House Public Health, Welfare And Labor Committee
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (7)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1384
· 4 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB1384”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1186
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…1256. Is anybody here to run 1038 by Representative Altus? House Bill 1186 by Representative Malone, pass over. House Bill 1384 by Rep…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1189
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…the 5th. Also, Representative Broadway has asked me to pull House Bill 1189 off of the deferred list and set that for special order on…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1190
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…of a discussion on that if we don't have any bills to run. House Bill 1190, Representative Hammer. Yes, sir. Oh, okay.”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1215
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…rect. Yours is set for special order on Tuesday. Thank you. House Bill 1215, Representative Westerman, or 1256. Is anybody here to run…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1473
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…going to contact him and ask. 1439 by Representative Altus. House Bill 1473 by Representative Ferguson. Okay. We're going to move that…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1486
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1486”
|
Pre-2017 bill |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 4, 2026
Have a seat and shut the door. Thank you. A couple, whoops. We did have a special order for 1468, but Representative Hammer has told me that he's not going to be able to run that because of some technical issues he's trying to get worked out. So we're not going to have that special order of business today.
You'll see on your agenda that we do have Representative Wilkins, 1402, for special order a week from today, March the 5th. Also, Representative Broadway has asked me to pull House Bill 1189 off of the deferred list and set that for special order on Tuesday. So without objection, we'll set that for House Bill 1189 for special order on Tuesday. I don't know that we're going to do anything. I don't know that anybody's going to run a bill, but I'm going to run it through the agenda.
And then if nobody runs anything, I'm just kind of winging it here. If you all want to do a little talk on, we might talk a little bit about Medicaid, just because there has been a lot of stuff happening in the past few days, It would probably be good to just have a little bit of a discussion on that if we don't have any bills to run. House Bill 1190, Representative Hammer. Yes, sir. Oh, okay.
Oh, that's right. There's only 28 days in February. They, Representative Wilkins pointed out that March the 5th is Tuesday, which will be his special order. So we'll, I'll visit with Representative Broadway, and let's go ahead and just keep her set for special order. Be immediately following yours, Representative Wilkins. If she wants to move that to Thursday, since we don't have anything there, we can move that on Tuesday.
I'll see if I can find out before the end of the meeting. But, yes, you are correct. Yours is set for special order on Tuesday. Thank you. House Bill 1215, Representative Westerman, or 1256. Is anybody here to run 1038 by Representative Altus? House Bill 1186 by Representative Malone, pass over. House Bill 1384 by Representative Miller. I will just tell you everything.
I'm going to text Josh up here because I actually think he did plan on running his today. He might just be on his way. So I'm going to contact him and ask. 1439 by Representative Altus. House Bill 1473 by Representative Ferguson. Okay. We're going to move that down to the deferred. okay
I do believe Representative Miller is going to run his bill today so if y'all will bear
ramble here for a little bit 1384 okay 1486 by Representative Miller 1492 by Representative Hammer your pass over and then 1312 by Representative Westerman.
Okay. This is kind of dangerous because we are just essentially waiting for Representative Miller to get here, and I've got a microphone in front of me. I could tell jokes. I don't think I'll do that. But, you know, I guess kind of as a summary, if you've been reading the paper, It does – there are a lot of moving pieces, I think, to the Medicaid debate, which is not necessarily news. But I think it would be wise for us to have a meeting.
It will probably be early next week where we can have some of the folks from the administration come in and kind of give us an overview of the lay of the land now and what options do exist. That probably seems to be the best approach, because even though there are still a significant amount of moving pieces, I think there's significant fewer of them now because it seems at least we have a couple very clear and distinct paths is probably the best way to put it.
