February 16, 2011

So please approach your seats and remain standing along with staff and press and those of you who are joining us in the gallery today, and please stand as we're led in prayer by Pastor Paul Roberts of the East Union Baptist Church in Hensley, who's here today as a guest of Representative Andy Mayberry, and if you will remain standing as we're led in the Pledge of Allegiance to our flag by Representative Billy Gaskell. On behalf of the people of East End and East Union Baptist Church, let me thank you for your hard work and your sacrifice during this time of year, and I'd ask you if you'd join me in prayer, please. Heavenly Father, we're so thankful for the way you bless us and care for us, how you've blessed our great nation. we pray your continued guidance for the leaders of this nation and that your hand would be upon them we ask on behalf of our state we thank you for the blessings we thank you for your watch care we pray that you would lead those in this house today that you would give them wisdom we know all wisdom comes from you we pray for wisdom we pray for an understanding of the issues and just that each one would conduct themselves in a way that gives honor to this place. We thank you so much for just the opportunity to be free. And Lord, we ask now for your guidance, for your watch care. We thank you for your son and the love that he's shown for us. And in Jesus' name we pray. Amen. members please indicate your presence by pressing the yellow present button Pair the machine, Mr. Clark. Everybody indicated their presence. Yellow present button. Cast up the ballot, Mr. Clark. Order 95 present. Chair recognizes a quorum. Are there requests for leave? Mr. Clerk, let the record reflect that Representative Colin Smith is present. Representative Vines, what purpose? Let the record reflect that Representative Vines is present. Anyone else? Representative Eddie Cheatham moves that we dispense with reading the previous day's journal. No objection, so ordered. Representative Colin Smith, what purpose? I was going to ask to leave. Leave for whom? Mr. Murdoch and Representative Love. Leave. There he is. We left the record of the fact that Representative Love has appeared. Okay. Leave granted for Representative Murdoch. Leave granted. Representative Love, for what purpose? No purpose. Okay. Okay. Are there reports from select committees? Ready to report, Mr. Clark. Mr. Speaker, we are a committee on joint budget to whom is referred House Bill 1067, House Bill 1073, House Bill 1075, House Bill 1077, House Bill 1080, House Bill 1087, House Bill 1093, House Bill 1102, house bill 1105 house bill 1108 house bill 1124 house bill 1127 house bill 1129 house bill 1130 house bill 1190 house bill 1328 and house bill 1329 by joint budget committee they believe report we've had the same under consideration herewith return the same with the recommendation that they do pass mr speaker we are committee on joint budget to whom is referred house bill 1155 by Joint Budget Committee. They believe the report will have the same under consideration. Herewith return the same with the recommendation that it do pass as amended. Respectfully submitted, Kathy Webb, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. There are reports from standing committees. Great reports. Mr. Speaker, we are a committee on state agencies to whom is referred House Bill 1353 by Representative Tyler, House Bill 1370 by Representative Shepard, Senate Bill 204 by Senator Taylor, Senate Bill 206 by Senator Files, and Senate Bill 219 by Senator Lamoureux, beg leave to report we've had the same under consideration, herewith to return the same with the recommendation that they do pass, respectfully submitted, Clark Hall, Chair. Mr. Speaker, we are a committee on agriculture, to whom was referred House Bill 1307 by Representative Patterson, and House Bill 1367 by Representative Brown. Begley report we've had the same under consideration and herewith return the same with the recommendation that they do pass. Respectfully submitted, Jerry Brown, Chair. Mr. Speaker, we are a committee on city, county, local, to whom was referred House Bill 1297 by Representative Elliott, House Bill 1351 by Representative Dale, Senate Bill 82 by Senator Jeffries, In Senate Bill 96 by Senator White, they will report we've had the same under consideration. Herewith return the same with the recommendation that they do pass. Respectfully submitted, Charlotte Wagner, Chair. Mr. Speaker, we are Committee on Aging, to whom we have referred House Bill 1024 by Representative English, House Resolution 1013 by Representative Steele, House Concurrent Resolution 1004 by Representative Steele, House Memorial Resolution 1002 by Representative Fielding, Senate Bill 119 by Senator Chesterfield, And Senate Concurrent Resolution 3 by Senator Taylor. A bigly report we've had the same under consideration. Herewith return the same with the recommendation that they do pass. Respectfully submitted, Stephanie Malone, Chair. Mr. Speaker, we are a committee on insurance and commerce to whom was referred House Bill 1354 by Representative Vines. A bigly report we've had the same under consideration. Herewith return the same with the recommendation that do pass as amended. Mr. Speaker, we are a committee on insurance and commerce to whom has referred House Bill 1388 by Representative Vines. Bayley report we've had the same under consideration. Here we can return the same with the recommendation that do pass. Respectfully submitted, Fred Allen, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Members, I'd like for you to take a moment in welcoming a special guest in the back of the chamber, former Representative Charles Moore from Mississippi County. Representative Moore, we're very happy to have you with us. Although I don't know that Representative Moore and I are kin, we both live on the Mississippi River, so we've got a lot in common if we're not kin to each other. Thank you for being here today. Also joining us in the gallery today, I understand former Representative Marvin Childers is with us. Oh, there it is. Hey, Representative Childers. And thank you for being with us today. Unfinished business. Executive communications. Read the letter from the Governor. Mr. Clerk. To the Speaker of the House. Dear Mr. Speaker, this is to inform you that on February 16, 2011, I approve the following measures from the regular session of the 88th General Assembly. House Concurrent Resolution 1005. House Bill 1004 is Act 39, House Bill 1018 is Act 40, House Bill 1117 is Act 41, House Bill 1120 is Act 42, House Bill 1136 is Act 43, House Bill 1159 is Act 44, House Bill 1223 is Act 45, House Bill 1224 is Act 46. Sincerely, Mike Beebe. