House State Agencies and Govt'l Affairs
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (1)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1292
· 2 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB1292”
|
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
Speaker 1
0:01
Apparently, we will, we're against, we've got to, we've got to go, there's no one else
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
0:18
on the agenda to speak for the bill, on the, is anyone in the public, we will bend the a little because of this extraordinary session we're having this afternoon in
the in the public would
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
0:44
is the person against the next one forgets and we're going to give everybody an opportunity that we'd like to speak for or against is Carolyn Stanley. Stately?
Speaker 7
1:02
Stately? Okay. Anyone for it? No one's for it.
Speaker 8
1:26
Rose Mims? Not here. Not here. Reverend Mendel Griffin? No
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
1:31
one's here? See what happens when you take a break. Ken Watson, Municipal League.
Speaker 8
1:44
He is against. We have no one signed up for. So we're going to give everybody an opportunity to make their statement. Can you state your name and who you're with? Yes,
Ken Watson
Unverified
1:58
sir. My name is Ken Watson with the Arkansas Municipal League, and my remarks will be very brief. I'll just bring concerns from your city officials that their perception of this bill is going to be that this is an unfunded mandate, 8, specifically on page 2 of the bill where it says that they should document the types
of benefits and the dollar amount spent on the benefits provided to the persons. So again, your cities back home are going to perceive this as an
Speaker 13
2:30
unfunded mandate and would be opposed to it. That is my remarks. MR. Would you take questions?
Speaker 8
2:37
MR. Yes, sir. MR. Is there any questions for the committee? Representative Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Are you aware we amended that
Ken Watson
Unverified
2:46
out? I was in the audience, and I have not seen the bill, but are you talking about Section D there where it says political subdivisions?
Okay. Yes, ma'am. I'm aware. If you're saying that's amended out, I caught that when I was in the audience. But, again, the definition of public corporation, is it still in there? Is it not? and that would probably give us a little bit of heartburn.
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
3:33
Representative Lee, are you through? Did you have
a, someone raise your hands on this side
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
3:51
of the, okay, Representative Nichols. So let me understand, you're concerned about the word public corporations and it's my
understanding that cities had a corporate charter more or less from the state, is that right?
Speaker 32
4:04
No, sir. No, sir. I mean, they're under Dillon's rule, which, you
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
4:09
know, they incorporate. Yes, sir. Okay. Yeah. And. I'm not
Speaker 37
4:27
then. Rep. Nichols, are you through? Yes, sir. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. Rep. Bernard.
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
4:35
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon. Thank you for coming back. And if you will, sir, for me again, please tell me your name again. I didn't hear it. Ken Wasson. Wasson? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wasson. And who are you with? The Arkansas Municipal League. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wasson. I want to speak or ask a question specifically to your concern on mines in our copy of the I guess it would be lines 13 through 15, where you're talking about state agency being defined
or means a public corporation, or in that next line it says, or instrumentality of this state. Do you see cities being instrumentalities of the state? Again, that's a
Ken Watson
Unverified
5:33
question that I don't have a specific answer to. My answer would be that, yes, I could see how we could under,
Speaker 43
5:41
you know, certain lawsuits or something might be interpreted as that. Yes, ma'am.
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
5:47
Okay. And public corporation, what would you, if you could help us, sir, public corporation in your mind means, for example? Well,
Ken Watson
Unverified
5:59
again, the legality of that would be that we would, in certain situations, we would probably be
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
6:10
interpreted as being a public corporation. Okay. Are there any other terms in those lines, 14, 15, right in there,
that would cause you concern with regard to cities? That's probably the extent of
Representative Mary L. Slinkard
Unverified
6:27
it, ma'am. Okay. Well, thank you, Mr. Watson. I appreciate your being here this
Representative Linda S. Tyler
Unverified
6:37
afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Tyler. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Mr. Watson. Thank you for being here and coming back. I know it's been a long day, but I'll bet you got lunch. Public Corporation, now that we are looking at this more in depth, it does make me think about.
I'm from Conway, and we have a Conway Corporation, which is our city-owned utility, municipal utility. And I would assume that that would be deemed a public corporation, would it not?
