no right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Please consider babies who have been born and survived an attempted abortion. These babies are born just like other babies with the only exception that their health care team may decide to nurture the newborn’s life, or attempt to end it due to gross negligence, and abandonment. As a nurse, my thoughts and motivations are to help others and uphold the responsibilities of my license. The titles “Health Care Provider” and “Health Care Professional” within itself, lead with the word “health”. Please don’t allow theses titles to become meaningless and veer off course of the good they are responsible to uphold in Virginia. Licensed doctors have made an oath to do no harm and The American Nurse Association (ANA) states “Nurses have a duty to care for patients and are not at liberty to abandon them”. Please give these babies the chance to be cared for.

Please understand that this bill is not about access to abortion. Rather, it is about the kind of people that we are and the kind of state we want to live in. The children who will be protected by this bill will all born to mothers who had access to abortion and who chose abortion. This law will not penalize them in any way. The issue here is basic decency and our common humanity which compel us to provide medical support for the injured. This is more important than movement rhetoric or abortionists' fears of being sued for wrongful birth. Rejection of this bill is too extreme for Virginia. Virginians expect better!

It is a matter of common sense and basic human decency to require, that any health care practitioner present when a child is born alive following an abortion give the same degree of care to preserve the life and health of the child as would be given to any other newborn. It is appalling and beyond comprehension. As we have witnessed our society, disrespecting life is the cause of all what is happening in this country, if we do not respect life as the foundation of our society, life from womb to tomb, our state of Virginia and the United States of America will end in decay.

Unfortunately, the reality is that abortion attempts happen "unsuccessfully" and the child comes out of the womb alive. The Abortion Survivors Network is a growing coalition of people who come into the world that very way. Requiring the same level of care to babies who survive an abortion attempt just as any other pre-mature baby is NOT a controversial thing- everyone can agree on this. HB1795 is a reasonable bill which ensures that a child surviving an abortion is not left to die. Please SUPPORT.

On behalf of REPRO Rising Virginia, we oppose HB1795.

I strongly oppose HB1795. This bill is based on medically baseless and unscientific claims about the possibility of a "born alive" infant from an abortion procedure. The reality is that such incidents are incredibly rare and already illegal under existing laws. This bill is a politically motivated attempt to restrict access to safe and legal abortion care and criminalize healthcare providers who perform a medical procedure that is protected by the constitution. The requirement of immediate transfer to a hospital and the threat of a Class 4 felony and disciplinary action are excessive and aim to intimidate healthcare providers and create obstacles to accessing essential healthcare services. Access to safe and legal abortion is a fundamental right and this bill infringes on that right by criminalizing medical professionals who provide compassionate care.

Every human life has value and a baby that survives an abortion should receive life saving medical care.

Comments Document

In support of HB 1795, please find attached written testimony. As the survivor of three failed saline infusion abortions, I fully support this bill. Every baby who is born deserves to be reported and cared for. Thank you, Robin Sertell

I support HB 1895. As I am sure you all are aware, retaliation in the work place happens all of the time. Employees need this protection. Please support HB 1895.

https://richmond.com/opinion/columnists/column-virginia-can-lead-nation-in-protecting-survivors-of-workplace-abuse/article_cf3facba-9915-11ed-b83f-67bd09cce1ab.html

Birth In Color RVA is a doula collective with over 100 doulas around the Commonwealth. We support patients going throughout pregnancy, during the pre- and post- partum period and birth. 40% of US women have faced gender-related discrimination in their careers. 42% of US employees confirm they have faced or witnessed workplace racism and sexism. Our clients are no different, and each of our doulas has heard stories about discrimination in the workplace experienced by a client at some point in their work, including retaliation for trying to address the problems. As an organization committed to the health and welfare of our patients and our doulas, we know how devastating workplace discrimination can be. We strongly support both bills, HB 1895 and HB 2148 - as important steps towards ensuring that those who face workplace discrimination know their rights and are able to exercise them. We thank the patrons, Delegate Filler-Corn and Delegate Guzman for bringing these important pieces of legislation and hope that they are met with the support they deserve from the members of this Committee. Thank you for your consideration, Galina Varchena, Birth In Color RVA.

AAUW strongly advocates for new laws and policies to battle the problem of workplace harassment and discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity or religion. Workplace sexual and other harassment threatens women’s mental health and physical safety, erodes women’s short- and long-term economic security, and contributes to the leadership gap. Alhough Title VII protects women in the workplace, one study published in the Harvard business Review found that 34% of female employees say they have been sexually harassed by a colleague. Although federal law appears comprehensive and robust, employees who are harassed or experience inequity at work are often unable to access justice. Barriers include: business size (small businesses are exempt); exclusion of various categories of workers, e.g., contractors, interns, from coverage; limited time frame for bringing federal charges; onerous standards of proof; reduced liability; and nondisclosure agreements and mandatory arbitration. • HB1895 (Del. Eileen Filler-Corn), The Silenced No More Act, would limit the abusive use of Nondisclosure Agreements and Nondisparagement agreements (NDAs) to silence employees from speaking up about discrimination, including harassment, retaliation, sexual assault, wage and hour violations, and waste, fraud, or abuse. • HB2148 (Del. Elizabeth Guzman) , Know Your Rights requires employers to inform workers of their rights to file a charge of discrimination with the U.S. EEOC or the Virginia Office of the Attorney General within 300 days after an alleged unlawful discriminatory practice occurred. The bill requires an employer to provide this information as part of any new employee training provided at the commencement of employment or anti-discrimination training provided to an employee and when an employee makes a complaint. These two bills will be important steps in protecting Virginia workers.

We respectfully ask you vote no on HB1922, HB1973 & HB2294 HB1973 & HB2294: No one in the hemp industry is opposed labeling, testing or packaging of products. We have met every new regulation in labeling and packaging as they have been introduced. In fact we welcome stricter regulations on labeling, testing & packaging as we believe it helps weed out bad actors. But both of these bills have a 2mg per package limit for ANY THC (even naturally occurring D9). The current limit of quantitation (LOQ) for modern testing is 0.01% or 0.1mg/g. That means that in a 20g or smaller package, detecting ANY THC would make the product marijuana. The purpose of these limits is to only allow hemp products that contain zero naturally occurring THC (even non-intoxicating levels). These mg caps will absolutely end every hemp retailer, processor, and farmer in Virginia. 1000s of living wage jobs will be lost. Millions of dollars in infrastructure will be auctioned off to neighboring states. Most Va hemp processors and retailers are not selling intoxicating products, even though their products contain low levels of THC (0.3%). NON-intoxicating hemp products with low levels of THC will still be widely available from out of state via the internet, but Virginia small business will not be able to participate in the federally legal marketplace. The requirement of bittering agents in topicals is yet another blow to small hemp businesses. No one is going to buy topicals with unnecessary additives that are specifically made to be unpalatable. This will spell the literal end to all hemp topical manufacturing in Virginia. But, consumers will still be able to buy non-bittered topicals from out of state via the internet. Again, Virginia small business will not be able to participate in the federally legal marketplace. On HB1922: Delta 8 THC is found naturally in Hemp biomass in small concentrations. This bill would make all Hemp and hemp products with small concentrations of naturally occurring Delta 8 THC illegal. Would the Hemp industry be forced to find cultivars that have non-detect concentrations of Delta 8 THC? This bill creates a number of legal question and problems for VCDACS and other stake holders. For this bill to not have unintended consequences it must call out an allowable percentage to include what's found naturally in hemp plants and products (<0.3%).
 There are a number of hemp derived, (federally legal) psychoactive chemicals that are not Delta 8 THC. This bill would have zero effect on the proliferation of these widely available chemicals. This bill would not have the intended effect of reducing psychoactive access or harm.

Delta-8 and other synthetic cannabinoids are not tested for potency, strength, or contamination. They are not safe for anyone, much less kids. Retailers are not being careful to sell only to ages over 21. High school kids easily obtain edibles and vapes. Small children can mistake the gummies for candy. The developing brains of our kids should be protected from these products. The availability of these products is a threat to safety in our families and our schools.

I support HB 1922. Delta-8 THC is much more dangerous than Delta-9 TCH due to its increased potency. Delta-8 and other synthetically produced cannabinoids are responsible for most of the accidental poisonings and emergency room visits attributable to vaping and edible cannabis. I do hope that HB 1922 can be amended to change Delta-8 to include synthetic intoxicating cannabinoids, as there are many synthetics that are as or more dangerous than delta-8, and new ones are also being developed. The needs of patients seeking medical cannabis can be met using the naturally occurring delta-9 form.