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Place the letter in the pile. Members, I want to recognize some other special guests we have with us today. In the East Gallery is a guest of Representative Ephraim Elliott. We have Reverend Cedric Hayes, pastor of Glory Land Church in North Little Rock and my district in Eudora. And we also have Dedrick Jones with the Chosen Praise singing group. So if you all would stand and be recognized, We welcome you as our visitors here today. Also, we have as guests Representative Post, Representative Deffenbaugh, Representative Harris, Representative Penartz, Representative Malone, and Representative Altus, the leadership groups from Crawford County and Fort Smith. So, if you would stand to be recognized, please. Thank you for joining us today. And as a special guest of Representative Stewart today, we have from Murfreesboro, the seventh grade class joining us today. Where are our visitors from Murfreesboro? Would you all stand? Okay. We welcome you, though we do not see you right now. Maybe you'll join us later. Okay. Thank you very much. Morning hour's expired. Members, we'll go to the red calendar. Mr. Clerk, read House Resolution 1005. House Resolution 1005 of Representative Elliott, designating September 2011 as Gospel Music Heritage Month in honoring gospel music for its valuable contributions to the culture of the United States. Representative Elliott, you are recognized. Come to the well and explain the resolution. Good afternoon, my distinguished colleagues. I just want to say that gospel music is deep within our heritage in Arkansas, and it's something that can be shared by our whole communities. that's the the reason why we're doing this resolution but I wanna I wanted to take a minute to let some other representatives speak a little bit about it who wanted to speak I'm gonna yield some of my time to Representative Wilkins members you've heard an explanation of the resolution anyone wishing to speak against the resolution for the resolution representative Wilkins you are recognized to come and and speak for the resolution. You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Representative Elliott, for this opportunity. All of you are aware that gospel music has impacted the culture of America in a variety of ways. And I was delighted to hear that Pastor Cedric and the young people from his choir are here every Christmas during the 12 days of Christmas on KARK Channel 4. They have various choirs that come in and sing early in the morning. And one of the things that I really look forward to is hearing those various choirs as they present various Christmas selections. And so it's been a delight to hear Pastor Cedric and his choir on Channel 4, KARK. Also, one of the ministers of music that has worked with my church, Dedrick Jones, who is also a recording artist, is over here in our West Gallery. and if you would wave your hand, he's made an important impact. Thank you. Yeah, let's, thank you. The gospel music and there are several other gospel music dignitaries. Also, Darius and would all of you, because you all didn't get recognized a few minutes ago, if you all would. And I just wanted to share one quick story with you about gospel music. I don't know how many of you are familiar with the name Thomas Dorsey. Thomas Dorsey was a recording artist back some 50, 60, 70 years. Thank you, Representative Walker, before I was born. And as everybody in my church knows, I am still 39 years old. But he penned a song based upon an experience that he had. And really, that was kind of the genesis of gospel music as we know it here in America today. Many of you may be familiar with the song. The name of it is Precious Lord. His wife passed away unexpectedly when he was out of town doing music for a church meeting in St. Louis. He was from Chicago. And he got word during that revival that he needed to call home. And he went to the phone and he called home, and all he could hear on the other end of the line was, your wife is dead, your wife is dead. And finally, when he was able to get home and find out what had happened, he talks about how that was such a traumatic experience for him and he wanted to turn his back on God and never play another note of music for the Lord again. And one day he was sitting at the piano and the notes began to flow and the words came to him, Precious Lord, take my hand, lead me on, let me stand. I am weak, I am tired, I am worn. I won't quote the whole song for you because I might get happy. You know like preachers do when they are getting really excited and getting ready for the offering. David are you telling me to keep on preaching are you telling me to hurry up and sit down oh hallelujah he said if I'll go ahead and shut up that we can pass the plate now so I just want to support this resolution and let you know that our culture in America is all the better because gospel music is being sang across this nation by members of your churches and of your district. And I thank you, Representative Elliott. I didn't know you were going to actually call on me today, and so I didn't come with a prepared text. And that is to the benefit of this group because I prepare no text less than 45 minutes. Thank you. Representative Wilkins has spoken in favor of the resolution. Anyone wishing to speak against for the resolution? Representative Elliott, you want to close for your resolution? You're closed. Representative Elliott is closed for resolution. Question for the House. Passage of House Resolution 1005. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Aye. Ayes have it. Mr. Clerk let the record show that the vote was unanimous and passes House Resolution 1005. Mr. Clerk, read House Resolution 1012. House Resolution 1012 by Representative Brown commending Arkansas farmers for their vital contributions to the security and economic well-being of the state and the nation. Representative Brown, you are recognized to explain the resolution. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again, I have the honor of following Reverend Hank Wilkins up there, and it's quite an honor to try to follow in his footsteps. Ladies and gentlemen, today is Farmers Day at the Capitol. I'm sure that some of you have noticed that our farmers of Arkansas are in the halls and trying to meet all of their representatives and senators. So in honor of that, I have prepared a resolution for our farmers, and it reads partially as following, that we are commending the Arkansas farmers for their vital contributions to the security and economic well-being of the state and the nation, and for producing the food and fiber that is essential to the health and security of the citizens of this state and the people throughout the world. Mr. Speaker, I would like for the resolution to be read in its entirety. Mr. Clark, read the resolution. Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the 88th General Assembly of the State of Arkansas, whereas 20 percent of Arkansas's economy is based on food, fiber, and forestry, and whereas two-thirds of Arkansas's counties rely heavily on farming and forestry as their industrial base, and whereas agriculture and related activities and industries employ one in every six Arkansans, and whereas agricultural pursuits in this state generate a value in excess of 16 billion dollars annually which contributes to arkansas's stable and well-balanced economy and whereas farmers ranchers foresters provide bulk of the state's wildlife habitat practice sound environmental stewardship and supply community leadership throughout rural arkansas and whereas the agricultural community contributes a substantial portion the revenues which finance state and local services to all the state citizens and whereas arkansas farmers ranchers and foresters are deserving of public commendation and appreciation now therefore be it resolved by the house of representatives of the 88th general assembly of the state of arkansas that the arkansas house of representatives expresses sincere appreciation to arkansas farmers for their outstanding contributions to the economy of the state and nation and to the well-being of the people and commends them for their dedication to the wise utilization of our resources thank you mr speaker ladies and gentlemen hundreds of farmers in this state and myself would appreciate a good vote thank you members you've heard the explanation of the resolution anyone wishing to speak against the resolution for the resolution not the question for the house passage of House Resolution 1012. All in favor say aye. Opposed, no. Ayes have it. Mr. Clerk, let the record reflect that the resolution passed unanimously. Representative Rogers. Mr. Speaker, you are recognized to read House Resolution 1011. House Resolution 1011 by Representative Moore to designate April as Parkinson's Disease Awareness Month. You are recognized, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, there's probably not anyone in this room that directly or indirectly, be a family or friend that has not been touched in some manner by the terrible disease of Parkinson's. This is joining other legislatures and the U.S. Congress in recognizing April as National Parkinson's Month, in recognition of those that suffer and those that work with those that suffer, and for the research and education to help find a cure for this terrible disease. Mr. Madam Speaker, I would like to ask that you read that portion of the resolved resolution. Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the 88th General Assembly of the State of Arkansas that the House of Representatives hereby designates the month of April as Parkinson's Awareness Month, supports the goals and ideals of Parkinson's Awareness Month, continues to support research to find better treatments, and eventually a cure for Parkinson's disease, recognizes the people living with Parkinson's disease who participate in vital clinical trials to advance our knowledge of this disease and commitment to the dedication of local and regional organizations, volunteers, and millions of Americans across the country working to improve the quality of persons living with Parkinson's disease and their families. Thank you, Madam Speaker. As I think all of you know, we had one in our midst, one of our treasured staff. Ms. Bobby Head, who was here at the House of Representatives for many years, who was caused to retire this year by being afflicted with the disease of Parkinson, also one of our distinguished colleagues in the last session, Representative Sample, now Senator Sample, has battled this terrible disease, so I'd appreciate a good vote in joining me on passing this resolution. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, you have heard an explanation of the resolution. Is there anyone that wants to speak for or against the resolution, for the resolution? If not, the question before the House is House Resolution 10-11. All those in favor say aye. Anyone opposed? Let the record show the vote was unanimous. Thank you. Representative Dale recommends that we consider concurring in Senate Amendment No. 1 to House Bill 1282. Mr. Clerk, read the amendment. Senate Amendment No. 1 to House Bill 1282. Representative Dale, you are recognized to explain the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House Bill 1282 was amended in the Senate. It was amended to take care of a concern of one of our colleagues, Representative Cowling, well as a concern of the director of the ABC director Langley these were obviously friendly amendments and made this bill a better bill and as you know though I think that there's been a lot of emails and contacts made here recently on this bill that that it any compare anti-com competitive that it's against free market well i'd like to tell you that retail liquor industry in the state of arkansas is not has never been and should never be a free market enterprise there are limited number of permits permit holders are told where they can and cannot locate what they can and cannot sell they can and cannot buy from who they can and cannot sell to and what hours they can be open i would say that's a pretty well-regulated industry regardless of what anyone's told you this bill is not changing the current policy that deals with liquor permits this is simply codifying and clarifying the intent of the existing bill that was passed almost 40 years ago. I respectfully ask this body to concur in the Senate amendment. Representative Smith, for what purpose? I have a question. Representative Dale has left the will. Okay, thank you. Representative Summers, what purpose? Speak against. Representative Summers, you are recognized. Come and speak against the bill. The amendment, I'm sorry. You're recognized, Representative Summers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and honorable colleagues. I thought about Ms. Arkansas outside, and I thought about asking her to represent me, and then I thought about Andy Mayberry. Maybe I should get him up here to represent us, but I decided to come on. And when this bill first came up in the House, I made a mistake by not recognizing the impact that it was going to have on business expansion. The people that put it together have done a wonderful job of crafting it. It's put together very well. The proponents have done a really good job on running it. And I really don't like to speak against something that my very good friend and colleague, the very distinguished Robert Dale from Dover, is for. But in this case, I must. This bill is about free enterprise. It's about the opportunity for businesses to expand. And it's about jobs, baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, and Chevrolet. I'll say it again. Baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, and Chevrolet. And Walls, I can see you thinking, Summers has lost it. And that may be true. That's American tradition. That's what we live for here is free enterprise, giving people the opportunity to start businesses, to hire people, to have jobs. And folks, this does work against that. This amended bill, if passed, would result in three planned retail outlets in Rock, Fort Smith, and Fayetteville not going forward and would mean that 150,000 jobs would not be filled. 150 jobs, excuse me. 150 jobs would be filled. Now, if we had a new industry that came to this state and said, we're going to provide 150 jobs, the Chamber of Commerce would line up, the ADC would line up, everyone would line up out here, and this is one that does bring jobs to it. We're talking again about jobs that would put people to work, where they could pay taxes, where they could buy things, they could buy groceries and automobiles and all that. I'm just asking you to really think about this and vote against this bill to show your support for jobs and free enterprise. And remember, baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, and Chevrolet. Thank you. Representative Smith, what purpose? I have a question. I'd like someone to answer. Representative Summers has departed the will. Representative Summers has spoken against the bill. Anyone wishing to speak for the bill? Representative Cowling, you are recognized. Come and speak for the bill. Recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Cockleagues, when you kind of look at this deal, I don't see apple pie, baseball, chivalry, or anything in this bill. It says liquor for one permit and one location. Thank you. Representative Cowling has spoken for the bill. Anyone wishing to speak against the bill for the bill? Representative Ingram, you are recognized to come speak for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have been bombarded with emails, and all of them start with free enterprise. And my good, dear friend, Mr. Summers, who I respect tremendously, I'm going to have to disagree with him regarding the liquor industry and the beer industry as being free enterprise. If I'm a retailer in West Memphis, Arkansas, and I don't like my wholesaler, I cannot do business with a wholesaler in Little Rock. That's not free enterprise. If I want to buy wine from Oregon or California, it has to come through a wholesaler in Arkansas through the three-tier system. To me, that's not free enterprise. The liquor industry across this country is the most regulated industry probably other than utilities that we have. And so the argument of somebody that is wanting to come in and, say, create jobs and free free enterprise. I just don't buy that. Since 1971, we have played by a set of rules in this state, and they've served this state well. But now we have a company that wants to come into this great state and circumvent the rules, change the playing field that each and every one