Representative Linda S. Tyler
Unverified
7:13
would be, yes, ma'am. And so if it is, then in terms of documenting the services that are provided to illegals, i.e. trash pickup or electricity or water, cable TV, how do you envision that the cities would do that?
Ken Watson
Unverified
7:37
Well, therein lies the reason for our concern and why we would, again, consider this as an unfunded mandate until we could clear up some of these definitions and so forth. As you're describing, that would be very, very difficult to document, as would other
Speaker 32
7:51
aspects of city services as well. Thank you, sir. Thank you,
Speaker 54
7:59
Mr. Chair. Representative Lee, did you raise your hand? Did I see
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
8:05
you? What I did not want to slight you in one instance, if I did, you're most welcome.
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
8:14
Representative Hobbs. Thank you, Ms. Chair. Sorry for the confusion. I do have a question. Do you provide the benefits you talked about for free to your citizens
Speaker 8
8:29
or do they pay for the services? It would certainly depend on the benefit by definition.
Ken Watson
Unverified
8:34
definition. Obviously, with sanitation pickup, there's a charge there. However, in terms of many parks and recreation activities, those are often provided free. And, of course, this does deviate from city to city.
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
8:47
Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Any other questions from the committee? Thank you for being here with us this afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Next on the list four is Representative Harris. Representative Harris, you do not have to state your name. We
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
9:15
know who you are. You have the end of the table. Thank you, Mr. Chair and
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
9:19
Madam Co-Chair, Vice Chair, for allowing me to speak today.
I just want to answer some question on the education piece, which I have been working on. But just to make a simple statement why this is a good bill, this isn't about any particular group that we're talking about. We're talking about people who come into the United States illegally. And I think as we teach our children, or I'm not old enough to have any grandchildren yet, but we teach them to do the right thing. And that's what we've got to do is do the right thing. And as in regards to in-state tuition, we looked
of the case Doe v. Plyler, which states that we cannot keep any child in the United States illegal or legal to deny them an education, and the fact was said by Representative Cheatham that the numbers were zero this year in 2010 in the fall semester on the report, and there are still, in fact, 37 students who receive in-state tuition, but it is done legally because there in high school. And there's three students who are in
the ADC and federal inmates that get in-state tuition. So I just wanted to make that clear. And I'll take any questions. Is there any questions from the committee?
Speaker 64
10:39
Well, I just guess, Mr. Harris, are you agreeing? There are
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
10:44
no... Representative Cheatham? I'm sorry, you don't recognize me. I'd like to recognize you first, if you don't
Speaker 64
10:49
mind. Let's keep the decor here. Representative Cheatham? Mr. Harris, I'm sorry I wasn't paying attention. Have you seen a copy? I mean, did Senator Broadway, former Senator Broadway, give you a copy of the report?
Speaker 41
11:00
Yes, and he has explained the numbers that I just talked about.
Speaker 66
11:05
Okay, and you agree with that, okay? Yes, I do. Okay, all right. And we're talking about public school, K through, pre-K through?
Speaker 38
11:15
On the high school, yes, on the 37 students. That's correct.
Speaker 67
11:21
Thank you, Mr. Harris. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Any
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
11:25
other questions from the committee? Representative Harris, we thank you for... Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 31
11:31
Are you through, sir? If there's no question... Okay, well, I just want to give you an opportunity to make
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
11:40
sure you get your position noted. Okay, we have Mr. Frank Scroggins from Lafayette County. Is he here? Let's do this a little different. Is anyone in the committee who would like to speak against the bill? If it is, would you please raise your hand.
Seeing none, is any in the... Well, would you come to the end of the table and state your name and who you're with, ma'am? And if you have a pin on stating a position, it must be removed before we can allow you to address this body. Thanks for the reminder, Chairman. As long as we can't see it, we're okay with that. If you would sit down and give us your name and who you're with, ma'am.
And are you speaking for or
Jean Mccrellan
Unverified
12:37
against this bill? I'm speaking against this bill. And your name? My name is Jean McCrellan Chambers. I'm here
Speaker 72
12:46
as a concerned Arkansas citizen. I would say I appreciate the chance to speak, Mr. Chairman and committee. I've been following this issue personally for some time, and the more I've investigated it, the more I've come to understand what the principles of it are.
