California Republicans reamed out their Democratic colleagues Thursday for passing what they referred to as a mealy-mouthed, anti-child sex trafficking bill that still leaves out harsher penalties for buyers who target older teenage prostitutes.
Lawmakers in the State Assembly’s conservative minority laid into Democrats for continuing to exclude an original provision in the bill, which called for automatic felony charges against anyone paying for a prostitute aged 16 or 17.
Instead, Assemblyman Nick Schultz, the Burbank Democrat who chairs the public safety committee, presented an amended version of the bill that said “it is the intent of the Legislature to adopt the strongest laws to protect 16 and 17-year-old victims.”
Republican legislators bashed the amended bill, which passed 55-21, for paying “lip service” to underage sex trafficking victims.
“What more does it take for this caucus, the Democrat caucus, to wake up and realize you’re on the wrong side of this issue that is so patently offensive?” Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, San Diego Republican, said during his floor speech.
“And why? Because you have an extremist wing of your party that says somehow it is normal to have sex with minors,” he said.
The proposal broadly cracks down on johns who loiter in prostitution hot spots.
Assemblywoman Maggy Krell, the Sacramento Democrat who authored the bill, said she was forced to remove the provision seeking tougher penalties against johns who go after older teenagers in order for the legislation to get a committee hearing.
Ms. Krell ultimately voted against the amended bill.
She said during her floor speech that she didn’t know what to make of the amendment because the language was so unclear.
Assemblyman Joe Patterson, a Republican from the Sacramento suburbs, also took a swipe at the bill’s squishy wording regarding “intent.”
“I woke up this morning and I intended to do a lot of things. I intended to work out. I intended to wake up earlier and have a more productive day … We all intend to do a lot of things that don’t happen,” he said. “This bill doesn’t accomplish what we’re trying to do, which is to make it a felony for purchasing a 16- or 17-year-old.”
Those who opposed the tougher penalties said the automatic felony charges were removed because it could see 18- and 19-year-olds who are romantically involved with the minors be wrongly accused of a crime.
But those who backed the felony charges have said no prosecutor would charge teens involved in a consensual relationship.
Mr. Schultz, the public safety chair, said there are already laws on the books addressing johns who pay for sex with minors, including statutory rape and other crimes.
The Burbank Democrat also took a shot at Gov. Gavin Newsom and Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis for spreading “misinformation” about the bill.
Both of the state’s top executives have come out against the removal of automatic felony charges that Ms. Krell originally had in her proposal.