And it will be up to the legislature to choose which one to follow. But at least now we do have a little bit of a direction, whereas before I think that was lacking. Does anybody have any specific questions on it for me or for anybody in the room while we wait I'm sure there's people here I don't know it's director see look over there anywhere okay well this is just rambling and saying something I shouldn't I'm gonna recess for about five minutes yeah we could practice I think we've had a lot of practice on those
already. He said we could practice roll calls. I think we've got it down. I was going to announce March the 4th, which is the Monday before Tuesday of next week, is the deadline to file appropriation bills. And then March 11th, that Monday, is also the next Monday, is the deadline to file any legislation so keep those in mind and also you you had been informed
before about UAMS and the tour there on March the 6th which sticking with our calendar will be Wednesday of next week they're going to do a tour of their telemedicine center they're gonna meet in the capital rotunda at 3 30 there are a few spots there. It's going to kind of leave at 3.30 and take most of the afternoon and then into the evening. It's going to be the Senate Public Health, but I think there's about six, they can fit six more people. If you're interested in that, just RSVP to Mr. Price and he'll take care of it.
I don't know of a better way to do this, but I don't want to leave and not do something if we can do something. So I'm going to just recess for five minutes and make sure Representative Miller's on his way. And then And then when he get when we'll call it back in and he can run his bill, so we'll stand in recess for about five minutes Hanging in there Representative Miller I believe you're going to run two bills. I'll recognize you first on the agenda is House bill 1384
So you'll be
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
7:22
recognized present 1384 Thank
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
7:36
Y'all got that. Thank you. Yes, HB 1384 is what I consider to be a common sense bill. It is requiring that anybody who is providing basically in-home caregiving services to beneficiaries of Medicaid waiver,
such as the alternative program, elder choices, a lot of things that fall under independent choices, that they be drug tested. Currently, if you work as a caregiver, personal care attendant, CNA, or any level of nurse through the county health departments or through the state, you have to be drug tested. And I happen to believe that this is going to eliminate some situations where these programs, they're very good programs.
they save the state a lot of money by keeping folks out of nursing homes I do think they're being abused a little bit I happen to think that but this is one step in eliminating some of that abuse and a little bit of fraud and I think the worst case scenario is it's going to ensure that folks that taxpayer dollars pay to take care of or going to be taken care of by drug-free personnel and I would entertain any questions all
right thank you for the presentation Vice
Speaker 25
9:12
Chair Murdoch you're recognized for a question thank you chairman thank you represent Miller
Speaker 27
9:18
for coming to see us question are you or do we have a an experience not a knowledge base here that's telling us that there's a problem with this or this there's something there's an assumption that you assume it's a problem so you want to put a regulation on on the caregiver on the non-certified caregiver I guess is what you're dealing with yes sir and to
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
9:45
answer your question I have been approached by several I have myself have been a beneficiary of the alternative alternative choices waiver and and so I for the last eight or nine years I've become fairly well acquainted with the folks that that run these programs both at the local level and at the state level and they have approached me for probably a year and a half to two years
now where case managers have come and talked to me about their frustration in in seeing people number one someone who is not Does not truly need to be on the program on it and then number two They're they're on it. They've they've hired their buddy Or whatever to come hang out And they're in the and they're inside cooking meth Takes place in Cleaver County
And and I told the I ran this by the governor a A few days ago, I told him that I believe with all my heart that what the state will pay or what the state will save in Cleveland County, in my district alone, will more than cover the cost of drug tests for the whole state. That was going
Speaker 9
11:11
to be my next question about the fiscal impact. What is the fiscal impact on
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
11:17
this, of this view? We are, I have not run an official fiscal impact.
you're looking at for the folks that there's a lot of folks that
work that work for our caregivers
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
11:34
through a waiver program that work for an independent agency nine times out of ten that independent agency already requires a drug test so they have no fiscal impact all we're saying is when when you're going to receive Medicaid waiver dollars and put somebody in in a home taking
care of somebody that you give verification of a drug test and the rest of it will be like for folks that are hired directly by an individual when they when they start work when they do go through their certification process with the state I think the drug test charge is usually around 30 bucks okay and this is so if
Speaker 9
12:17
a family member to walk me through just a little bit of a family member want to hire someone I
Speaker 27
12:23
mean if someone it's that needed this care want to hire a family member or friend then they would be subject to
this drug testing absolutely is that drug testing on any on any schedule is it random there will be one
Speaker 20
12:38
the way the way the bills written I believe is there
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
12:43
There's one mandatory drug test at the initial hiring of the individual, and then they are subject to one random drug test for every five years. One test every five years? That's the way it's written right now.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And Representative Miller, is the state paying for the test or is the person that's seeking the – The agency will
Speaker 38
13:12
pay for the test, as it's written right there, yes.