I would like to read this. I have a statement I would like to read, which I think fairly well illuminates where my standing is on this. Yes, ma'am. Go right ahead. I've been, you know, like I said, I've been attending the progress of this issue for many months. I've witnessed the emotional reaction to this issue by many of those who I believe do not have a full understanding of the total implications of unintended consequences of the legislation meant to protect, but in the long run will hold the reputation of the state of Arkansas to ridicule.
As such, I must in good conscience speak out against HB 1292 for the following reasons. But first, I would make my personal position clear. However, I firmly believe that people who are here unlawfully without benefit of legal immigration status should not be qualified to receive benefits in any way, shape, or form. But I have serious reservations with the present language and the methodology of House Bill 1292.
two, especially in our present economy and the condition of the state budget. I'm going to point out some reasons why I say this. Language in the bill improperly cites code changes where it's going to be made. If they're going to make the cite in it, they need to make it properly, fully, and that would eliminate a legal challenge. In Section 4, C-1, the provision will increase the operating budget of every state agency
affected under these provisions, plus adding to the paperwork burden of already overworked state employees who are presently requiring proper documentation to obtain benefits. Also on that point, the Department of DHHS is not authorized by Federal Immigration Authority to act in local authority for any federal agency, which these provisions is attempting to require.
These agency workers are not law enforcement officers, nor are they trained as such. There are no provisions in this bill to provide such training and qualifications. Besides, what's the probable cause to force such actions? Just the fact the person looks different from the caseworker? However, in Section 4C2A, it is a duplication of the affidavit section on the application of all documents for services which bears federal penalties if found in violation services being withheld indeterminately.
In Section 4C2B is an example which reflects an overall lack of knowledge of services already provided within state agencies. Section IV-D will put undue paperwork burden on already understaffed and overworked agencies with budgets barely allowing for benefits being serviced at present time. Moving on to Section IV-F, which has been removed, and I will say I am glad it's been removed
because it directly flew in the face of existing Arkansas statute law dealing with perjury and false swearing under Title V. And something else that really bothered me is parts of this bill could be good if it was worded better, but there is no severability clause in language in this bill whatsoever. It means this bill, you take all of it or nothing. If there's a legal challenge, it will be all declared null and void.
This bill as written will potentially promote racial profiling of Hispanics and other cultures, whether they are here under proper authority or not, because of prejudicial attitudes toward these segments of the population. These actions remind me, unfortunately, of the era of the 1960s pro-segregation actions of some people that happened within this state. Overall, general language of this document is very badly constructed in such a way which opens our judicial system to a very real potential onslaught of legal challenges
and, if allowed, to go forward and become law. I would urge the committee to exercise common-sense reason when addressing this issue. I understand you're being highly motivated to pass this on with a recommendation, but there are many in the state at this time who are being emotionally reactive in this issue, whose actions they may well come to regret in the long run. And I just would like to say that when I looked at this, I did look up all the statutes.
I did go into the code and check it against what they're saying. And I'm saying there's a lot in the code that they haven't done their due diligence and looked at. And if there's any questions, I would be willing to answer to the best of my ability. Thank
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
18:39
you, ma'am. Is there any questions from the committee? Seeing none, ma'am, thank you. Thank you for your comments and your input. You're quite
welcome, Chairman. This is against the bill. Is anyone in the audience who would like to speak for the bill?
Yes, ma'am. If you go to the end of the table, put up your cell phone, and if you got anything, I'm going to be fine, but
Speaker 79
19:23
just don't be texting. Okay. My name is Mary Gardner, and I
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
19:27
am just a citizen. Thank you, ma'am. Welcome, and you may begin.
Speaker 78
19:31
I came here today with no intention of speaking. But I have worked with the other three ladies here with me with the Secure Arkansas petition earlier in the year. And we have talked to huge numbers of people that are upset about the influx of illegal residents in Arkansas. And we understand a lot of it's being caused by other states around us that has been discussed previously.