Comments Document

I echo Griffith: Please vote NO to the following bills: HB 1973, HB 2294, and HB 1922. These bills would put thousands of Virginia hemp businesses out of business overnight when we have been operating by the law for the last 5 years. If the objective is truly consumer safety, then establish moderate regulations that legitimate Virginia owned companies can comply with. Consumers are already used to buying these products on retail shelves in Virginia, and by criminalizing the sale of these products in the state will only force consumers to the black market or the unregulated online market. The best way to control the market is to moderately regulate it in a way that does not exacerbate black market sales, and also does not put thousands of Virginia owned businesses out of business. We all want consumer & child safety, and the only way to do that is by regulating the recreational market. Prohibition is never the answer, and by voting yes to any of these bills, you will be a direct contributor to the issue you are trying to resolve. Please consider this as well as the thousands of families whose sources of income and their life’s work will be ruined by passing these destructive bills. We are real people and we are asking you respectfully to vote no on HB1973, HB2294 & HB1922

Greetings Delegates, The selected biils are Detrimental to the small farmers and retailers in the state of Virginia. As a member of the Virginia Hemp Coalition I ask that you vote no on these bills. Also add the Social Equity back to all of the cannabis legislation. Thanks for keeping Virginia first!!!! Sincerely, William Hill New Century Farmers Group

Delta 8 is a federally protected product as part of the 2018 Farm Bill per both a 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruling (A. K. FUTURES LLC v. BOYD STREET DISTRO, LLC) and per a Kentucky court via (Kentucky Hemp Association, et al vs. Ryan Quarles, Kentucky Department of Agriculture). Virginia adults have the right to buy, sell, purchase, or possess Delta 8 products for themselves or their adult friends and to give the same to their adult friends. The politicization of this issue and product by people running for higher political office has been disgusting and unethical. The simple fact is that adults shouldnt give or allow children to have access to adult products. Don't let your children have access to alcohol or guns. And if they are little, don't leave them unattended in the bathtub or near a 5 gallon bucket with water in it. We don't ban cars simply because children die in car accidents every year. What we do instead is force parents and guardians to take sufficient measures to protect children from the dangers of vehicles, including penalties for not using car seats or seatbelts. We do not ban people from buying or possessing cars. This bill needs to die.

I oppose bills that restrict the re-emerging hemp wellness industry in favor of state-controlled medical / recreational cannabis industry. Bill's before this committee will allow the the government to choose out of state corporations as winners, at the expense of registered and federally compliant small hemp businesses. There is space in Virginia for industrial hemp, hemp extracts for wellness, and cannabis for medicine and recreation to coexist in Virginia. That space should allow small, medium, and large growers, producers, testers, and manufacturers to enter, without exorbitant entry and maintenance fees. Bad actors should be held accountable for irresponsibility marketed products, however, a whole legal hemp industry should not be criminalized and punished. There should not be new criminal penalties for hemp or cannabis products. There are current laws in place to deal with unscrupulous products. We should be researching and studying hemp and cannabis as alternatives to pharmaceuticals, educating, marketing and building safe access to hemp and cannabis products. We should include many Virginian workers and small businesses and create tax revenue for our Commonwealth.

Please vote NO to the following bills: HB 1973, HB 2294, and HB 1922. These bills would put thousands of Virginia hemp businesses out of business overnight when we have been operating by the law for the last 5 years. If the objective is truly consumer safety, then establish moderate regulations that legitimate Virginia owned companies can comply with. Consumers are already used to buying these products on retail shelves in Virginia, and by criminalizing the sale of these products in the state will only force consumers to the black market or the unregulated online market. The best way to control the market is to moderately regulate it in a way that does not exacerbate black market sales, and also does not put thousands of Virginia owned businesses out of business. We all want consumer & child safety, and the only way to do that is by regulating the recreational market. Prohibition is never the answer, and by voting yes to any of these bills, you will be a direct contributor to the issue you are trying to resolve. Please consider this as well as the thousands of families whose sources of income and their life’s work will be ruined by passing these destructive bills. We are real people and we are asking you respectfully to vote no on HB1973, HB2294 & HB1922. Sincerely, Savana Griffith

Our kids are being harmed by delta-8 and other synthetic cannabinoids. They harm their brains and mental health. Young children are accidentally ingesting them as they look like candy and the kids are becoming very sick. They are available in edibles and vape cartridges that high school kids can easily obtain (and use undetected in school and at home). I am a former high school teacher and college instructor. These products are keeping us from developing the potential in our young people. I support HB 1922!

I am writing in support of HB 1922, but I do believe that it needs an amendment. I hope that the reference to delta-8 THC can be changed to include all synthetic intoxicating cannabinoids. I am a scientist and am aware that the potential for developing new types of synthetic cannabinoids is almost limitless. While delta-8 THC is clearly a more dangerous drug than the delta-9 THC found in the marijuana plant, there are other potentially more dangerous, high potency cannabinoids that manufacturers can substitute if delta-8 becomes illegal. A friend who is a therapist specializing in adolescence told me that he has worked with several teens who suffered brain damage from using K2, one of the most potent and potentially deadly cannabinoids. In the wake of the pandemic, the stress on our health care system has never been higher. We are in the midst of a mental and physical health crisis. Our health care system cannot support the additional stress from the huge surge in emergency room visits from synthetic cannabinoid poisoning. Furthermore, the lack of quality control in these products has allowed for other types of chemicals to poison consumers. Recently, a bad batch of THC that contained the rat poison, brodifacoum, resulted in the hospitalization of 52 people in Florida, 4 of whom died. This wasn't the first time brodifacoum had shown up in vaping and edible products containing THC. This problem has been ongoing in many states, including Virginia, over the last few years. I am appalled by how Virginia has been handling the sale of cannabis products. Synthetics are widely available, and most stores that sell them willingly sell to those under age 21. Even though this is illegal, the age restrictions are not being enforced. Cannabinoid use (synthetic and marijuana based) is a huge problem at my son's high school. Furthermore the products that look like foods have led to a huge number of accidental poisonings in people of all ages, including infants and toddlers. I am also concerned that we are not currently doing a good job at addressing driving under the influence of cannabinoids. There are some bills up for consideration to address this, but I strongly feel that these need to be implemented first, and that their effectiveness assessed for several years before cannabinoids of any kind should be legalized. I don't have much faith in the state's ability to regulate these products. I'm not sure why they were allowed on the shelves in the first place, but the safest thing we can do to protect our kids is to ban the sale of all synthetic intoxicating cannabinoids. Thank you for considering my concerns.

The impact statements confirm this bill is wholly unnecessary. "Given the low incidence of GPS tampering over the last twenty years, any potential cost avoidance would be minimal and is indeterminate." From 2017-2022, there were a grand total of two convictions for a sexually violent predator leaving the state without permission or failing to return. In both cases, this offense was a companion charge to a failure to register as a Tier III sex offender. It was not unknown if the individuals tampered with their tracking devices.

I would like for you to hear me please. I was molested at the age of 5 years old, because my mother wanted her drugs amd men more than me. I was 10 years when I started using drugs and alcohol. By 11 I was told by my grandmother where my mom was so I Hitch hike from. CHICAGO to Cleveland to find her. I dropped out of school in the 6th grade the streets taught me how to read and write. The state trooper picked me up and did a APB for my mom. When found she told them that's not my child you can do whatever you want with her. Now I'm homeless, on drugs amd my parents doesn't want me. I remember being in that bathroom when a GROWN man forced me on my knees and said to me " You're not a little girl anymore you are a grown woman. For 2 weeks in that apartment all the men had their way with me. Now I was being sexually exploited. For 31 years I lived this way. I walked around with 8 pairs of socks because I never had any shoes. My childhood was taken away from me. I can never get that back. There are so many young kids out there who can be saved save them. As of August 6th 2010 which is my date of Grace 2019 I got my High school diploma, graduated college with my associates degree in social work in 2022, I am a publisher author of 31 Years in the Desert, many accomplishments. I will never be able to have children physically this is another reason I stand and not be silent. After 31 Years of hell I walk with my head held high. Something needs to be done to the sex traffickers, not the victims. Why should we be punished with felony records, can't get housing in a neighborhood like you live in. I had to pay double rent because I had prostitution charges. Where is the justice? I hope whoever reads this finds it in their hearts to make the right decisions moving forward. Thank you Castanita Fitzpatrick A Butterfly Gets Her Wings Back LLC. 214.535.3034 abutterflygetsherwings@gmail.com

We respectfully ask you vote no on HB1922, HB1973 & HB2294 HB1973 & HB2294: No one in the hemp industry is opposed labeling, testing or packaging of products. We have met every new regulation in labeling and packaging as they have been introduced. In fact we welcome stricter regulations on labeling, testing & packaging as we believe it helps weed out bad actors. But both of these bills have a 2mg per package limit for ANY THC (even naturally occurring D9). The current limit of quantitation (LOQ) for modern testing is 0.01% or 0.1mg/g. That means that in a 20g or smaller package, detecting ANY THC would make the product marijuana. The purpose of these limits is to only allow hemp products that contain zero naturally occurring THC (even non-intoxicating levels). These mg caps will absolutely end every hemp retailer, processor, and farmer in Virginia. 1000s of living wage jobs will be lost. Millions of dollars in infrastructure will be auctioned off to neighboring states. Most Va hemp processors and retailers are not selling intoxicating products, even though their products contain low levels of THC (0.3%). NON-intoxicating hemp products with low levels of THC will still be widely available from out of state via the internet, but Virginia small business will not be able to participate in the federally legal marketplace. The requirement of bittering agents in topicals is yet another blow to small hemp businesses. No one is going to buy topicals with unnecessary additives that are specifically made to be unpalatable. This will spell the literal end to all hemp topical manufacturing in Virginia. But, consumers will still be able to buy non-bittered topicals from out of state via the internet. Again, Virginia small business will not be able to participate in the federally legal marketplace. On HB1922: Delta 8 THC is found naturally in Hemp biomass in small concentrations. This bill would make all Hemp and hemp products with small concentrations of naturally occurring Delta 8 THC illegal. Would the Hemp industry be forced to find cultivars that have non-detect concentrations of Delta 8 THC? This bill creates a number of legal question and problems for VCDACS and other stake holders. For this bill to not have unintended consequences it must call out an allowable percentage to include what's found naturally in hemp plants and products (<0.3%).
 There are a number of hemp derived, (federally legal) psychoactive chemicals that are not Delta 8 THC. This bill would have zero effect on the proliferation of these widely available chemicals. This bill would not have the intended effect of reducing psychoactive access or harm.