Okay. Thank you. Mr. Maxwell, I think you were here to, this is your area. Would you like to
add some comments? And then we're going to recognize Representative Wilkins for a question.
Speaker 40
13:30
Yes, sir. I'm Dusty Maxwell with Pathfinder Incorporated.
We operate waiver programs. To answer part of Representative Murdoch's question, All of the waiver providers are required to do criminal background checks, and the majority of them follow the federal drug workplace, so they're all drug tested before they're employed. Independent Choices doesn't have any rules or regulation on them. They don't have to do a criminal background check. They don't have to do a drug screen.
and this would put some regulation in place that everybody else is already doing on someone that's not doing it. And the interesting thing that with the criminal background check, if someone like Representative Miller was talking about was trying to hire their buddy that they're doing drugs, if he's been convicted of a crime, he cannot operate in that house. He can't live in that house. So I think that that's really important. Okay,
Speaker 27
14:30
since you addressed it to me, may I follow up?
I'm just trying to make sure that I'm looking out for Chairman Burrs here as you are talking about putting regulation on individuals and choices. I just want to make sure that I'm properly advocating
Speaker 40
14:47
for what he really believes in. Yes, sir. I agree with you. I think the important thing that it is that individuals who are picking their own caregiver, they have the same safeguards in place that everybody else does makes sense
vice-chair Murdoch you've never sounded smarter representative Wilkins
Speaker 26
15:10
you're recognized so representative Miller
this will also cover people who are not participating in government programs are just totally for government program this is for
this is for any program that is that is
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
15:33
being funded through a Medicaid
waiver if you're gonna bill if you're gonna bill a Medicaid waiver program for for in-home caregiving services this affects them like mr. Maxwell said just about all of the independent privately run programs that that bill Medicaid already have this in place the main the main areas that we're trying to target target is some of these independent choices programs that and just ensure
that folks that are receiving this care are receiving care by folks who are meeting the same standards as as folks that would work for a county health Department or any of these other health
agencies? If I may, let me, in response to Vice Chair Murdoch's question a while ago, I've been involved in home health care, first with my mother-in-law and then my wife for over 12 years. During that period, I have had to fire two people.
I don't know that it was drug related or not, but it's certainly criminal related. They stole from a mother-in-law who's got dementia and quite advanced in years. And one time it was $2,000, and I was still working in law enforcement and was able to get that back. But the other time it was just what not. Well, it does. It is a common problem, I think, and I fully support you. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Representative Wilkins. Representative Hammer. Thank you. Representative Miller, just wanted
Representative Kim Hammer
Unverified
17:17
to qualify a few things. The homes that you're talking about the caregivers being in, most of the time these patients have prescription drugs, some of which would be highly valuable on the street. Is
Representative Kim Hammer
Unverified
17:33
a yes, very much so. So by the implementation of this law, that would build another filter system as far as identifying potentially potential individuals who might, you know,
cipher off some drugs or steal some drugs away from the patients that they're in there watching and selling them on the street. Is that a fair assessment of the intent of the bill? Yes, absolutely. Okay. Well, I applaud you for it because I know we can't put too many layers in the homes of these individuals that, you know, are trusting these folks but many times become victimized because their drugs are stolen. And if their drugs are stolen, doesn't that, in turn, also make it hard on them to get their prescription refilled? And, in fact, they may run out of their medicines and not be able to get some because, you know, you can only get so many certain types of drugs.
Okay. Thank you for that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Representative Mayberry.