But we're like, I was told, we're like number one in illegals coming into the state. And I also want to point out that I am in no way, this is not about immigration, as we all know, and I want that to be well understood that we're a melting pot. I come from foreign backgrounds. I have a Filipino sister-in-law that just recently became a citizen, and she's very proud of it. but it's a concern of mine
that we have become an attraction to an influx of illegal residents and that is my concern and as has already been spoken today we are about law and order and when we have this huge influx of illegals we are no longer orderly and we have Excuse me ma'am I'm sorry Yes Representative Rogers I have a point
Speaker 81
20:54
of order, please. And state your point. The rules of
Speaker 82
21:00
the House indicate that no one can testify with the use of an electronic device during committee or on the House floor.
Speaker 78
21:08
That is correct. I'll put it down. I'm concerned because I have seen I'm from Rogers area, and I have seen massive school growth and increase in tech. You know, we can't keep up with the growth and the burden on the school systems with the bilingual. I am currently unemployed, and there is a lot of jobs available out there if you're
bilingual. And there's nothing wrong with being bilingual as long as we're supposed to be integrating and becoming Americans. Our whole culture has changed. So I just want law and order, and I want the residents here to be legal, and I want the people coming in legal into the country wanting to be Americans. And if this law is not written correctly, let's write it correctly.
Let's just have legal citizens in Arkansas and build this great state to what we all want it to be. Thank
Speaker 7
22:18
you, ma'am. Will you take questions? I certainly will. Director Cowley. Thank
Speaker 87
22:24
you. Are you going down the street and you send these
Speaker 80
22:30
folks? Is that the way you're? When we were doing the petition, we were on sidewalks outside
Speaker 78
22:36
of the revenue office, and we were in parking lots of grocery stores.
And we just had tons of people come and talk to us about
Speaker 88
22:46
their concerns. I understand that, but are you profiling these? do you actually know that they're illegal? I mean, if you just see someone, do you know whether
Speaker 78
22:57
they're illegal or not? All I can say to that answer, no, I'm not documenting, I mean, I'm not seeing their certification or anything like that. I have seen citizens, I mean, American-born people come up with their concerns, and I have had other people come up to me and flip me off
and call me dirty names and tell me how wrong I am. And I just tried to, you know, to communicate my concerns. I understand that. And we all
Speaker 88
23:25
are the same way and all. But as far as knowing actually whether they're legal or not, you don't actually know that. Only from the comments that were said
Speaker 80
23:35
to me. Representative Tyler. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Gardner.
Representative Linda S. Tyler
Unverified
23:45
You indicated you represent Secure Arkansas. No, ma'am. I worked
Speaker 78
23:50
with them on the petition. I am not associated with them in any way, shape, or form. All right. I was a
Representative Linda S. Tyler
Unverified
23:58
volunteer. Let me ask you a question about the petition. Am I not right in that there were not enough signatures gathered to get
Speaker 80
24:06
that petition on the ballot? In my understanding, and I'm not officially speaking, in my understanding, we had the signatures but
Speaker 78
24:13
we didn't have pages stapled correctly and it was a
technicality in my understanding as to why it it wasn't adequate I don't
Representative Linda S. Tyler
Unverified
24:20
think that was what was in the press but I'm so that's my understanding okay I understand
Randy Romo
Unverified
24:36
that I'll pass sir Representative Hutchinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Garner, in reference to Representative
Speaker 95
24:42
Cowling's question, is it true that the Rockefeller Foundation did a study and determined that half of the Hispanics in Benton County are
there illegally? Ms. I have no idea. Well, thank you. That was decided by the Rockefeller Foundation when they did a study. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no one else on the list.
Speaker 9
25:05
Thank you, Ms. Garner, for being here and I
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
25:13
assume coming all the way from the northwestern part of the state. I know it's quite a drive. I make it every week.
Ms. Garner, are you in the bill? You support the bill, right? I support my understanding of the foundation of
Speaker 80
25:32
the bill, yes. So you support the bill, yes? To the best
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
25:39
of my knowledge, yes. So you support prenatal care being given, right? If you support the bill, that's what the bill currently says. Well, I'm not crazy.
Speaker 80
25:49
I mean, I want people to have prenatal care. Don't get me wrong.
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
25:53
Okay, well, that's my question. Okay, I'll go on with that. So you support the bill, okay. Do you believe that by having immunizations, that that will protect the public health of our fellow citizens in Arkansas? Based on the comments I've heard this
Speaker 78
26:10
morning, it's my understanding that the children will all be taken care of as far as that goes.