of our liquor stores have operated under. It is a complicated issue. Think about this as it relates to the beer industry. If I have three friends, or let's talk about the liquor industry, either one. If I have three friends in three different locations in this state, and I build a building for them, and I lease it to them for a flat rate that is legal, I do not have an interest, I do not have an interest with that entity. I am not circumventing the law. But yet, if I lease those buildings based on sales, I could not have a liquor license. That would be an interest in that building. That is more than one person. All we're asking the people in this body to do is to protect this state, play by the rules that we've played by for so many years. I ask you to vote for this piece of legislation. Representative Ingram has spoken for the amendment anyone wishing to speak against the amendment for the amendment Representative Dale you want to come and close for your amendment Representative Dale is closed for the amendment the question before the house is concurrence of Senate amendment number one to House Bill 1282 Mr. Clerk, prepare the machine. Voting on the bill and the emergency clause. Voting on the bill and the emergency clause. Everyone voted? Everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Mr. Clerk, by a vote of 76 yea, 16 nay, and one present. You have concurred in the amendment and the emergency clause. Representative Dale moves to the clincher. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Ayes have it. The clincher is adopted. Members, before we move to the next item on our agenda, we have some very special guests with us today. It's Razorback Day in the Capitol, as you know, And our special guest, which I want to introduce individually, Chancellor from the University of Arkansas, Chancellor David Gerhardt. Is Chancellor Gerhardt with us today? Okay, we'll move on down. It's Athletic Director Jeff Long. Athletic Director Long, thank you for being with us. We're going to move these right on out. Coach Bobby Petrino, thanks so much for being with us today. And our most distinguished visitor emeritus, Coach Frank Brewell. Thank you for being with us. Thank you all for being with us today. Mr. Clark read House Bill 1052. House Bill 1052 by Representative Jean Aneal to decrease the sales and use tax on natural gas and electricity used by manufacturers and to declare an emergency. Representative Jean, you are recognized to explain the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members of the House. In 2022, for some of you third-termers, we started off in 2007 by reducing the sales tax on gas and electricity for manufacturers. We've brought it down to 3.125. We've had much debate on this. As you know, our neighboring states, Tennessee, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Texas all have zero. Mississippi has one. We are at a competitive disadvantage. This is not a Republican bill. It is not a Democrat bill. It is a jobs bill. It has been endorsed by the state chamber of commerce and the manufacturers throughout this state. We have to do something in this state to show businesses that we are business friendly. And we took this approach. There are some bills out there that just does it totally away with it. We're asking for a half cent. I listen to the governor. I think this is responsible, and I think we have got to do things to help the business climate in Arkansas. I would appreciate a good vote. Representative Penards, what purpose? Question. Representative Ginny, you take a question. You're recognized. For the speaker. Question for the speaker. What's your question? Usually, when we have a bill like this, at least in the past, I'm not a member of that committee so I don't know what the fiscal impact statement on this bill is, but normally we get the little sheet with our red calendar, white calendar, yellow calendar, and I don't know if I've just misplaced mine or I didn't get one, but there's supposed to be a . Is there not, Mr. Speaker? Or maybe it's being handed out right now? Representative Jean, was there an economic impact available to the committee? 3.8 million and it passed the Revenue Committee 17 to 1. Is that the impact statement that's being handed out right now? Do not know. Okay. If I may, Mr. Speaker, may I have a question now to the – to the – you're recognized for question. Thank you very much. I appreciate this bill because, as you know, I come from a city of manufacturers, and this is a very important issue for us. And my question, again, since I don't have the impact statement, it was – the total amount is $3.8 million. Would that be in the first part of the biennium, or the second part, or for both parts? That's for fiscal year 2012, which begins July 1st. So the bill would become effective July 1st of this year? Yes, ma'am. Which is 11 to 12. What about the fiscal impact for 12 and 13? I believe it was 4.2 million. So it does actually increase? Yes, ma'am. And as we all know, we've been challenged as legislators to come up with a source of funding for any proposed tax cuts. I know I had one before your committee, as you well know, for $10,000, and I came up with a source for that. And I'm still awaiting y'all's final decision, which I look forward to. But what was your source of replacement of the revenue, which certainly in this case is a worthy cost? Well, we have $110 million in surplus, and I think, you know, this is the prudent thing to do to give back some to our manufacturers to help create more jobs. But it's in the growth of 2.5%. So that would be on the fiscal impact statement, I guess? Yes, ma'am. Okay, well, I'm a little confused because it's hard. You know, sometimes I like to look at things when it's actually written down. And 3.8 and 4.2, so that's what? Eight million over the biennium? Over two years. And then you don't have any projections further out than just the biennium? This will create jobs. This will help. Do you have any figures about what? What the job would create? No, ma'am. Well, I appreciate your taking the questions, and I would have appreciated a fiscal impact statement. I'll get you one. I'll walk you one over. Thank you. Representative Penartz and Mr. Jean, I'm going to interrupt right now, and I'm going to recognize the parliamentarian. As we deal with bills like this, the issue of a fiscal impact statement is something I think all our membership needs to be aware of, So I'm going to recognize the parliamentarian to lend a little clarity on this issue. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, just for clarification purposes, fiscal impact statements can only be asked for and have them produced if they affect cities and counties, education, or corrections. And I can just read to you briefly. It says, as used in this chapter, fiscal impact statements mean a realistic statement of the estimated financial cost of implementing or complying with proposed law, regulations, policy, order upon municipalities or counties to which the proposed regulation, rule, or policy is administered. Everything you vote on up here affects the state, so I'm suggesting to you that this does not require a fiscal impact statement at all. I can't read that in there anyplace. We're getting a little confused. Everybody thinks that they can ask for a fiscal impact statement on anything, and you can, but they don't have to produce it except for these areas here, which would be cities and counties and education and the corrections. That's our rules. Representative Penards, what purpose? Question to the speaker. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that clarification. It's just that normally in the past, as a courtesy, those of us who aren't on the committee that receive that usually have received that. And I was just wondering, this is the first time that's happened where I haven't had a copy. I'm not a member of that committee. So I appreciate the Chair's clarification of the issue. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Penar. It obviously is a matter that is subject to inquire from the presenter and a matter of debate for any member to present information on that issue. There's a difference between the sponsor providing information on his or her own accord or a member attempting to hold up a bill because it's not present. So in this situation here, I'm suggesting that he does not have to furnish you with a fiscal impact statement to holding the bill up, and if he wants to give it to you, that's fine, but the rule does not require him to do it. Representative Steele, what purpose? You're recognized. If a financial impact statement was produced in committee, does it have to be placed on our desk since not all of us are in the same committee? That's right. If a fiscal impact statement was presented in the committee, then it should be a part of the bill when it comes back up here and it should be distributed on the debt. If it was required in the committee, this wouldn't have even been required in the committee. okay representative gene has explained house bill 1052 anyone wishing to speak against the bill for the bill representative gene close for your bill question for the house passage of house bill 1052 mr clerk prepare the machine you're voting on the bill and the emergency voting on the bill and the emergency clause everyone voted everyone voted cast up the ballot mr. clerk by a vote of 88 yay eight nay and zero present you have passed the bill and the emergency clause representative gene moves for the clincher all in favor say aye Aye. Opposed? No. Ayes have it. Clencher adopted. Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 1002. House Bill 1002 by Representative Gardner and All to create the Arkansas Capital Gains Reduction Act of 2011. Representative Patterson, what purpose? You have a motion, Representative Patterson? Yes, sir. What's your motion? put bill number one zero zero two on second reading proper motions debatable become the well explain your motion representative passion director and as represent person thank you mister speaker i'd like to amend this motion where uh... i'd like to leave some names of co-sponsors, and Allen, Gaskell, Lampkin, Murdoch, Patterson, Penards, Post, J. Roebuck, G. Smith, T. Steele, Stewart, T. Thompson, Wardlaw, B. Wilkins, H. Wilkins, Word, Wren, Wright, and take them off as co-sponsors of Bill 1002, please. Representative Patterson has explained the motion. Representative Burris, you want to speak against the motion? Question first. You're recognized. Who's your question directed to? Representative Patterson. You want to answer your question? Go right ahead. Thanks for the sake of confusion, we need some clarification. There's been two amendments distributed here. One of them had three members that did not agree to be on the amendment on the amendment. One of the papers that was distributed did have the wrong names on there, and there's another sheet of paper in front of you that's got the correct names on it. I'd like a clarification for the parliamentarian on the distribution of amendments and when those have to be on the desk in order to be ran on the floor. Right now, we're on the motion whether to place it back on second reading for the purpose of the amendment, and then we will, if the motion is adopted, then we will address the amendment and the questions you're answering. Now, you want to speak against the motion to place it back on second reading. Is that correct? You're recognized to come to the well and speak against the motion. members we've got tough decisions sit down here a hundred times and told you that I think this motion is just one of those several of you signed on the co-sponsor bill now today for whatever reason you're asking this bill to be placed back on second reading to take your name off I'm not gonna ask why it's not in any of my business I respect your own decision that can be done in the Senate. I've had several members stand down here and say, send my bill to the Senate, we'll make the corrections there, we'll offer amendments there. That's very normal. What's not normal is hours before vote to have your name request to be pulled off as a co-sponsor after days and weeks of debate to have three members not request to be removed as co-sponsors, to be on an amendment that says that they did, and then to have another amendment distributed only ten minutes before motion to have it placed back on second reading to run an amendment. It's very unnormal. I think it's a bad way to do business. I think we need to proceed, and I think we need to make a vote. That's what we came here to do. So I'm speaking against the motion. Thank you. Representative Burris has spoken against the motion. Anyone wishing to speak for the motion? Against the motion? Representative Garner, for what purpose? I speak against the motion. All right, you're recognized. Come and speak against the motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Recognized. Members, I appreciate the pressure of being in the seats that you're in. i understand that i've been to many of you regarding this bill you've received information at the last minute that gives you cause for concern there may be have threats been made that cause you to want to add your name to an amendment to be removed from the bill I have no time to counter those threats. I have given you, and everyone knows I've worn you out with these figures. I've given you everything I know about the impact of this bill, but I will tell you that I have given the pros and cons. I would appreciate the opportunity to run this bill today. i understand the procedure would take this bill off the floor today i'm prepared to run this bill i still have the votes to pass this bill if you will allow me the honor or honor me at my word i will remove any of those who hear the bill and hear the discussion of the information on the bill as it's presented here today and I will be happy to stand here and give you all I know and all I have come to understand after years of research but to do this at the last minute with this tactic is not deliberative and it is designed to kill the bill and I think in your heart you all know that so if after hearing the bill today and i do believe it will still pass i will remove your name by amending it as we go to the senate i believe that is a fair way to deal with objections that the people need to hear the bill and this would stop that and it is based on misinformation i understand pressure thank you mr speaker representative garner has spoken against the motion representative wilkins what purpose question your question of representative garner that's correct you're recognized thank you mr speaker representative Garner, I appreciate what you just said. Since my name is on the amendment that was passed out, my question to you is you do realize, of course, that a person can change their mind and decide to come off of something that has nothing to do with a threat. Absolutely. And some have received that, and perhaps you are not, so forgive the total generalization. And so let me continue to say that, Mr. Wilkins, if after you've heard this and we vote on it and you still want off the bill, I will certainly honor this and remove your name for the bill. but not having a chance to discuss the facts of the bill is what this amendment is intended to do. It's intended to create a tactic to kill the bill. Okay, well, my question for you, I just want to clarify and make sure that you understand that there are some of us who don't participate in whatever this threat game is that you're talking about and don't take lightly