Comments Document

I echo Griffith: Please vote NO to the following bills: HB 1973, HB 2294, and HB 1922. These bills would put thousands of Virginia hemp businesses out of business overnight when we have been operating by the law for the last 5 years. If the objective is truly consumer safety, then establish moderate regulations that legitimate Virginia owned companies can comply with. Consumers are already used to buying these products on retail shelves in Virginia, and by criminalizing the sale of these products in the state will only force consumers to the black market or the unregulated online market. The best way to control the market is to moderately regulate it in a way that does not exacerbate black market sales, and also does not put thousands of Virginia owned businesses out of business. We all want consumer & child safety, and the only way to do that is by regulating the recreational market. Prohibition is never the answer, and by voting yes to any of these bills, you will be a direct contributor to the issue you are trying to resolve. Please consider this as well as the thousands of families whose sources of income and their life’s work will be ruined by passing these destructive bills. We are real people and we are asking you respectfully to vote no on HB1973, HB2294 & HB1922

This is an outrageously egregious bill that would attempt to put the entire hemp industry in Virginia out of business for the benefit of the medical cannabis monopolies. A $1000 annual retail sales license PER LOCATION for products whose competitors are bought on Amazon does nothing but punish Virginia farmers for attempting to do business in Virginia. There are hundreds of small businesses in Virginia who do less than $2000 in gross annual sales of hemp and cbd products, but make up large portions of small Virginia hemp farmers' businesses. These people would immediately be forced to stop selling locally produced and VDACS regulated cbd products. Perhaps that is what the medical cannabis monopolies wanted when they donated $3500 to Del. Leftwich last year, per VPAP.org. A $10,000/day civil fine for not having said sales licese is a violation of the 8th Amendment, and a Class 1 Misdemeanor/day for not having said sales license is an outrageous money grab and extortion attempt against Virginia business owners. VDACS and Virginia have an agreement with USDA regarding the Farm Bill & Industrial Hemp and federally protected hemp products like CBD, and this bill would absolutely violate that agreement. Forcing product manufacturers to put ALL cannabinoids on the label is a scientific impossibility as more are discovered every day. Additionally, the testing costs once protocols were discovered for the new cannabinoids would be entirely cost prohibitive. Product labels would be out of date the moment they were printed. VDACS ALREADY has testing standards in place for the cannabinoids that are advertised on a product. Those are working just fine. If a product doesnt have those, then go after them. All this bill will do is destroy small businesses, push millions of dollars in business out of the state, and force people to get the same cbd products online, out of state, that they were getting from their trusted local farmers at their trusted local store, manufactured under VDACS quite capable current standards. This bill is an unethical power and money grab by deep pocketed out of state interests and needs to die.

Greetings Delegates, The selected biils are Detrimental to the small farmers and retailers in the state of Virginia. As a member of the Virginia Hemp Coalition I ask that you vote no on these bills. Also add the Social Equity back to all of the cannabis legislation. Thanks for keeping Virginia first!!!! Sincerely, William Hill New Century Farmers Group

I sent the committee an email about this early this morning.

I oppose bills that restrict the re-emerging hemp wellness industry in favor of state-controlled medical / recreational cannabis industry. Bill's before this committee will allow the the government to choose out of state corporations as winners, at the expense of registered and federally compliant small hemp businesses. There is space in Virginia for industrial hemp, hemp extracts for wellness, and cannabis for medicine and recreation to coexist in Virginia. That space should allow small, medium, and large growers, producers, testers, and manufacturers to enter, without exorbitant entry and maintenance fees. Bad actors should be held accountable for irresponsibility marketed products, however, a whole legal hemp industry should not be criminalized and punished. There should not be new criminal penalties for hemp or cannabis products. There are current laws in place to deal with unscrupulous products. We should be researching and studying hemp and cannabis as alternatives to pharmaceuticals, educating, marketing and building safe access to hemp and cannabis products. We should include many Virginian workers and small businesses and create tax revenue for our Commonwealth.

Please vote NO to the following bills: HB 1973, HB 2294, and HB 1922. These bills would put thousands of Virginia hemp businesses out of business overnight when we have been operating by the law for the last 5 years. If the objective is truly consumer safety, then establish moderate regulations that legitimate Virginia owned companies can comply with. Consumers are already used to buying these products on retail shelves in Virginia, and by criminalizing the sale of these products in the state will only force consumers to the black market or the unregulated online market. The best way to control the market is to moderately regulate it in a way that does not exacerbate black market sales, and also does not put thousands of Virginia owned businesses out of business. We all want consumer & child safety, and the only way to do that is by regulating the recreational market. Prohibition is never the answer, and by voting yes to any of these bills, you will be a direct contributor to the issue you are trying to resolve. Please consider this as well as the thousands of families whose sources of income and their life’s work will be ruined by passing these destructive bills. We are real people and we are asking you respectfully to vote no on HB1973, HB2294 & HB1922. Sincerely, Savana Griffith

I would like for you to hear me please. I was molested at the age of 5 years old, because my mother wanted her drugs amd men more than me. I was 10 years when I started using drugs and alcohol. By 11 I was told by my grandmother where my mom was so I Hitch hike from. CHICAGO to Cleveland to find her. I dropped out of school in the 6th grade the streets taught me how to read and write. The state trooper picked me up and did a APB for my mom. When found she told them that's not my child you can do whatever you want with her. Now I'm homeless, on drugs amd my parents doesn't want me. I remember being in that bathroom when a GROWN man forced me on my knees and said to me " You're not a little girl anymore you are a grown woman. For 2 weeks in that apartment all the men had their way with me. Now I was being sexually exploited. For 31 years I lived this way. I walked around with 8 pairs of socks because I never had any shoes. My childhood was taken away from me. I can never get that back. There are so many young kids out there who can be saved save them. As of August 6th 2010 which is my date of Grace 2019 I got my High school diploma, graduated college with my associates degree in social work in 2022, I am a publisher author of 31 Years in the Desert, many accomplishments. I will never be able to have children physically this is another reason I stand and not be silent. After 31 Years of hell I walk with my head held high. Something needs to be done to the sex traffickers, not the victims. Why should we be punished with felony records, can't get housing in a neighborhood like you live in. I had to pay double rent because I had prostitution charges. Where is the justice? I hope whoever reads this finds it in their hearts to make the right decisions moving forward. Thank you Castanita Fitzpatrick A Butterfly Gets Her Wings Back LLC. 214.535.3034 abutterflygetsherwings@gmail.com

HB 2011 - I supported Del. Roems' bill last year and I do again this year. This allows African Americans to be able to visit graves of their relatives. HB 2059 - This is the legal definition of a foreign born person who has not been naturalized to become a US citizen under federal law & the Constitution. HB 2056 - I do not support any one who may be here illegally to start a business. They are already violating our laws: what would be the purpose in starting a legitimate corporation where you are expected to follow the law when you're not even willing to follow it to be here in the first place?