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
26:16
Okay, so you would support them being vaccinated? Absolutely. Okay, well, thank you very much. I was wondering from one of the statements you made, and I just wanted to clarify.
Thank you again, ma'am, coming all the way from Rogers. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you,
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
26:34
ma'am. And since no one else has asked on the list, we thank you for coming down and giving us your thoughts today. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for the bill? Against the bill. I'm sorry. Against the bill. Against the bill. Yes, ma'am. If you can. Was
Speaker 101
26:57
she for the bill? She was for the bill. speaking against
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
27:02
the bill. I've got this lady right here at first. She raised her hand first
and I'm going to recognize her. And then we'll go to the next. If you would take your seat and state your name and who you're with in organization and you may begin. My
Randy Romo
Unverified
27:21
name is Randy Romo, and I'm with the Center for Artistic Revolution. And I come here today with great concern. Arkansas is my adopted state, and I am originally from Texas, and I am Mexican-American, and
I am second generation, and as you can see, I've integrated rather beautifully. I speak very good English. I adore this country. I adore this chosen state. And I'm very concerned when I think about the impact of this type of legislation, the kind of message that we're sending, the willingness to put into terms of who may and who may not be taken care of. You know, I'm glad that there was a relenting to allow prenatal care and immunizations,
as it should be. Because when we look at the economic consequences, which I think really what I've heard repeatedly is at the bottom line of this is how much will it cost us to have undocumented people in the state. And as we've continued to refer to the Winthrop study, it did show that undocumented people were contributing far more than they were using in any type of services. And, you know, this bill seems like a repeat of existing federal laws. It's redundant. I think that
it opens us up to lawsuits and litigation that in our current economic status that we can ill afford. I think that, as Representative Hubbard was mentioning, Oklahoma, he may not be aware that they have repealed most of that law due to pressure from corporations and litigation. Arizona, they've done their laws, and as we now see, they are up to their eyeballs in litigation. Litigation costs money. Litigation is not benefiting anybody in Arkansas.
And the thing that we keep hearing about is, you know, Arkansans that are suffering under economic woes and foreclosures and unemployment, undocumented people are not doing that. This is not the doing of the undocumented. These are pressures that are being brought to bear from far greater sources than undocumented people coming into the state. Undocumented people that come here, they're not coming here looking for a great giant golden rainbow. They don't think there's a blinking sign over the health office that says, you know, you can't get your benefits elsewhere, so come here.
Undocumented people cannot get food stamps. You know, there's a lot of misunderstandings in what's being put forward here. And so the thing that I would really urge this body is to not agree to pass this bill forward, but to take time and the due diligence to really understand what the various parts of this law do, in fact do and do not do rather than to move forward on emotional feelings about a certain body of people historically this country
has had the same country the same conversation generationally again and again and again the same conversation that there is not enough has been said when the Irish came here the same conversation that there is not enough is when they moved indigenous people from their lands and clearly we have continued to have enough. We have continued to be able to take care of all of our brothers and sisters. And, you know, I've heard people allude to being Christian at this table, but yet speak against
the community. And it takes me back to the charge that we are to welcome and care for the stranger in our midst. And so if we cannot agree and understand what this bill is, and I'm telling you, where this bill stands right now, because I do not have a completed, advised, and amended copy such as the body has been privy to, I'm not quite sure what is trying to be done at this point. And I think that given the fact that I think a lot of us are kind of confused at this point,
that I would just really beg for the committee to not pass this at this time. I don't feel that any of us are clear enough to really understand the full import of this. And because the whole thing goes or the whole thing doesn't go, the legal implications are huge. And as we've seen in every other place where these types of laws have been put forward, there will indeed be legal challenges. Not one state has been able to put these forward and have them stand free and clear. Every community, every state that is putting these types of bills forward are now or have been involved in legal challenges.
Speaker 8
31:49
Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Is there any questions?
Speaker 47
32:03
Will you take questions? Sure. Representative Hutchison. I'm aware of your
Speaker 93
32:07
organization, but I'm sorry. Name? You repeat that, Representative. Mike, why no? I'm aware
Randy Romo
Unverified
32:10
of your organization, but I didn't catch your name. I'm sorry.