Representative Kelley Linck
Unverified
18:29
I'd like to make a motion at the proper time. Okay. Thank you. Representative Link. I may have missed some where we were talking about costs because I heard you say it was about $30. dollars and and the applicant it pays for that
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
18:43
$30 right no no okay who pays the 30 or the who pays the cost the agency the waiver the waiver for a lot of the a lot of the agencies the privately run agencies already already
require a drug test and of course that's left up to them whether their employee or the agency themselves pick it up the ones that work like through alternative care choices where if like representative Wilkins his mother-in-law could hire you to be her caregiver the state would pay the state would pay for that drug test as the bill is okay and that's what we're
Representative Kelley Linck
Unverified
19:24
talking about we don't have an
impact we don't know exactly what the financial impact would be
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
19:32
to the state no sir okay I don't but I I wouldn't be here if I didn't feel like state
Representative Kelley Linck
Unverified
19:39
would be money ahead well I understand but sometimes we got know where the money is before we know we can get ahead okay thank you
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
19:49
representative love thank you mr. chairman I have a question of the chair mr.
Miller I like your bill but But we're talking about a fiscal impact to the state.
And am I not correct that we
have to have a fiscal impact? No, sir. Fiscal impacts are required for various things, more
targeted towards cities and counties and legislation that would impact there. But generally speaking, no. It's not required on a bill like this.
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
20:20
Okay. Is it possible that we can request one for this bill? yes sir what I'm concerned with if it is going to be a fiscal impact to the state
then I mean while this is a
good bill we would still need to know the impact to the state that's my I have no apprehension to the
bill it's just that we need to know the fiscal impact to the state let me take a couple more points
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
20:54
I assume here and then make a decision representative Harris thank you Mr. Chair, a question maybe for either the presenter or, if I'm not mistaken, it's not
cost to the state, it would be to
the independent provider, and that needs to be, maybe we
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
21:11
can get that clarified, but I think that is correct. That is the case. now however in in in the spirit of everything on the up and up here there there is there are individuals who like myself or whoever I could hire someone to work and they would be employed through the alternative care waiver
program that would be paid by palco and those are the people where the way the bill is written those are the people where the the agency or the the waiver program would pick up would pick up the cost of the drug test right
mr. Maxwell would you join us again representative Harris I think you might be able to address your point I believe
Speaker 40
22:05
if you read the bill it says the department will establish the procedure so there's a way for them to set aside how they would
handle that yes there would be I don't think the state wants to have to pick up the cost for what they are one way or the other I mean let's be honest but I think the important thing is this bill will make everybody have to go through the same procedures before somebody goes into that house and we want to make sure and there's plenty of people out there that offer drug testing that may be a lot less than $30 so I mean it's a
screen it would help do that the important thing in my opinion is going to be the criminal background check that way you're preventing somebody that has a history of misbehavior let me see
yeah thank Let me just see if I can clarify or summarize what we're discussing. I mean, so in order to participate in this waiver program, they have to actually join up with an entity, what would amount to a provider or contractor. So the legislation establishes the process by which, in order to be licensed, for lack of a better word,
this is the process you have to go through. but the entity would be required to conduct the test and
Speaker 40
23:36
Okay. I think the difference is that the independent choice waiver is run through the aging department of DHS, and that's where somebody like Mr. Wilkins could have people come out to his house that have been approved to go do that. Right now there are no qualifications to do that.
They can sign up and become a provider. You get to pick. You could pick your brother, your uncle, your cousin down the street, or your next-door neighbor to come do it. We just think, I mean, there should be a filter to make sure that they're reasonable folks that's not going to take advantage of you.
I got you. Okay. Representative Ferris, do you still have a
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
24:18
question? Yes. If you just follow me. So if, to just make it clear, I understand the bottom line, the state pays for it,
but does it come out of the, so the independent person, it comes out of their billing, I meant their reimbursement. Is that what, so it's technically not coming from. Well, actually, Representative Harris,
Speaker 40
24:42
words, your screen, just like all of us have to screen folks, if they don't pass that screen, they don't get to go work. Right. So there's an upfront cost of doing business. And criminal background check, the state already does that, will do that.
They do that in-house. That's not a problem for them. But the drug testing and who it pays for, but in the bill, it says the department will establish, and I think that will help resolve this issue.