RE: HB 1435 - PRO -I am in favor of this bill, running sentences concurrently. However, this should be taken up AFTER HB 2013 and 2230. HB 1960 - I am PRO eliminating mandatory minimums. Last year, when I sparred with Del Holt on this matter, he challenged me to provide proof that mandatory minimums did not work. i provided a copy of the Brennan Center study-- https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/end-mandatory-minimums within minutes. No study says this works. PLEASE REPEAL MANDATORY MINIMUMS. HB 2013, 2230 - CON -- Both bills once again advanced this session, seek to suspend sentences on 'technical' violations, and to redefine technical to essentially mean whatever the probation officer wants. Example, in 2021, my probation officer determined that I must be wanting to have sex with minors (never mind I was falsely convicted though I plead NOT guilty). Why? Because I was in a hotel's business office at 6 am legally using a computer to apply for a job. I was arrested again, this time claiming I was trying to have sex in a park. Why ? A vigilante group accosted me there, filed a report, and were upset because I was out of jail on appeal, and so they accused me of looking for illicit sex in the park. I was, in fact, jogging. The current system puts the burden of proof on the CW, where it should be, and where the real burden should be. The CW has too much authority now, but repealing this bill, and reimagining both bills to punish greater, does nothing for liberty, nothing for justice, over-trusts the judicial system to do the right thing, where they have failed over and over and over again. VOTE NO

HB 2103 is a horrifying bill that does nothing except shunt people back into jails and prisons. It removes judicial discretion for whether or not a suspended sentence should be revoked, meaning that judges can no longer use their more nuanced understanding of the circumstances and personalities to craft a reasonable and just decision. Perhaps most frightening is the addition of subsection (G) to § 19.2-306, which defines what a “technical violation” is in the most draconian ways. Without doubt, this will end up with otherwise model probationers being tripped up by technicalities that then cost them their freedom. The most concerning of these are the nebulous ones that provide no objective criteria for ensuring compliance, e.g., “(ii) maintain regular employment. . .;” or “(ix) a good behavior violation that did not result in a criminal conviction.” We urge the committee to vote “No” on this bill.

For 10 years I was married to a man who knew how to walk the line and "play the game" in the court system. I married him before finding out that he is a felon in VA and MD and by then I was on a mission to "save him" anyway. As these stories often go, the domestic abuse in the home went from bad to worse. We were living in Fairfax, had 2 small children, and I was the only one with stable income. I'd overcome the chaos in my home and worked my way up to an impressive position at my job in Tyson's Corner. Driving to work each morning my thoughts were focused on that job and the critical role it played in our livelihood. Other people driving to work might be thinking about the weather or what they were going to have for lunch that day -- but my mornings were often filled with threats from my husband. Threats that he was planning to come to my job and "cause a scene" so I would get fired or "show [my boss] who's REALLY in charge" -- you get the point. For years this was my life. The "grand finale" occurred after we moved to Charlottesville. I was working for the same company and had evicted him from my home. I was in a meeting and received a text from his mother that I needed to leave work because he was on his way to my office, with a gun, to shoot me. Because of prior threats I knew that I needed to email HR and include a photo of him so they could lock all doors and inform the 400 people in my office to not let him in. Obviously this was humiliating, but mostly it was TERRIFYING. This entire time he had time hanging over his head due to a larceny conviction. This bill doesn't speak to threats at all -- however I say with absolute confidence that abusers manipulate the system and THEY KNOW where the line is. This law wouldn't eliminate the threats. It gives a layer of protection to those being threatened. My ex-husband wouldn't dare pick up another felony - his pride and wish to gain custody back would prevent that. This law would have allowed me to concentrate on my job and feel safe.

I would like for you to hear me please. I was molested at the age of 5 years old, because my mother wanted her drugs amd men more than me. I was 10 years when I started using drugs and alcohol. By 11 I was told by my grandmother where my mom was so I Hitch hike from. CHICAGO to Cleveland to find her. I dropped out of school in the 6th grade the streets taught me how to read and write. The state trooper picked me up and did a APB for my mom. When found she told them that's not my child you can do whatever you want with her. Now I'm homeless, on drugs amd my parents doesn't want me. I remember being in that bathroom when a GROWN man forced me on my knees and said to me " You're not a little girl anymore you are a grown woman. For 2 weeks in that apartment all the men had their way with me. Now I was being sexually exploited. For 31 years I lived this way. I walked around with 8 pairs of socks because I never had any shoes. My childhood was taken away from me. I can never get that back. There are so many young kids out there who can be saved save them. As of August 6th 2010 which is my date of Grace 2019 I got my High school diploma, graduated college with my associates degree in social work in 2022, I am a publisher author of 31 Years in the Desert, many accomplishments. I will never be able to have children physically this is another reason I stand and not be silent. After 31 Years of hell I walk with my head held high. Something needs to be done to the sex traffickers, not the victims. Why should we be punished with felony records, can't get housing in a neighborhood like you live in. I had to pay double rent because I had prostitution charges. Where is the justice? I hope whoever reads this finds it in their hearts to make the right decisions moving forward. Thank you Castanita Fitzpatrick A Butterfly Gets Her Wings Back LLC. 214.535.3034 abutterflygetsherwings@gmail.com

Please Vote YES on HB2252. This makes the Magistrate system more responsive for training and accountability. Having had a few encounters with Magistrates on behalf of accused individuals with special needs, the system lacks any sort of document tracking system (they do not keep records). this will allow for the legal oversight of a key entry piece into the justice system.

Please vote "YES" on HB2259. This bill is reasonable, rational, and necessary legislation to help put a stop to the prevalence of paternity fraud cases in Virginia. The issue of paternity fraud is not new, and not difficult to detect and prevent, yet legislation has failed to help put an end to the injustice. This bill is the legislation needed to deter persons from making knowingly false statements. And with DNA tests available for less than $100, an alleged father of a child should, at minimum, be given the opportunity to request the administering of this inexpensive, conclusive test. Historically, injustices occurred because there simply wasn’t the science to support or deny the claim of paternity, but in the year 2023 there is no longer an excuse for paternity injustice. Family Reunion is a national, non-profit organization that works with lawmakers, existing organizations, and experts dedicated to making much-needed changes to the family court system so the best interests of children can be supported. We focus on positively influencing family laws and policies that often discount one parent and ultimately harm the children.

Comments Document

Attached is testimony against HB 2270.

Please vote against HB 2270. This bill to restore written informed consent before an individual receives an abortion is unnecessary, biased, and misleading. Abortion is an incredibly safe procedure and this bill adds an unnecessary additional step to receiving this critical care. The American Medical Society and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists already declare that it is the moral and ethical duty of the provider to obtain voluntary informed consent from the patient. The goal of this bill is to pressure individuals to not seek an abortion and therefore further risks the health of the individual. Please do not support HB 2270.

Please support HB1999 and HJ519 which establish the fundamental rights to contraception and reproductive freedom. This Bill and Constitutional Amendment will enshrine vital and necessary healthcare rights for women without fear of governmental intervention or criminal consequences. Please table HB1488 and HB2270, two pieces of legislation designed to intimidate facilities and patients seeking legal abortions. Thank you.

The ACLU of Virginia strongly opposes HB2270, a bill to reinstate written informed consent. This legislation as an unnecessary regulation on abortion providers designed to limit access to abortions. This bill does not make patients any safer, and instead constitutes a burdensome obstruction to medically necessary care. A law forcing patients to receive materials containing irrelevant, misleading and false information 24 hours before receiving an abortion is not out of concern of the pregnant person, but to coerce them to not seek care. Such intent and impact could jeopardize the health of the pregnant person. In addition to creating a barrier to healthcare, the bill is duplicative as providers are already legally required (See VA Code § 18.2-76) to obtain their patient's written informed consent before an abortion may be performed. It is for these reasons the ACLU-VA opposes HB2270 and urge you to oppose the bill.

I am Lawrence Diehl, attorney who has practiced family law for 48 years and for around 20 years served on the Child Support Quadrennial Review Committee, serving for some years with Del. Leftwich. I oppose hb2290 for the following reasons: 1. We already passed last year Code sec. 20-108.2(D1) which sufficiently protects a birth mother for the recovery of pregnancy expenses. We don’t need this bill 2. Child support by statute and years of case law cannot be ordered retroactively prior to the “filing” of a petition for child support. See 20-108.1(B) This bill is inconsistent with our decades of law and attempts to permit support PRIOR to the date of filing- back to the date of conception. 20-108.1(B) prohibits this- it just can’t be done by law. 3. Paying bereavement costs and wage reimbursements to a mother based on % of TOTAL wages based on guideline %s as now amended - still is a de facto spousal support payment - payments not limited to just a child support computation but based on GROSS wages. These payments between unmarried parties for the benefit of the mother since this is for her above child support- is in substance in the form of spousal support. This has never been permitted in the history of Virginia law unless parties are married. By allowing such support this will be, for the first time in Virginia history - support for an adult by unmarried parties- again, clearly in the nature of spousal support. This could reverse decades of Virginia law on this issue contradicting our public policy of only permitting such support between married parties. 4. The implementation of the bill will be inconsistent between court ordered support and the voluminous administrative orders issued by the DCSE. I have spoken with Craig Burshem of DSS and he indicates DCSE workers, many of whom are not attorneys, would not be considering the expenses provided by this bill/ they will only be doing the basic guideline calculation That is not fair. There should not be two separate standards used- one by a judge in court and one by the DCSE. The inconsistency of results in child support orders this bill would create is unfair. 5. This bill is actually a back door effort by the administration to declare a fetus as a person or child. The award of support to a fetus from date of conception raises serious constitutional issues of when life begins. And if pregnancy expenses can already be awarded now per our statute passed last year, what extra expenses are needed by a fetus? Why is “child” support even needed for fetus when a fetus does not need clothes, food, educational costs- none of the elements for which child support is based. Clearly this bill is a very veiled attempt to provide precedence to declare a fetus as an actual person being a “child”. Virginia should categorically reject such an attempt. I ask that hb2290 be defeated. Thank you and if anyone needs to call me on this - my cell phone is 804-763-9631.