My name is Randy Romo, R-O-M-O. Randy Rojo. Mr. Rojo, you did. Ms., I can't see down there.
Speaker 95
32:20
you did give a brief historic of our immigration policy and that it was the Christian thing to do and that we always
Randy Romo
Unverified
32:31
had enough but I don't think you went back further enough I'm Native American and it didn't work out that way for us I
did mention the indigenous people and I'm also of indigenous people
Speaker 95
32:46
sometimes you do need to keep your treaties, keep your borders secure.
Randy Romo
Unverified
32:52
I am not contesting that we do not have to have our immigration system overhauled. I think that we're all, whatever side of this bill that we're on, I think we are all of that agreement that our immigration system is broken. You know, I'm not sitting here saying that people should and that I'm encouraging people to come here without the proper paperwork. But what we have is a situation where this is happening and our people are living here among us now. So it's what do we do now? What do we do with our neighbors that we live with now?
So I'm not endorsing a free-for-all with the borders or the immigration system. I'm saying it's broken. We need to fix it. But in the meantime, is that our charge to fix it? And if we take that as our charge, how much is it going to cost us as a state? How many teachers and prenatal cares and immunizations and other things that this money could pay for? When we're saying that we want to do this because we're afraid there might not be enough for our citizens, well, how much is it going to cost us and how much will that take away from our citizens if we're tied up in a legal battle that we may very well and most likely will come down on the wrong side of?
Thank you for that. Are you aware that many Indian tribes were almost wiped out because of smallpox brought over across the border? Absolutely, and I
know that they knowingly gave them those blankets. I am from indigenous people. Well, my great-grandmother is a Cherokee, and then the rest of my people are Mexican Indians. So I'm not Cherokee. I'm on the Cherokee princess thing. Comanche. My people are Comanches. Any other
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
34:21
questions to the committee? If not, thank you, ma'am, for coming to your presentation. Appreciate it. Is anyone in the committee, in the room, would like to speak for the bill, against the bill?
If not, I see one in the back. Stand up. I can't barely see you there. If you'll come to the podium, take off your little emblem there and state your name
Clemencia Converse
Unverified
34:51
and whom you're with, and you may present your case. My name is Clemencia Converse, and I'm a concerned citizen. And I would just like you to, not because somebody told me, It would be a little more thorough if illegals had money bags,
they would be back in the country having a big business. People come to the United States to seek the dream. They have to wait 10, 15, 20 years to be illegal in their country, and when their families are dying of hunger or they're being persecuted or killed, that's when they decided to come over just to save their families. It's not just a game. It's not because they enjoy being illegal, not because they're getting money bags for being illegal. I also wanted to point out the fact that, I don't know about you guys,
but when I go to Walmart or any store where I pay my insurance or buy a car, I don't hear people saying, hey, by the way, I'm illegal. Don't charge me any taxes. I don't know that anybody, any illegal has a special card that says, don't charge me any taxes, I'm illegal. So I just want all of you to keep in mind that just because somebody told you, that doesn't mean it's true. Let's do our homework. Thank you. Is there any questions from the committee?
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
36:14
Yes, I'll take any questions. Seeing none, we thank you for your testimony. Thank you. Have a nice day. Anyone to speak against the bill? For the bill? Representative Hubbard, would you like to close for your bill? I'm sorry, sir.
Speaker 112
36:33
sorry sir we've already moved on I apologize I didn't you wouldn't quite fast
John Hubbard
Unverified
36:44
enough I apologize thank you mr. chairman here in a couple of the
questions in here about the still a little bit of confusion on some of the wording in the bill I would like to pull the bill right at this time and make a a couple of changes to it to clarify some issues
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
37:15
in the bill. What is the will of the committee? We have a motion to,
well, we just have a motion to allow Representative Herbert to pull
the bill. discussion on that motion far again sir if there's one person that's against it we've got we've got to do a different
Speaker 88
37:34
procedure here well I mean we've said here and you know we've been grilled a diligent investment
Speaker 18
37:40
they've discussed it and everything and all that
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
37:44
I'd rather not do this anyone else have any Any comments on the motion to?
According to Speaker Massinelli, we got a little problem here on the procedure, so we're trying to get it correct.