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
25:13
There's going to be a cost involved. And that's what I was wondering. That was my question to
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
25:20
whether a financial statement would be necessary or not. Okay. I would like to
add one thing if you a lot of these folks on on these waiver programs are working they're paid for the waiver program a lot of times will
pay for up to 52 to 54 hours a week worth of work so so you're looking at someone at the end of the year that's that's cost the state one employee it's cost the state around you know twenty one to twenty three thousand dollars a year if you eliminate if you eliminate one employee you've paid for a lot of drug tests eliminate one situation of abuse
drug test. Okay. Thank you. Representative Hammer.
Representative Kim Hammer
Unverified
26:14
Thank you. Mr. Maxwell, I want to clarify something you said earlier in the testimonies. Did I understand it that other agencies that are providing similar benefits or, you know, that are under the same type of umbrella currently are required to offer these kind of tests in their arena? Yes. Okay. And, you know, to the chair, if I may, I think we ought to do everything in order so that, you know, what you do for one, you do for everybody.
And with regards to the fiscal impact, if it's determined that we need to have that in order to make sure this bill passes out of here without any further future scrutiny, that's what we need to do. But at the same time, regardless of what the impact is going to come back and show, if the expectation in the law is required in other areas, this seems to be a loophole that got slipped through. And regardless of what the fiscal impact is going to come back and show, we ought to do it on the basis of merit. And I would just extend that to you to throw in the mix of things.
Thank you. No, and I'll just say, and then I'll recognize Representative Ferguson, you're next. But I think we, like I said, to Mr. Maxwell's point, I mean, reading the legislation, it does just simply say establish the procedures. So it's not really spelled out specifically in what's going to be and how this is going to be applied. So I think there's a little flexibility there to the Department to establish those procedures in a way that would be cost-effective. So in making the decision on whether or not an impact is required, I just don't think
it is, simply because of the flexibility that's in the bill. It really just authorizes them to establish this as they do for other entities. So I think there are good points that need to be addressed before final passage and then subsequently if it becomes in practice. But I think that's easily resolved because it's not addressed in the legislation. Representative Ferguson, you're
Representative Deborah Ferguson
Unverified
28:09
recognized. I think I understood, but you're saying the agencies who provide these services and are doing the criminal background checks and drug testing now are indirectly being paid by the state already,
Not maybe directly, but they're being reimbursed by Medicaid or some of those. Yeah, I mean, I think this is a great bill. I think all people who go in and treat people, they
ought to have this. Thanks. Thank you. Representative Love? Had you down. Okay. Representative Butch Wilkins? Good. Okay. That's the last of the questions. So let's see here. I'm losing my train of thought. Is anybody – yeah, thank you, Mr. Maxwell and Representative Miller, for the presentation.
Is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak for or against? Okay, thank you. Seeing none, what is the pleasure of the committee? Oh, yeah. Representative Mayberry makes a motion to do pass. Any discussion on the motion? Okay, all in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Congratulations, Representative Miller, you passed your bill. Would you also like to present, I believe you do, House Bill 1486?
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
29:26
You are recognized to present. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. Folks, I don't have a copy of the bill in front of me, but I'm pretty familiar with it so I may
not I may not have all the hey there
we go this bill 1486 is 1486 the subtitle the first line of the subtitle pretty
much sums up what the intent of this bill is to provide incentives for working person with disabilities we have a program right now in in the state in our in our in our Medicaid system called the tickets to work program and that is for folks who have permanent disabilities that are uninsurable in the private sector even through the upcoming health care exchange will be uninsurable they
will be dependent upon upon governmental health care programs they are this this program allows for them to work currently if you're receiving Social Security disability you're allowed to work and make I think it's right around a thousand dollars a month in addition to your disability check well if you're if your disability check is only six hundred dollars a month that's not a lot of money and sometimes it's hard to find a part-time job that pays $1,000 a
month and and then if you if you get a full-time job they want to pay you more than a thousand dollars a month and that that screws you up and and causes you to lose your disability this program tickets to work allows for folks to lose their disability but maintain their health care coverage the problem with the ticket to work program is that it has an income cap the first income cap is at $25,000 that would eliminate someone who is in need of a of a waiver
program if they're in need of a personal assistant to help them in their home to get up and get ready for work this would eliminate that would eliminate that Their their final cap is that a little it's between twenty nine and thirty thousand dollars They're not allowed to make over that are there out of the program. They lose everything. They lose their health care coverage They they lose everything I've got The problem is this That does not provide much incentive for folks with disabilities to rejoin the workforce
You know a lot of times you're If you're if you're on if you are taking advantage of all the benefits you possibly can and on disability The first cap at twenty five thousand dollars you would necessary you would in essence be losing your disability going to work full-time Really to only benefit yourself about two thousand dollars a month in a lot of cases Most folks don't do that $2,000 a year isn't worth working 40 hours a week all year for when you don't have to.