to that. Right. And so I want to make it clear, and my question to you is, you do realize that there are some of us who, if we are threatened or accused of being threatened and have made a decision to do something and are told that we were threatened, that we will respond to that by letting you know we don't play threats. Yes, sir. I appreciate that. And if you'll forgive the generalization, there are some... Forgiven and duly noted. There are some who have been threatened. Has your question been answered, Representative Wilkins? Thank you. Representative Hyde, what purpose? Clarification, Mr. Speaker, if Mr. Garner would yield for a moment to the parliamentarian, I'd like an explanation of what happens, where this bill goes, and what the timeline is if we decide to go ahead and consider this amendment and should, in fact, pass the amendment. What happens? I need some help on that, please. Okay. Generally, the amendment to be considered is brought forth by a person who makes the motion. So I think there are two or three amendments out there on the floor. I think one of the amendments is Amendment 3, and that's Mr. Patterson's amendment. So if this motion were to pass, that amendment would come up first. And then any other subsequent amendments, if in fact someone wanted to try them. If any amendments passed, the bill would be sent to engrossing. it will be engrossed, and as far as I know, it will be available for the calendar tomorrow. That's my opinion. Any further questions? Okay, Representative Garner has spoken against the motion. Anyone wishing to speak for the motion? Representative Steele, do you have a question? Representative Garner, do you want to take another question? All right, Representative Steele, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And the last question led me to this one. Since we may or may not get an opportunity to hear it again, my only concern and reason for coming off the bill is we're getting different information, and the information is very significant in the tune of a difference of opinion of about $30 million. I would like that... Excuse me, Representative Steele, is your question going to the motion now? We're not talking about the bill. We're not debating the bill. We're not talking about information in the bill. We're just talking about the information question on the motion. On the motion. Yes, the presenter mentioned that there was some misinformation. And I just, if there is misinformation, Mr. Speaker, I just would like for him to clarify what that misinformation is. If it's not the proper time, then I will withdraw my question. I believe we're going into the merits of the bill. We have a motion placed back on second reading. That's the question that we're debating right now. Representative Garner has spoken against that motion. Is there anyone that wishes to speak for the motion to place it back on second reading for the purpose of amendment? Anyone wishing to speak against the motion? Representative Wren, what purpose? Against the motion. All right, Representative Wren, you are recognized. Come to the well and speak against the motion. you recognize thank you mr speaker colleagues a month or so ago ed wilk or mr wilkins came to me and or mr garner came to me and asked me to co-sponsor this bill and i did so today after much thought and I I was put on to an amendment that I don't feel like that I knew I was going to be on so I won't take an off so I am going to speak against the amendment to this. Thank you. Representative Wren has spoken against the motion. I want to wish him to speak for the motion. Representative Viviano, against the motion. Representative Viviano, you're recognized. Come and speak against the motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, when I first joined this body, I was told to proceed very cautious. Take the information in, understand it, before you make a decision. But once you make that decision, your word is your honor, and you should stick by it. Thank you. Representative Viviano has spoken against the motion. One for the motion. Representative Carter, you're recognized. Come speak against the motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, that's four people that were on that First Amendment. They didn't know they were on the amendment. look if you don't want to vote on any bill just vote against the bill i mean vote against it vote against any bill that comes up here that you don't want to go against i mean that you don't want to support but something's not right this isn't right i mean this isn't right just vote your conscience but i don't even i don't even know what's going on here i mean i'd like maybe to hear for everybody else that's on here we should be wanted to be on here I mean I can't be the only one that is feeling this way Ed Garner has warned me out and every one of you for years about this bill warned me out there's nothing that you don't know today that you hadn't been discussed on for years I'd ask you to speak on the motion as to whether or not place it back on second reading. We're not talking about the bill. We're just talking about the issue of the motion to bring it up for second reading. That's fair. Well, procedurally, to that end, I mean, I guess there's four members of this body that were on this amendment that didn't give their permission to be on there. It just didn't seem right. So I'm going to ask you to vote against the vote. Representative Carter has spoken against the motion to amend. I do think, as a point of clarification, we are looking at Amendment No. 3 to House Bill No. 2. I didn't comment, but that is the amendment that if you have more than one on your desk, that's the one we're looking at. All right. We're back. Representative Carter has spoken against the amendment. Anyone wishing to speak for the amendment? Representative McCrary, you are recognized to come and speak for the motion. Mr. Speaker, I am one of the ones that are still on the bill, and I walk off as a co-sponsor. And the reason I do is, of all taxes, there's only one I hate worse, and that's the inheritance than the capital gain. But my understanding, and I'm not blaming anyone, but my understanding was that we were talking about either $10 million, $12 million possible. Representative McCrary? I'm sorry. I'd like to get my name off of it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There we go. Back on the motion. That's good. Representative Cowling, what purpose? Motion. What's your motion? Media consideration, please. Proper motion, non-debatable. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Those no, the ayes have it. Question before the House is passage of the motion to place House Bill 1002 back on second reading for the purpose of Amendment No. 3. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. We're looking for a majority of the quorum. Everyone voted? Everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Mr. Clerk, by a vote of 40 a, 55 nays, 0 present. The motion has failed. Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 1002. House Bill 1002 by Representative Garner to create the Arkansas Capital Gains Reduction Act of 2011. Representative Garner, if you are recognized, present the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, members. House Bill 1002 would eliminate the capital gains rate that it currently exists in Arkansas for new investments after July 1 of this year. A capital investment is one, a long-term capital gain that would be taxed would be one that would be held for over a year. This bill has had a lot of controversy as far as the impact statement, and I want to be here. I don't want to you know they say don't stay in the well but I want to tell you you guys have supported this in an amazing fashion this has been a heart work for me so you're going to have to bear with me I know of no other measure that I have seen or investigated that will do so much for the future of Arkansas as to make our state competitive with surrounding states who have either eliminated capital in-state capital gains taxes or do not have them. We have an impact statement from DF&A in front of us that shows, number one, we all agree that according to this budget, according to GIF of this year, higher ed, none of those budgets will be touched. The impact statement for the budget currently, 2012, is zero. There is no debate. It is mathematically impossible to have an impact statement on this budget because a capital gains must be held, a long-term capital gain must be incurred over a year. There is a debate about the length of a capital investment, how long is it held? Capital investment in stock of an Arkansas domiciled company, we have that in there because we want a publicly traded company to move here, Get out of California. Get out of Illinois. Get out of New York. Come here, because we balance our budget, and the future here is that we will not be raising taxes on you. In fact, we will welcome your capital here, bring your jobs here. We're ready to grow. We're open for business. Now, you've heard about the immediate impact of $44.5 million. dollars. To do that, you would have to invest on July 2nd of this year, between July 2nd of this year and through December 31st of this year, six months. And then you would have to have a profit in that investment and sell it in the same six-month window in 2012 to have an impact on the tax year, fiscal year of 2013 of $44.5 million. To do that, simply take $44.5 million at the tax rate of 4.9% and you get capital gains of $907 million. That is the profit, not the total investment, just the profit of what would have to be invested in Arkansas and sold in a year, if you assume a healthy 10% return, that means what would be invested and then sold to create that problem would be $9 billion in the second half of this year. $9 billion. Billion dollars. That's if you sold it all. And DF&A estimates that half of capital gains would go away. If that were true, if that were half, it would mean $18 billion dollars in the last half of this year. This impact is not only debatable. This impact is fantasy. Now, we have a paper that I've distributed in getting sponsors for this bill and thank all of you that have stood up to do this by Dr. Michael Paco, who is the senior economist at UALR Institute for Economic Advancement. He is the man who created the model for our state's economic modeling. And he did research on this bill and came out with an impact that was only fractions of this. Now, that's the static. In other words, that's the hit. That's the cost. The upside, we can go over to economic development, and over the years, the measures that have come before this body and the legislature show that capital investment creates jobs. In fact, you don't have jobs created without capital investment. You can make some capital investments that don't create jobs, but you can't create jobs without capital investment. That's why I support and we have a quick action closing fund for the governor so he can invest that capital to make these things happen and happen quickly. And economic development comes up for Amendment 82 with all the figures of all the companies that we have missed because we can't institute a bond program. And it shows the capital invested, the jobs, what those jobs pay per hour. And you know what? When you look at even a quarter of capital investments creating jobs, and that's very conservative, income tax pays for the loss of the capital gains lost by a factor of two, three, four times. This is a jobs bill. This makes us competitive with jobs. There will be no measurable impact in the future. It is. It is positive. People sent us here in this election cycle to create jobs and opportunity for Arkansas, and that's what this bill does. I would be happy to answer any questions. Members, you've heard an explanation of the bill. Representative Walker, what purpose? Yes. Mr. Speaker? Question? Do you have an impact study to show how many jobs will be created by this bill in the next year? And by creation, I mean something different than what we considered yesterday or one earlier day. When you take some jobs from, say, Jefferson County and you transfer them to Saline County, I don't see that as creating a job, as transferring a job. I don't see consolidating state services from around the state, largely the southern part, and putting them in the central part as creating jobs, even though the city may say that that's creating jobs. Can you tell me how many jobs will be created by this? At what expense? Where those jobs will be? Will they be in the Delta or will they be in the Northwest? Do you have anything that shows the impact upon South Arkansas, East Arkansas, North Arkansas or Central Arkansas? That is the kind of impact study I'd like to see. Whether you have to have it, I don't know. But I think that when we're looking at something as significant as this that's going to impact the state for years to come, we need to have that. And it's not just speculation. It is something that is real and it affects a lot of people. Thank you. Representative Walker, I appreciate your question. I have to tell you that it's framed in such a broad way that it borders on a statement, but I will try. Yes, sir. It would be the same answer as if you went to Arkansas Economic Development Commission and said what exactly what locations of companies and capital are you making in each area and would you be willing to turn down the location of a company if it didn't locate in my district as to the number of jobs the number of jobs are related to how much capital is invested This bill does not guarantee a single job. It does also not guarantee a dollar of a capital investment. It simply creates the environment where there is likely to come here and look at the benefits of being in Arkansas versus Texas or Tennessee that doesn't have a capital gains tax. The decision would then be, where do I locate my capital investment? Where do I create the jobs? As far as guaranteeing that that behavior occurs, I can't, because if nobody locates a company in Tennessee or in Arkansas, there's no capital investment. But, sir, there's also no impact. If the capital investment is not made, then the jobs aren't created, but you also don't have a capital gains liability because you have no capital gain. So what is necessary to create jobs in Arkansas is investment capital. It is something that we keep out of Arkansas because we have a high capital gains tax relative to Oklahoma, who has exempted their in-state capital gains from taxation, relative to Louisiana, who just exempted their privately held capital investments from capital gains. Mississippi, who has in 1997 exempted their corporate capital gains on in-state Mississippi investments from capital gains. So we are competing against states around us who do not have this tax. And as someone makes a decision about where to make the capital investment, we need to be able to compete. Should they make the decision to come to Arkansas, in addition to the Governor's Quick Action Closing Fund and all the efforts we're making in education and all the efforts that we're making to improve our infrastructure, all the efforts we're making to open Arkansas for business, we shouldn't have to overcome this most volatile of all revenues at the expense of job creation. If the capital is invested here, the jobs are created, and even in a small fraction of capital investment, those jobs net income taxes that are higher. People go to work. Those jobs are net income taxes that are higher than the capital gains liability. Thank you very much. Members, you've heard an