HB 2290 contains some very weird provisions. For example, some parents would have to pay more than their entire income in child support. If the father is making the minimum wage and the mother is unemployed, he would have to pay her for "paid maternity leave" at "the minimum wage if the mother is unemployed." So he would be paying her for family leave at the same wage he himself is getting. He would have to do that while also paying other forms of child support as well: He would also have to pay her nine months retroactive child support based on his monthly income, back to the "date of conception," in addition to "pregnancy" and "delivery" expenses, and pay current child support based on his monthly income, pursuant to Va. Code § 20-108.2(B), and also for various other expenses, see, e.g., Va. Code § 20-108.2(E). (The original version of the bill required the "legal father" to pay "least 50 percent" of all these expenses, but the revised bill apparently mandates payment "in proportion to the parents' gross incomes," which would mean the father would bear 100% of the expenses in this example). Such a requirement will backfire and harm custodial parents. When fathers are ordered to pay obviously unpayable amounts, they give up, and pay less, resulting in custodial parents getting less, according to child support officials. See Office of Child Support Enforcement, Family and State Benefits of Debt Compromise, August 18, 2022 (available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/policy-guidance/family-and-state-benefits-debt-compromise) ("Parents who owe large child support debts are more likely to become discouraged and leave formal employment, further compromising their ability to support their children. This is partly because up to 65 percent of disposable income can be withheld from the paychecks of nonresident parents owing arrears...This high withholding rate can have the unintended effect of pushing low-wage parents out of a job, because the remaining paycheck is often too little to survive on. Child support debt can lead to increased job-hopping, participation in the underground economy, and generation of illegal income as parents try to support themselves and their children and avoid the child support program."); Yvonne Wenger, Maryland Should Overhaul Child Support System and How Payments Are Set, Abell Foundation Says, Baltimore Sun, June 18, 2019 (citing a study, and quoting a former federal child-support chief and a women's advocate) . The bill would also require many fathers to bear more than the actual costs of the child, further increasing the risk that they will be unable to pay. The father would have to pay both "pregnancy" and "delivery" expenses, and 9 months retroactive monthly child support based on his income back to the "date of conception." But the only actual child-related expenses during pregnancy are for "pregnancy" and "delivery," so for the bill to also require monthly child support under Va. Code § 20-108.2(B) back to the "date of conception" results in the father having to pay twice for the same expenses, once as "pregnancy" and "delivery" expenses, and then again as retroactive monthly child support.

Please vote NO on HB2290, which contains extreme provisions.

We completely favor a robust child support program, but we fear that HB 2290 will harm rather than help children. In Virginia, as in most other states, massive uncollectible arrearages have accumulated because a “more is better” impulse has imposed unsustainably high burdens on child support obligors. See, e.g., the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) guidance at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/policy-guidance/family-and-state-benefits-debt-compromise and the report by Vicky Turetsky, former head of OCSE at https://abell.org/publication/reforming-child-support/. Excessive child support obligations lead to defaults which lead to sanctions like loss of driver’s licenses which lead to loss of employment which leads to even less ability to pay and destroys the relationship between parent and child. HB 2290, we are sure, is offered with good intentions, but it is solely a “more is better” proposal with absolutely no analysis of its impact on ability to pay. Payment of pregnancy expenses is mandated without reference to availability of medical insurance. HB 2290 even demands reimbursement to the government if government funds helped pay for the pregnancy. HB 2290 also mandates payment of maternity leave. HB 2290 also mandates payment of child support from the date of conception before there is a born child in need of support which is a pure “double-dipping” on top of the payment of pregnancy expenses. HB 2290 also mandates payment of bereavement leave. All of these are on top of the existing child support obligations in Virginia which already cause the massive accumulation of uncollectible arrearages as described above and at the links provided. HB 2290 will cause severe disruption to thousands of families by imposing impossible burdens and magnifying the negative consequences of a system that already generates uncollectible arrearages by imposing unsustainably high burdens on obligors. Respectfully submitted, S. Horning For The Boys Initiative

*Please ignore my initial comment and instead refer to this corrected version This bill is discriminatory, unfair, biased, and should go no further than this subcommittee. This bill is badly drafted and not written in a gender-neutral fashion. The existing child support guidelines are gender-neutral, and don't single out "the legal father.” But this bill allows a second parent to avoid responsibility, unless the second parent is a man. Sometimes a child has two mothers, yet this bill does not take that into consideration. The bill states “in the case of assisted conception, the donor shall not be considered the legal father.” This means “the legal father” is required to pay support for prenatal periods, and at least 50 percent of paid leave, but a second mother never does, even if that mother was directly involved in the conception of the child. The bill makes "the legal father" pay for "at least 50 percent" of the equivalent of 60 business days paid leave to the mother even when (1) the mother isn't taking any leave from her job, and/or (2) the father plays an equal or greater role in raising the child (such as if father is on leave or can work from home), and/or (3) the mother was unemployed, and thus is not on leave from any job, and thus isn't losing any income, or (4) the father makes far less than the mother. And this is on top of any child support the father would owe under existing law. The mother is already getting paid maternity leave. That is unfair. Why should an unmarried father have to pay for such leave that costs the mother nothing? A married father has no such responsibility. Whether married or unmarried, a father is a father and should have equal rights. There should not be discrimination against an unmarried father, which this bill allows for.

HB 2290 appears to result in double-dipping of expenses, resulting in an unfair windfall to the mother at the expense of the father. The mother could get paid twice for the same pregnancy-related expenses, or get paid for both daycare and family leave at the very same time. It also contains gender-based double standards. Va. Code 20-108.2(D)(1) already awards child support for "unpaid expenses of the mother's pregnancy and the delivery of such child." But the bill uses the existence of those same pregnancy expenses to make "the legal father" pay monthly child support for all 9 months of pregnancy, all the way back to the "date of conception," on top of any expenses awarded under Va. Code 20-108.2(D)(1) or elsewhere. Existing law already awards child support for daycare expenses (Va. Code 20-108.2(F)). But the bill would let mothers collect child support for a monetary value "equivalent" to 60 business days of family leave, even if they aren't taking leave, but are working, and as a result, the father has been ordered to pay daycare expenses. So a mother could collect both daycare expenses for the infant, and the value of the family leave she isn't even taking. It could also result in fathers being ordered to pay for the value of family leave the mother will never take and doesn't need, such as where the father or others are caring for the child. The comment by Family Reunion is right to say that "The bill makes 'the legal father' pay for 'at least 50 percent' of the equivalent of 60 business days paid leave to the mother even when (1) the mother isn't taking any leave from her job, and/or (2) the father plays an equal or greater role in raising the child (such as if father is on leave or can work from home), and/or (3) the mother was unemployed, and thus is not on leave from any job, and thus isn't losing any income, or (4) the father makes far less than the mother. And this is on top of any child support the father would owe under existing law." (Family Reunion might be mistaken, though, to say mother can collect both from the "employer and...from the legal father," because the bill has language later on about things "already .... reimbursed by an employer." But it's not clear, because that language follows the requirement to pay monthly child support from "the date of conception" under Va. Code 20-108.2, rather than the earlier requirement to award family leave expenses. As Family Reunion points out, this is a "badly-drafted bill"). As another comment rightly points out, this bill "would also create a family leave obligation for only fathers, not mothers. It would create big uncollectible child-support arrearages, and also be unfair to fathers by making them pay for the value of family leave the mother isn't even taking, and pay for the value of family leave even when the mother isn't losing a dime of income, and pay for the value of family leave even when the father is raising the kid. It would lead to huge retroactive child support arrearages by ordering child support back to 'the date of conception.' Fathers would suddenly become liable for 9 months extra child support during pregnancy. Not even states that are pro-life or restrict abortion do this, because [monthly] child support isn't designed for prenatal expenses," but rather is "based on the estimated cost of raising kids who are already born."

This bill is discriminatory, unfair, biased, and should go no further than this subcommittee. This bill is badly drafted and not written in a gender-neutral fashion. The existing child support guidelines are gender-neutral, and don't single out "the legal father.” But this bill allows a second parent to avoid responsibility, unless the second parent is a man. Sometimes a child has two mothers, yet this bill does not take that into consideration. The bill states “in the case of assisted conception, the donor shall not be considered the legal father.” This means “the legal father” is required to pay support for prenatal periods, and at least 50 percent of paid leave, but a second mother never does, even if that mother was directly involved in the conception of the child. The bill makes "the legal father" pay for "at least 50 percent" of the equivalent of 60 business days paid leave to the mother even when (1) the mother isn't taking any leave from her job, and/or (2) the father plays an equal or greater role in raising the child (such as if father is on leave or can work from home), and/or (3) the mother was unemployed, and thus is not on leave from any job, and thus isn't losing any income, or (4) the father makes far less than the mother. And this is on top of any child support the father would owe under existing law. The mother is already getting paid maternity leave. This is like double-dipping--first from her employer and second from the legal father. That is unfair. Why should an unmarried father have to pay for such leave that costs the mother nothing? A married father has no such responsibility. Whether married or unmarried, a father is a father and should have equal rights. There should not be discrimination against an unmarried father, which this bill allows for.