Speaker 112
38:11
About the taking out of order, where's it at? You're looking
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
38:15
up the rule book right here to get it correct because if one member of the body objects to it and we have a member that objects to taking it, letting Representative Hubbard pull it down, we've got to do a different procedure here.
So just bear with us because this is
Speaker 124
38:39
new ground for a lot of us. If one member objects to Representative
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
38:49
we have to have a motion to take it out of proper order. It takes it's non-debatable, and it's two-thirds of a quorum.
Is that what the parliamentarian has told us? and we will get the parliamentarian down here to make sure we're right. But that's what he came
Speaker 41
39:14
in while I got represented. So taking it out of proper order, that means that we would basically, he could just bring
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
39:21
it back at another date. Is that a date of his choosing? According to the parliamentarian, when we have it, it's already on the order here when we put it in special order to take it out.
But according to our interpretation of what the parliamentarian told us, we've got to make a motion to, if one member objects to pulling it down, then we have to have a motion to take it out of the proper order, and it takes as non-debatable, and it's a two-thirds vote to do that, to allow Representative Hubbard to pull his bill down. Okay. Thank you. And that would take how many people based on it? Mr. Chairman, that's my question.
We're getting to that right now, but we're going to wait on the parliamentarian to make sure we have this in correct form and that we're doing it properly where Rep. Hubbard is protected on what he wants to do. We want to make sure that he is protected because that's our job. So if you just bear with us, it will take 12 members to vote. to allow Rep. Hubbard to pull this down, is that correctly, based on our interpretation
of the rules, but we're going to wait on the Parliamentarian to make sure that we're doing this correctly. So, everybody just hold tight. Thank you.
Speaker 60
41:30
I know the members really thought we were going to have an easy time this year when we all joined up. There's a parliamentarian. Now we'll get the correct answer.
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
42:00
Mr. Massinelli, the question is before this committee is the Rep. Hubbard has asked to pull down his bill. And then we have an objection from one of the members of the committee. What is the proper procedure to handle this? I'll go back a little bit. When that bill was introduced
Speaker 132
42:19
in the House and was given a number, it became the property of the House. An extension of that was when it was put on the committee agenda, it becomes the property of the committee.
And so the bill is in the property of the committee now to pull a bill down. And Mr. Chairman, it doesn't make any difference whether one member on the committee objects or not. To pull it down is a motion to take it out of the proper order. The proper order is on the calendar where it is. If you don't want it to be there, you have to make a motion, a committee member does, to take it out of the proper order. That's a non-debatable motion. it takes two-thirds of a quorum of the committee. The quorum floats now. A quorum is 11, but if 12 people vote, it's two-thirds of 12.
If 14 vote, it's two-thirds of 14. So if I understand where you are now, you're in a posture where it would require a motion to take it out of the proper order. It's a non-debatable motion, and you would have to vote on that. And if two-thirds of a quorum did not do that, you would have to just continue with the bill. If they did pass that, then he would just be pulling it down for today and getting back on the agenda again when he wanted to. That's
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
43:30
the rules. Amen. Is there any, does everybody understand the parliamentarians?
Thank you, Mr. Messinelli. I'm not going
Speaker 135
43:39
anywhere. Please don't. That's too long a
Speaker 133
43:43
walk for me, Mr. Chairman. We have a motion by, who had
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
43:49
the motion? Rep. Clemmer to allow Rep. Hubbard to take it out of a special order of business. Take it out of the proper order, Mr. Chair. Take it out of the proper order. Is that your motion? It's non-debatable. It takes two-thirds of a quorum. That requires 12 votes.
Speaker 137
44:09
Depends on what? Depends on how many vote. There's 17 here. The
Speaker 139
44:16
quorum floats. Minimum quorum is 11. and then whoever votes. So it
Speaker 63
44:22
two-thirds, Mr. Parliamentarian, is those that vote, not those that are present. That's exactly right. If they call the roll and you say present,
Speaker 132
44:29
you're in the quorum. If they call the roll and you don't say anything, you're not in the quorum, even though you're
Speaker 60
44:42
As I understand the motion now, ladies and gentlemen, members of the committee, If you vote
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
44:48
in the affirmative, you're voting to allow Representative Hubbard to take it out of special order and take the bill down. If you vote no, you're denying that motion. Yes, Representative Klemmer. I'm a little bit confused, though. I
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
45:05
understand the yes votes and the no votes, but it sounds like we've got to establish who's going to be among us voting.
