Today, a final State Senate Floor vote is expected for outpatient commitment extension bill AB 2357 (Karnette and Yee). California mental health clients, survivors and advocates are mobilizing to stop the bill, which would extend the sunset date of soon-to-expire outpatient commitment law AB 1421 ("Laura's Law"), and many are writing letters and visiting state senators to voice their opposition. But the voting records of the majority of state senators on similar forced treatment bills do not bode well for AB 2357 opponents.

Much of the current senate leadership voted "aye" for AB 1421 in 2002, including President pro Tem Don Perata (D-East Bay), the bill's principle co-author; Assistant President pro Tem Jackie Speier (D-San Francisco/San Mateo); Democratic Caucus Chair Tom Torlakson (D-Antioch); Minority Leader Dick Ackerman (R-Orange); Majority Whip Carole Migden (D-San Francisco); Republican Caucus Chair George Runner (R-Lancaster) and Minority Whip Dennis Hollingsworth (R-El Cajon). The latter three were assemblymembers at that time, and cast their votes for the bill at its final hearing on the Assembly Floor.

Also among the AB 1421 "aye" votes was Kevin Murray (D-Los Angeles), the current chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee who stunned advocates Monday by invoking the obscure Senate Rule 28.8 and reporting AB 2357 out of that committee for placement on the Senate Floor second reading file. The bll was read a second time on Wednesday, and is now on the third reading file, where it awaits a final hearing on the Senate Floor, most likely today.

In addition, a significant number who voted to pass AB 1421 also voted "aye" two years earlier for inpatient commitment expansion bill AB 1800 in the Assembly in 2000, including Senators Ackerman, Samuel Aanestad (R-Nevada City), Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield), Gilbert Cedillo (D-Los Angeles), Dave Cox (R-Roseville), Dean Florez (D-Shafter), Sheila Kuehl (D-Los Angeles), Abel Maldonado (R-San Jose), Bob Margett (R-Glendora), Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks), George Runner (R-Lancaster), Jack Scott (D-Pasadena), and Edward Vincent (D-Los Angeles).

But the "ayes" of yesterday do not always translate into "ayes" of today. Without a doubt, many of the senators who voted "aye" to AB 1421 are expected to again vote "aye" to AB 2357, such as Aanestad, Kuehl, Scott and Torlakson, who signed on as co-authors of AB 2357 on June 7. However, other senators who voted "aye" to 1421, such as Senate Health Chair Deborah Ortiz (D-Citrus Heights) and Liz Figueroa (D-Fremont) appear to have changed their minds, as evidenced by the fact-finding questions the two asked at the Health Committee hearing June 14, followed by two "no" votes. Principled swing votes like these offer some hope to clients, survivors and allies who seek to stop the bill in the legislature.

And of course, there remain a significant number of senators who voted "no" on AB 1421, including current Majority Leader Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), Rules Committee member James Battin (R-Riverside) and stalwart client/survivor ally Wesley Chesbro (D-Arcata), who spoke critically of involuntary treatment's ineffectiveness at the Health Committee hearing, noting that many who have been subjected to forced treatment report being traumatized as a result and consider it a civil rights violation. Senators Richard Alarcón (D-San Fernando Valley) and Michael Machado (D-Linden) also voted "no" on AB 1421. Romero and Battin are also examples of senators who have changed their minds about the need for involuntary treatment; Battin voted "aye" forAB 1800 two years before his "no" vote on 1421, and Romero voted in support of AB 1421 two months prior to her "no" vote on the Senate Floor.

Faced with AB 1421's passage into law four years ago, as well as the majority votes that have thus far propelled AB 2357 through the Assembly and now through the Senate, many opponents of the current bill see it as a foregone conclusion that it too will pass. Still, some advocates remain stubbornly optimistic that as long as the senators who have voted "no" remain opposed, become more vocal on the Senate Floor, and convert a critical number of others to switch votes, opponents to expansion of involuntary services may pick up a majority of 21 votes, defeating AB 2357 and halting the expansion of forced treatment.

Most likely swing voters.

Based on their voting histories, perhaps the most likely senators to be persuaded to vote "no" on AB 2357 who have not always opposed forced treatment legislation in the past are the ones who voted "aye" for one of the previous forced treatment bills, but "no" on the other. Top contenders include Senators Migden, Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) and Elaine Alquist (D-San Jose), who as assemblymembers voted "aye" on AB 1421 but "no" on AB 1800. It should be noted, however, that since AB 1800 only came to a vote in the Assembly, the only current senators who voted on that bill are the handful who were then in the Assembly.

Next most likely, perhaps, to vote "no" on AB 2357, despite having cast an "aye" vote on 1421 on the Senate Floor, is Chuck Poochigian (R-Fresno) who voted "no" on 1421 in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

The burning question facing AB 2357 opponents is whether these four potential swing voters will follow the lead of Romero, Chesbro, Ortiz, Figueroa and three other almost assured "no" voters - and whether they will be able to persuade 10-14 others to oppose the bill.

Perata: past forays into forced treatment legislation.

Although Senate President pro Tem Perata has not co-authored or spoken publicly on AB 2357, many advocates predict that he will likely vote "aye" based on his past principle co-authorship of both prior bills. When Senator Perata signed on as co-author of AB 1421 in April 2001, the bill was still in the Assembly. Under Perata's initial amendment to the bill, the State Dept.of Mental Health (DMH) would have been allocated $50 million to award grants for AB 1421 programs to counties that already provided similar services on a voluntary basis; this provision was deleted two months later in a subsequent amendment that shifted the financial burden of program implementation onto counties, while retaining the requirement that they already offer the same voluntary services.

Another key provision of Perata's initial amendment would have required AB 1421 programs to administer periodic blood tests or urinalysis to determine compliance with prescribed medications, along with alcohol or substance abuse treatment and counseling and periodic tests for the presence of alcohol or substance abuse. These provisions were also soon struck from the bill in another amendment.

While the primary author of AB 1800 and 1421, former Assemblymember Helen Thomson, no longer serves on the state legislature, Sacramento sources say she has remained very active behind the scenes in the current effort to extend AB 1421.

Prior bills: a primer.

AB 1421, signed into law in September 2002 by then-Governor Gray Davis, allows counties that provide an array of voluntary services to elect to participate in an involuntary outpatient treatment program in which courts may order adults to obtain outpatient treatment if prescribed criteria are met. Its predecessor,AB 1800, which sought to broaden criteria for involuntary commitment under the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act, passed the Assembly in June 2000, but was immediately referred from the Senate Rules Committee by then-Chair John Burton (D-San Francisco) to the Joint Committee on Mental Health Reform, where the bill was eventually reported out without further action.