Please vote NO on HB 2290, a badly-worded bill that imposes child support from "the date of conception" and would also create a family leave obligation for only fathers, not mothers. It would create big uncollectible child-support arrearages, and also be unfair to fathers by making them pay for the value of family leave the mother isn't even taking, and pay for the value of family leave even when the mother isn't losing a dime of income, and pay for the value of family leave even when the father is raising the kid. It would lead to huge retroactive child support arrearages by ordering child support back to "the date of conception." Fathers would suddenly become liable for 9 months extra child support during pregnancy. Not even states that are pro-life or restrict abortion do this, because child support isn't designed for prenatal expenses. State child-support guidelines are based on the estimated cost of raising kids who are already born. Many parents simply could not afford to pay nine additional months of retroactive child support, which would be thousands of dollars they would suddenly owe on top of, and in addition to, the thousands of dollars they already need to pay in child support under existing law. The bill is also unfair, because it orders fathers to pay the mother the value of 60 business days of family leave even if the father is taking care of the kid, or the mother isn't on family leave, or won't use the money for family leave, or the father is poorer than the mother. HB 2290 requires "the legal father" to pay "at least 50 percent of the equivalent of the mother's paid maternity leave," but that is not the actual cost of leave to the mother, or the amount of leave she is actually using. Instead, "'Paid maternity leave' means the equivalent of 60 business days at the mother's hourly wage if the mother is employed, or the minimum wage if the mother is unemployed, for eight hours per day for a total of 480 hours." So even if the father is taking care of the kid, he can be ordered to pay the mother the value of maternity leave, even if she is not paying any costs, and maybe even if she wouldn't take maternity leave even given the opportunity. For example, the mother gets to collect the value of paid maternity leave, even if she isn't taking leave, because she was unemployed and thus isn't losing income. Sometimes, it is the dad who is responsible for much of the child care of an infant, like when he can work from home or has access to family leave from his employer. When that's true, it's wrong to order him to pay the mother for paid maternity leave. That's especially true when the mother isn't on leave from a job, such as if she is unemployed for reasons unrelated to childbirth, and is being supported by well-to-do family members. Or if she wouldn't take leave anyway, such as for reasons of career advancement. If a new mother has daycare expenses from working after giving birth, the father can already be ordered to pay those daycare expenses as child support under existing law, and the current child-support guidelines, without any need for this bill. But the mother shouldn't be able to collect BOTH daycare expenses AND the value of family leave she isn't even using from the father -- that would be like having your cake and eating it, too. The father shouldn't be ordered to pay both real AND imaginary expenses.

This bill creates gender-based obligations, which seems unconstitutional. Doesn't that violate the Supreme Court's decision in Orr v. Orr, 440 U.S. 268 (1979), which ruled that support obligations can't be based on gender? The bill is also unfair, because it orders fathers to pay money for family leave even when the mother isn't actually on leave, and orders fathers to pay money for periods when the mother doesn't actually have any child-rearing costs, such as early in her pregnancy. The bill creates gender-based obligations. Under the bill, "the legal father" is ordered to pay "child support" "beginning at the date of conception" and including "at least 50 percent of the equivalent of the mother's paid maternity leave." But a mother has no such obligation, ever, under the bill, even if the child has two mothers, and regardless of whether the second mother is a transgender mother who provided the sperm for the conception, or a cisgender mother who didn't give birth, but who agreed to the pregnancy via assisted conception. The bill states, "For the purposes of this section, in the case of assisted conception, the donor shall not be considered the legal father. " So a father who didn't give birth to the child has the obligation to pay support, but a mother who didn't give birth to the child doesn't (even if the legal mother is a transgender mother who was involved in conception, either through intercourse prior to her "sex change" or through use of sperm collected and stored prior to the gender transition). This qualifies as sex discrimination for purposes of the Constitution and federal law. (See the Supreme Court's decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020)). The bill makes fathers pay for family leave even when the mother isn't on family leave, such as if she was not employed, and thus didn't lose any income from the birth of the child. It requires the father to pay "at least 50 percent of the equivalent of the mother's paid maternity leave," even if the mother isn't taking any leave, or even "if the mother is unemployed" and thus is not sacrificing income to take care of the child. That seems unfair. The bill makes fathers pay for "child support ... beginning at the date of conception of the infant." But while life may begin at conception, child-rearing costs don't. Most expenses related to children begin near the time of birth, not conception. During the earliest stages of pregnancy, women often don't know they are pregnant, much less incur costs from being pregnant. One in three women only learn they are pregnant after six weeks. Unborn children don't incur daycare expenses or use up diapers. The bill makes fathers pay for child support under the Virginia child-support guidelines, Va. Code Section "20-108.2," but that guideline was developed based on the major cost of raising children who are already born, not the minor cost of nurturing a growing fetus or accommodating a body changing due to pregnancy -- like a mother eating a bit more as the unborn child grows, or buying maternity clothing. The total cost of my unborn daughter prior to her birth, for all 9 months, was less than $200 (prenatal vitamins + 3 pairs of cheap pants + 1 body pillow + maternity pantyhose + a few boxes of Eggo waffles due to increased appetite at breakfast time). By contrast, child support for a household with our income would be well over $1000 per month under Virginia's child support schedule, just for one child.

This bill unjustly discriminates based on sex and marital status. It would order the father to pay for the value of paid maternity leave that the mother is already getting at no cost from her employer, when the father is already paying child support to support the child. The bill would order the father to pay at least 50% of the value of paid maternity leave -- even though that leave costs the mother nothing because it is paid leave, so she doesn't need to be reimbursed for it. This could result in fathers being ordered to pay thousands of dollars beyond what they can afford. For example, I had months of paid maternity leave after I gave birth to our daughter. That was worth many thousands of dollars. I didn't expect my husband to pay me for that leave, which cost me nothing. So I don't see why an unmarried father should have to pay for such leave that costs the mother nothing to use. A married father has no such responsibility, and doesn't have to pay the mother for paid leave that she is getting at no cost. Why should an unmarried father have greater obligations than a married father? All parents have an equal duty to take care of their kids, regardless of marital status. The bill also allows men, but not women, to be ordered to pay more than half of childbirth and family leave expenses. The "father," because of his gender, has to pay "at least" 50 percent of these expenses under the bill -- potentially more than 50%, but never less. That's unfair and discriminatory, especially when the father has a lower income than the mother.

We respectfully ask you vote no on HB1922, HB1973 & HB2294 HB1973 & HB2294: No one in the hemp industry is opposed labeling, testing or packaging of products. We have met every new regulation in labeling and packaging as they have been introduced. In fact we welcome stricter regulations on labeling, testing & packaging as we believe it helps weed out bad actors. But both of these bills have a 2mg per package limit for ANY THC (even naturally occurring D9). The current limit of quantitation (LOQ) for modern testing is 0.01% or 0.1mg/g. That means that in a 20g or smaller package, detecting ANY THC would make the product marijuana. The purpose of these limits is to only allow hemp products that contain zero naturally occurring THC (even non-intoxicating levels). These mg caps will absolutely end every hemp retailer, processor, and farmer in Virginia. 1000s of living wage jobs will be lost. Millions of dollars in infrastructure will be auctioned off to neighboring states. Most Va hemp processors and retailers are not selling intoxicating products, even though their products contain low levels of THC (0.3%). NON-intoxicating hemp products with low levels of THC will still be widely available from out of state via the internet, but Virginia small business will not be able to participate in the federally legal marketplace. The requirement of bittering agents in topicals is yet another blow to small hemp businesses. No one is going to buy topicals with unnecessary additives that are specifically made to be unpalatable. This will spell the literal end to all hemp topical manufacturing in Virginia. But, consumers will still be able to buy non-bittered topicals from out of state via the internet. Again, Virginia small business will not be able to participate in the federally legal marketplace. On HB1922: Delta 8 THC is found naturally in Hemp biomass in small concentrations. This bill would make all Hemp and hemp products with small concentrations of naturally occurring Delta 8 THC illegal. Would the Hemp industry be forced to find cultivars that have non-detect concentrations of Delta 8 THC? This bill creates a number of legal question and problems for VCDACS and other stake holders. For this bill to not have unintended consequences it must call out an allowable percentage to include what's found naturally in hemp plants and products (<0.3%).
 There are a number of hemp derived, (federally legal) psychoactive chemicals that are not Delta 8 THC. This bill would have zero effect on the proliferation of these widely available chemicals. This bill would not have the intended effect of reducing psychoactive access or harm.