In this day and age, there are getting to be more and more opportunities, more and more options for folks with disabilities to work and have a prosperous career. And, folks, let's be honest. the the state is spending the same amount of money to insure these people whether we sit at home and rot or we get out and do something and make a hundred thousand dollars a year and pay taxes on it what a novel idea and and so
I'm asking that we that we pass this bill which eliminates the income cap currently I think there are 112 people in the state of Arkansas that are enrolled on the ticket to work program I think that's extremely sad when you compare that with the number of people in the state of Arkansas on disability and and I would like I would like for this to sort of be a catalyst to get the ball rolling to encourage more folks with disabilities to get out do what
they can go to school we spend millions of dollars a year through Arkansas rehab to educate young folks with disabilities and young adults with disabilities they get out they go to school we pay for their school and pay for their career training they get out they work a year to realize hey in some cases I'm going to make $25,000 a year and I can quit and do nearly that good so all I'm asking is we eliminate the income cap let folks be as prosperous as they can and you know hopefully we'll we'll get a little money back on it in
and the taxes they pay. Okay. Thank you for the presentation. Vice Chair
Speaker 27
34:47
Murdoch, you're recognized for a question. Thank you again, Chairman. And a great bill, Representative Miller. I applaud you for stepping out of the box to try to create better situations for people with disabilities. And I just think it's a real good idea and probably something that should have been addressed in the manner that you're addressing it earlier. You do know if you look at the last statement of the bill on page two line, beginning in line three, and probably because of the federal oversight of the monies, you know, this being
Medicare, Medicaid money, they have rules that they've instilled that the state have to follow. So certainly this being a good starting point, and you did put that in there, and I think that's good, and I think that's where it's going to lead us to, that there's going to have to be some waivers given to change or make some amendments to what's currently being done. But I do think it's a great idea, and I think there's a lot of merit in it, and I applaud you again for a good bill. Do
you think it's going to require a waiver? Have you had any
feedback from the department? Well, I've got mixed reports back on that.
Some say that yes, it will. Others say no, it
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
35:50
won't, so that's why we put that in there. If it does come back and CMS sees what we're doing and they crack down and say, you know, no, you can't do it, Well, then, you know, it's in the bill that, you know, Arkansas DHS will request a waiver for this to happen. You know, I feel like we've got a little more common sense here in Arkansas than we do.
In my recent conversations with the federal government, they agreed. Yeah. Representative Love, you're recognized. Thank
you Any other questions for Representative Miller? Okay, seeing none Anybody in the audience like to speak for or against the bill? If not, Representative Love, you recognize for motion Recommend do pass Okay, you've got a motion do pass Any discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor say aye
Aye Any opposed? Congratulations, you passed your bill I don't think we have any other business to come before the committee, so we'll stand adjourned until 10 a.m. Tuesday.
Agenda
HB1384
HB1486
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative John Burris Chair
Unverified
Speaker 10
Representative Josh Miller
Unverified
Speaker 19
Speaker 25
Speaker 27
Speaker 9
Representative Butch Wilkins Chair
Unverified
Speaker 20
Speaker 38
Speaker 40
Speaker 26
Representative Kim Hammer
Unverified
Representative Kelley Linck
Unverified
Representative Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
Speaker 44
Speaker 74
Representative Deborah Ferguson
Unverified