Speaker 60
45:13
Are we going to vote yes and no? We're going to roll call this. We're going to roll call this because this is it. That'll settle it. Okay. We're going to roll call
Speaker 35
45:24
this. That skips a step. Thank you. And it just has to be two-thirds of those that
Sarah Moore
Unverified
45:37
are participating in the vote. As long as there's 11. Thank you. Roll call the. Representative Cheatham. Representative Cheatham. Representative Gardner
Representative Robeck Representative Hutchinson Representative Kelling Representative Pernards Representative Baird Representative Hobbs Representative Lee Representative Wilkins no. Representative Tyler. No. Representative Hopper. Yes. Representative Klemmer. Yes. Representative
Nichols. No. Representative McLean. No. Representative McLean. Representative Rogers. No. Representative Representative Steele, Representative John Bonds, Representative Slinkard, Representative Paul.
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
47:05
The motion failed. We will continue on listening to Representative Hubbard's bill. So, Representative Hubbard, you are now ready to finish your close of your bill, and then if you would. Thank you, Mr.
John Hubbard
Unverified
47:19
Chairman. In the interest of trying to be as accommodating as possible, we have amended out all or most of the concerns of the members of this committee. Almost everyone here during their questioning period stated that they, too, are against
illegal immigration. Now, all this bill does now is to change into law what we already are doing by rule and under rule. This is basically doing our job. All federal mandates still apply, and I would ask you for a good vote. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Huffman, have you closed for
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
48:03
your bill? Yes, sir, I'm closed. What is the will of the committee? committee. We have a motion to do pass as amended four times. We have a motion to do
pass as amended four times on House Bill 1292. All in favor of the motion say aye. Those opposed, say no. No. I will the no's have it, Representative Hubbard. I have two hands for a roll call. We will have a
Sarah Moore
Unverified
48:44
roll call. Representative Cheatham? Representative Cheatham? Representative Gardner?
Yes. Representative Robeck? No. Representative Hutchinson? Yes. Representative Kaling? No. Representative Penards, Representative Baird, Representative Hobbs, Representative Lee, Representative Wilkins, Representative Tyler, Representative Hopper, Representative Clemmer? Yes. Representative Nichols? No. Representative McLean? No. Representative McLean?
Representative Rogers? No. Representative Steele? Representative Steele? Representative Vines? Representative Vines? Representative Slinkard? Yes. Representative Hall?
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
50:02
far and 9 against, Representative Hubbard takes 11 to pass.
You had a good hearing today and we appreciate you presenting
your bill. Committee members, we will meet Monday afternoon at full committee. That is the will of the
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
50:18
subcommittee. Mr. Chairman, I think the committee has been through too much today, and so I think we should just meet next Wednesday to deal with the constitutional amendments. That
Speaker 60
50:28
being said, any comments, questions, or answers from the committee before we leave? If not, we will see you all Monday. Thank you all.
Agenda
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Speaker 1
Representative Clark Hall
Unverified
Speaker 7
Speaker 8
Ken Watson
Unverified
Speaker 13
Representative Jim Nickels
Unverified
Speaker 32
Speaker 35
Speaker 37
Representative Tracy Pennartz
Unverified
Speaker 43
Representative Mary L. Slinkard
Unverified
Representative Linda S. Tyler
Unverified
Speaker 16
Speaker 54
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
Speaker 64
Speaker 41
Speaker 66
Speaker 38
Speaker 67
Speaker 31
Jean Mccrellan
Unverified
Speaker 72
Speaker 79
Speaker 78
Speaker 81
Speaker 82
Speaker 87
Speaker 80
Speaker 88
Randy Romo
Unverified
Speaker 95
Speaker 9
Speaker 101
Speaker 47
Speaker 93
Clemencia Converse
Unverified
Speaker 112
John Hubbard
Unverified
Speaker 18
Speaker 124
Speaker 60
Speaker 132
Speaker 135
Speaker 133
Speaker 137
Speaker 139
Speaker 63
Representative Ann V. Clemmer
Unverified
Sarah Moore
Unverified
Speaker 138