As a scientist concerned about quality assurance testing for products in the Commonwealth, I have reviewed HB2294. It is my opinion, from an informed position regarding quality testing and in having spoken with other stakeholders in patient and consumer safety, HB2294 has the strong language to protect consumers from poorly made, contaminated, and adulterated products.

Comments Document

I echo Griffith: Please vote NO to the following bills: HB 1973, HB 2294, and HB 1922. These bills would put thousands of Virginia hemp businesses out of business overnight when we have been operating by the law for the last 5 years. If the objective is truly consumer safety, then establish moderate regulations that legitimate Virginia owned companies can comply with. Consumers are already used to buying these products on retail shelves in Virginia, and by criminalizing the sale of these products in the state will only force consumers to the black market or the unregulated online market. The best way to control the market is to moderately regulate it in a way that does not exacerbate black market sales, and also does not put thousands of Virginia owned businesses out of business. We all want consumer & child safety, and the only way to do that is by regulating the recreational market. Prohibition is never the answer, and by voting yes to any of these bills, you will be a direct contributor to the issue you are trying to resolve. Please consider this as well as the thousands of families whose sources of income and their life’s work will be ruined by passing these destructive bills. We are real people and we are asking you respectfully to vote no on HB1973, HB2294 & HB1922

This is a ridiculous bill that both violates federal standards for federally protect CBD products via the 2018 Farm Bill, and violates the basic tenants of math and science. I'm certain that the $26,500 that Delegate Kilgore took in last year per VPAP.org from the medical cannabis monopolies had nothing to do with the fact that these medical cannabis monopolies stand to become the only places in the state where people could buy products in person that are federally legal in every other state. For starters, the federal threshold for CBD products is 0.3% THC. It is not 1mg per 100 grams of of product weight. That is 0.0001% THC. The 2 cannot coexist in the same bill because math exists and 0.0001% is not equal to 0.3%. This bill outlaw the most basic of cbd products - cbd oil. Any full spectrum extract cbd oil will contain trace amounts of THC. For example, a 500mg bottle of cbd oil that contains 0.05% THC is 6x below the federal limit, but at 15.9mg in total thc in the bottle, is still 16x over the entirely ridiculous limit in this bill. The portion of the bill requiring bittering agents in non-edible cbd products is both scientifically ridiculous and practically absurd. No one is eating cbd soap, lotion, salve, or bathbombs. However, given that most cbd products are formulated to be as natural as possible, forcing manufacturers and farmers to add additional chemical compounds to these products both ruins these products, and potentially harms the consumer. What happens if an alcoholic buys a non-edible product that has ethanol in it as a bittering agent? What happens if a bittering agent triggers a skin reaction on someone with sensitive skin or a skin condition (which is a sizeable portion of people buying cbd products)? The end result of this is that even more businesses in Delegate Kilgore's district will slide across the border to North Carolina, Tennessee, and Kentucky - just like many already have. In short, this bill - while violating federal law and the 2018 Farm Bill provisions - will simply cement that far from helping Delegate Kilgores region regain an economic footing so desperately needed, he has instead presided over their long, slow, altogether avoidable, slide towards economic destruction and abject poverty. This bill needs to die.

Greetings Delegates, The selected biils are Detrimental to the small farmers and retailers in the state of Virginia. As a member of the Virginia Hemp Coalition I ask that you vote no on these bills. Also add the Social Equity back to all of the cannabis legislation. Thanks for keeping Virginia first!!!! Sincerely, William Hill New Century Farmers Group

With reading this proposed bill, I am confused about the inclusion of a bittering agent in non-consumable hemp products. I have created and am pushing to market hemp fire starter, fire logs, etc, which utilized all parts of the left over materials from the plant, leaving zero waste. All parts are used. You can view this product on my website www.crystalhillcannabis.com But in this proposed bill, it states that a bittering agent will need to be added to any non-consumable hemp product. Does this include my product? Does this include the exploding building industry that is utilizing parts of the plant. Does this include pet bedding made from the plant. I find the inclusion of a bittering agent in any non-consumable hemp product to be overboard and lubricous.

I oppose bills that restrict the re-emerging hemp wellness industry in favor of state-controlled medical / recreational cannabis industry. Bill's before this committee will allow the the government to choose out of state corporations as winners, at the expense of registered and federally compliant small hemp businesses. There is space in Virginia for industrial hemp, hemp extracts for wellness, and cannabis for medicine and recreation to coexist in Virginia. That space should allow small, medium, and large growers, producers, testers, and manufacturers to enter, without exorbitant entry and maintenance fees. Bad actors should be held accountable for irresponsibility marketed products, however, a whole legal hemp industry should not be criminalized and punished. There should not be new criminal penalties for hemp or cannabis products. There are current laws in place to deal with unscrupulous products. We should be researching and studying hemp and cannabis as alternatives to pharmaceuticals, educating, marketing and building safe access to hemp and cannabis products. We should include many Virginian workers and small businesses and create tax revenue for our Commonwealth.

Please vote NO to the following bills: HB 1973, HB 2294, and HB 1922. These bills would put thousands of Virginia hemp businesses out of business overnight when we have been operating by the law for the last 5 years. If the objective is truly consumer safety, then establish moderate regulations that legitimate Virginia owned companies can comply with. Consumers are already used to buying these products on retail shelves in Virginia, and by criminalizing the sale of these products in the state will only force consumers to the black market or the unregulated online market. The best way to control the market is to moderately regulate it in a way that does not exacerbate black market sales, and also does not put thousands of Virginia owned businesses out of business. We all want consumer & child safety, and the only way to do that is by regulating the recreational market. Prohibition is never the answer, and by voting yes to any of these bills, you will be a direct contributor to the issue you are trying to resolve. Please consider this as well as the thousands of families whose sources of income and their life’s work will be ruined by passing these destructive bills. We are real people and we are asking you respectfully to vote no on HB1973, HB2294 & HB1922. Sincerely, Savana Griffith

Good morning, my name is Sue Lunt, I am commenting on behalf of the Virginial Coalition Against Human Trafficking. VCAHT supports HB 2398 as sextortion is a manner by which an individual might find themselves being trafficked. We would love to see this bill extended to include statutes in Article 3. Commercial Sex Trafficking, Prostitution, Etc. We encourage the committee to vote in favor of the passage of HB 2398. Thank you for your time.

Dear Delegates, As I sit here thinking of all the genetic illness’s I suffer with. I can not help to wonder why you would not make this medicine available to people who suffer. My background was in the medical field, now disabled due to Ehlers Danlos syndrome (genetic disorder never goes away) and almost all of its comorbidities! Look it up it’s living with extreme flu symptoms everyday on top of the rest and your collagen being like faulty bubble gum. You wake up with bruises just because it’s part of the disease migraines and nausea .Which I am now limited to treatment options as well as pain management and am allergic to most meds I have adverse reactions due to my genetic illnesses. As well I have seizures, tremors, CPTSD from severe trauma and all forms of abuse. Cervical spondylosis, Rheumatoid arthritis, Dysautonomia, Postural Orthostatic tachycardia and bradycardia when my body decides to throw a fit. Also sleeping with all these conditions is almost impossible and I wish it in no one. But I do wish we could find the good in this! Revenue for Va, roads and school systems , small businesses, People not suffering more than necessary “ let’s be humane”, how about our Emergency response crews who deal with trauma everyday and need to sleep/ mental break, let’s end prohibition on cannabis. It’s not fair alcohol is the one that makes people violent, abusive and kill. I grew up in that legal drinking home of abuse. As a person of 46 years of age this is the only option for relief. Why should we be penalized by doctors or jobs? They don’t alcohol test first if they did, most wouldn’t be treated like cannabis users. My daughter was having major surgeries in Colorado this year for our genetic illness. A surgeon walked out and came to talk to the family beside me. His advice to the family was get him some Strongest medicinal marijuana and yes he emphasized it. Best Regards, Linda Ludin

Any bill that supports the retail market through the medical cannabis providers will further weaken the current quality and quantity of the medical cannabis offerings. Patients wait as much as 12 weeks for the medical cannabis product that was discussed with their practitioner and has provided the benefit that they need. The focus of the medical cannabis producers has pivoted from medical patient care to that of recreational, which is evidence by the accompanying lines of products they carry. The key comment I have heard from patients is that they are uncomfortable in the dispensaries as they carry lighters, other smoking devices and it seems less medical and more recreational. The medical dispensaries need to do a much better job focusing on what they were licensed to do. Have a continual supply of products that benefit and work for the patients and cease catering to the recreational user who received their medical certificate through a 1-800 number or a Groupon for $69.00. People are hurting because the medical processors want to be in the recreational field, and treat the medical process and the patients with disregard.

Comments Document

The Commonwealth of Virginia has a rich and storied history in the cultivation and use of cannabis and hemp. As early as the 1700s, Virginia farmers were growing hemp for textile production, making it a vital component of the state's economy. In 1979, Virginia became the first state in the union to recognize the medical potential of cannabis, a discovery that would change the course of history for patients and healthcare providers alike. As we move forward, it is imperative that we build on this legacy and create a cannabis industry that is inclusive, equitable, and sustainable. This legislation is a commitment to the people of Virginia to create a cannabis industry that benefits all, and to make Virginia a leader in the national conversation on cannabis legalization and regulation.

I'm glad that we've come this far as a state but do not dwindle it away by giving a monopoly to cresco and col-care. What happened to creating jobs for Virginians? Not these multi-state multi billion dollar companies who only care for quantity at the expense of quality leaving people at risk for consuming pesticide. Cresco already has allegations in other states with poor quality control with no oversight. What happened to both parties caring about the individual? The working class? Instead Virginians have no voice in Virginia only those with deep pockets... Let Virginia be about Virginians.

In 2021, the Commonwealth of Virginia legalized marijuana. Since then the commonwealth has been in grey area wrt marijuana. The delaying the sale for adult use does not stop the use. Allowing legal sales quickly so the product sold is safe and only sold to adults is the priority of the commonwealth. Today Cresco operates a majority of the medical storefronts the the proposed bills will only increase Cresco's gripe on the market. The spirit of legalization was to help people of color run legal adult use establishments, not create a monopoly for Cresco under the direction of Virginia's NORML chapter. Please allow non multi-state to open establishments to receive licenses and open before Cresco and others multi-state companies to open more (they run all the medical dispensaries) establishments.

Why not consider the statutory option of a civil stay of an MOT court order, per an amended HB2434? This might be on the recommendation of expert testimony given by the court ordered evaluator, referred by the criminal judge upon acquittal, to the civil side for disposition by a special justice or district judge for direct MOT or "step-down" MOT in the community. The option of a civil stay of an MOT order would exist in district court or in a specialty court by a district judge or a special justice in a licensed facility or alternative site on a voluntary basis for a presumed legally competent SMI/DD/ID/Autism Spectrum respondent found not guilty due to lack of criminal intent (Mens Rea) at the time of the criminal offense (Actus Reus) but found to be in need of outpatient services in the community to avoid a foreseeable risk of future substantial deterioration. This option could be recommended in testimony at the criminal hearing by an expert evaluator (forensic clinical psychologist or board certified psychiatrist with a forensic specialty) as an option for the court prior to a verdict as not meeting ECO/TDO commitment criteria but who poses a foreseeable risk due to a past criminal act (Actus Reus).related to the individual's mental condition. Invoking a statutory stay of a civil MOT order would allow the individual and his or her chosen supporters under medical supervision and with oversight by a special justice or judge in specialty "problem solving" courts in the community to provide needed mental health services and CSB case management support similar to what is being done in CARE Courts in California. As in California CARE Courts, this provides an opportunity to use supported decision making or shared decision making as a case management model to facilitate a Virginia Advance Directive with Ulysses Clause with inpatient and outpatient crisis plans to intervene in the event of early prodromal signs and symptoms of substantial mental deterioration and loss of decisional capacity in the foreseeable future. Invoking a voluntary civil stay of an MOT order, as in CARE Courts, is similar to "preventative AOT" in a number of other states, such as New York, that allow this kind of civil judicial disposition. This "voluntary" community based treatment option might satisfactorily address Senator McClelland's reservations about the "involuntary" nature of an MOT order for Autism Spectrum, SMI, and other special needs "at risk" populations under SB1510 yesterday. Such an approach might help to salvage SB1510/HB2434 (indefinitely passed by yesterday in the Senate) , particularly if approved and recommended by an Interbranch Judicial Advisory Task Force, recommended by the National Judicial Task Force (10/2022), and sanctioned by the Executive Office of the Virginia Supreme Court working closely in concert with the Behavioral Health and Crime Commissions in a further study of diversion models, such as E EDCOT and CARE Courts.

I would like for you to hear me please. I was molested at the age of 5 years old, because my mother wanted her drugs amd men more than me. I was 10 years when I started using drugs and alcohol. By 11 I was told by my grandmother where my mom was so I Hitch hike from. CHICAGO to Cleveland to find her. I dropped out of school in the 6th grade the streets taught me how to read and write. The state trooper picked me up and did a APB for my mom. When found she told them that's not my child you can do whatever you want with her. Now I'm homeless, on drugs amd my parents doesn't want me. I remember being in that bathroom when a GROWN man forced me on my knees and said to me " You're not a little girl anymore you are a grown woman. For 2 weeks in that apartment all the men had their way with me. Now I was being sexually exploited. For 31 years I lived this way. I walked around with 8 pairs of socks because I never had any shoes. My childhood was taken away from me. I can never get that back. There are so many young kids out there who can be saved save them. As of August 6th 2010 which is my date of Grace 2019 I got my High school diploma, graduated college with my associates degree in social work in 2022, I am a publisher author of 31 Years in the Desert, many accomplishments. I will never be able to have children physically this is another reason I stand and not be silent. After 31 Years of hell I walk with my head held high. Something needs to be done to the sex traffickers, not the victims. Why should we be punished with felony records, can't get housing in a neighborhood like you live in. I had to pay double rent because I had prostitution charges. Where is the justice? I hope whoever reads this finds it in their hearts to make the right decisions moving forward. Thank you Castanita Fitzpatrick A Butterfly Gets Her Wings Back LLC. 214.535.3034 abutterflygetsherwings@gmail.com

Bell HB2434 (Orders for involuntary outpatient evaluations & services; evidence of defendant's mental condition found not guilty due to diminished capacity to form criminal intent) is in my professional opinion as an independent forensic examiner a good example of contemporary lawmaking meeting the crisis needs of our time. A few states courageously allow for court ordered evaluation of these cases with diversion directly from the criminal courts to mandated civil court dockets in the community. Virginia may soon be one of them. This judicial disposition is reserved for individuals found "not guilty" by virtue of "diminished capacity" to form criminal intent (Mens Rea) but who may be in need of ongoing evaluation and services in the community because of the risk posed by the criminal nature of the act itself (Actus Reus). Usually court-ordered services involve direct or "step-down" Assisted Outpatient Treatment or AOT (in Virginia it’s called Mandated Outpatient Treatment of MOT). Most MOT civil dockets are reserved for individuals who pose no immediate or foreseeable risk of harm to the community or to themselves following discharge after an inpatient psychiatric stay. HB2434 allows, however, for disposition in cases of "diminished capacity" that might arise where the defense attorney for an individual charged with a serious criminal offense, including a violent offense, might offer a "diminished capacity" defense for his client. Such cases are likely to be rare in Virginia. They are typically based at least in part on expert testimony by a forensic expert, such as-a licensed forensic clinical psychologist or psychiatrist with a forensic specialty area, and this may lead to a verdict of acquittal. In such cases there may be experts providing testimony for the prosecution and for the defense. This is similar to NGRI cases with expert evaluation in the criminal courts. However, in acquittal cases by virtue of diminished capacity, the individual may be, and often is, released directly back into the community. Depending on the circumstances, an Emergency Commitment Order (ECO) may be issued under current Virginia law for individuals meeting commitment criteria considered at the time of acquittal to be at risk "in the near future" to harm self or others. On the other hand, if such an individual does not meet ECO criteria at the time of acquittal, he or she might pose a future risk for "mental deterioration" and therefore be in need of further court-ordered evaluation and services in the community deemed to be of a preventative nature. This form of AOT or MOT is termed "Preventative AOT or MOT". As an independent examiner for the Virginia Supreme court who regularly performs risk assessment in civil commitment courts, I believe that it is time for Virginia to consider expanding its legal "dangerousness" standard in civil commitment law to encompass the broader standard of "future risk for mental deterioration" based in part on the individual's past history of serious mental illness and known acts of past dangerousness. I applaud HB2434 as a step in the right direction in seeking a necessary compromise between the treatment needs of the individual with serious mental disease or disorder and the safety of the community.

I urge you all to pass this bill. This is not an expansion of police powers, but a housekeeping measure within the intent of the original legislation passed in 2015. It does not extend the scope of authority beyond what these DCJS approved agencies have done for over 20 years. Private police provide a valuable community service with no cost to the Commonwealth. Passing this bill would help clarify that private police can continue to combat drunk driving and intimate partner violence.

HB 2448 is strongly supported by the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police. When Virginia authorized private PDs about 12 years ago, the power of warrantless arrest was supposed to be included since they are fully certified LEOs and their agencies are fully authorized police departments by the General Assembly. We consider this a clean up bill to ensure that their warrantless powers of arrest are clear in the Code. This applies to departments like Kingsmill PD, Wintergreen PD, Aquia Harbor PD, Bridgewater Airpark PD, Lake Monticello PD, and Babcock and Wilcox (BWX) PD. Ironically, our private campus police departments already have this authority, so these private authorized police departments are no different. These officers are subject to certification and decertification standards and meet all training requirements of all other law enforcement officers in Virginia. No other private police departments can be created without General Assembly authorization. Please support HB 2448.