explanation of the bill. Anyone wishing to speak against the bill or the bill? Rep. St. Burroughs, you are recognized. Come to the well and speak for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I'll be brief. We've debated this to death almost, but I want to make one point very clear. It's the point I wanted to make on the motion. In order for this impact that you're hearing to be realized, even if the highest possible impact estimated by DF&A was realized in the soonest possible way, that highest impact at the quickest time frame possible still does not even come close to equaling the proposed growth in next year's budget. We'll make that perfectly clear. It doesn't even come close, $50 million short. So anybody that tells you there's going to be cuts, any college that tells you they're going to lose their funding, any agency that tells you they won't survive, they're going to be cut. Zero cuts. The worst possible scenario for this impact statement still does not even come close to equaling the amount of proposed growth that we're going to vote on in the upcoming budget. Anybody that says it's going to create cuts should be ashamed of themselves. It's not true. Look at the budget. Look at the impact. It's absolutely not possible. Thank you. Representative Burroughs has spoken against the bill and one wishing for the bill, excuse me. I'm sorry. Representative Murdoch, what purpose? Question. There's a question. DFNA who's being questioned. Who's your question directed to? Speaker. Now, what's your question? DFNA, who's been questioned here, who provided this impact study, and we're hearing so much about how wrong it is, is there anybody here for those of us that really want to know the truth? We don't have an ideology here on either side of it. We just want to know the truth and make a good decision. That's a state agency that's being ridiculed to a very large degree today, and I think we need to know if there's such a difference where is that coming from okay let me respond to your question that that's the that's purpose of our debate here we've got uh you know everybody's gonna have a chance anybody bring any information they want to that's germane to uh this bill uh that's that's what we're doing so uh that's that's a response to your question if somebody If anybody has information regarding the validity of DF&A and their statement, then they certainly have the opportunity to come and speak for the bill and provide that information for consideration to the members. You have another question? Go ahead. And otherwise, without that, if DF&A, which is a very, very major part of the decision that has to be made, if DF&A is not represented here, then we're just left to... Representative Murdoch, that's the process of our committee system where these matters are considered by the committee. The committee makes a recommendation. Any member can bring information that was brought before the committee for or against the bill to the floor. Representative Cowling, what purpose? Question for the parliamentarian. What's your question? You said while I go on the financial statement, I don't think I was asleep. It may have been, but you said if a financial statement was brought up in committee, then it could be brought to the floor. Yes, if it was required. There was a financial statement on this in the committee, so now I'm asking. Well, I wasn't there, and I'm not sure it's required, though, because, again, this doesn't affect cities and counties. It doesn't affect the education, and it doesn't affect corrections. It doesn't change anything in any of those. So I'm suggesting it didn't need one. If it was one there, then if they brought it with a bill, that's fine. If they didn't without it being required, it's not necessary. If there is one out there, I guess somebody might ought to pass it around. Well, if it was a tax and it was took away, it would look like it would affect the cities and the counties to me. Well, this impact statement is direct to affect the city and counties. The ruling of the chair would be consistent with parliamentarian, that it's a direct impact. That's what our rules state on those entities. And, you know, this information can be made available to the members, committee members who have an interest in this, have this information placed for consideration by the members. uh representative lee what purpose point of order what's your point of order i think we probably need to recognize that representative murdoch is present we get granted him leave didn't we i thought we all called out leave earlier i think it might be good notified the clerk notified the clerk when he arrived thank you thank you Okay, let me get back to where we were. Representative Burroughs spoke for the bill. Anyone want to speak against the bill? Representative Powers, you are recognized to come to well and speak against the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Now, I'm going to preface my remarks and tell you that this is not my area of expertise. But here's what I do know. Haven't been threatened. Don't think. Anybody threaten me here? I'm not ashamed. Haven't ever done anything I'm ashamed of here. Nor should anyone else be ashamed. But I do have a concern. There's a huge discrepancy between the UALR numbers and the DFNA numbers. Now, it's not my area of expertise. Which side's right? I don't know. Representative Garner has worked on this ever since he and I first met several years ago. And I applaud your effort. But even he told you there's no guarantee to the jobs. And I understand the concept, Representative Garner. Oakline tells me the same thing when I go down there. So it's not my area of expertise, but to tell you I have concerns, I have grave concerns about this, and I do have concerns how it affects our general revenue budget. So I am against this bill, and I thank you for your time. Representative Powers has spoken against the bill. Representative Westerman, you're recognized. Come and speak for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don't know if many of you realize this, but I used to play football for the Razorbacks, and when they were playing the fight song out in the rotunda today, I was in a back room, and it reminded me of being in the dressing room before a game, and I started getting butterflies and ready to come do some work but now it feels like a conference game or something so you know as a representative mayberry's pastor was praying this morning he or this afternoon he talked about wisdom and understanding and it reminded me of a proverb that says how much better to get wisdom than gold to choose understanding than silver today i hope be able to provide some wisdom and understanding for house bill 1002 you see i'm an engineer i'm not an economist i was trained to use reason and logic to solve problems now some people have suggested that this might not be the right venue for me to showcase my talents but like i said i'm not an economist but reminiscent of an old tv commercial that said i'm not a doctor but i play one on tv i did study finance and economics in graduate school at yale when i studied the physical impact on this bill that was put out by dfna i'm actually very optimistic for our future dfna claims that this bill would reduce revenue by 44 and a half million dollars in 2013 and 68 and a half million dollars in 2014 and thereafter from a perspective of reason and logic i did a little back calculation on their numbers representative garner talked about this a little bit but if you look at it and go through the numbers if they're projecting a loss of 44 and a half million dollars in 2013 then that means we need to see over 900 million dollars in gain Now, even assuming a 20% growth in six months, which is almost unheard of, it would take over $9 billion worth of capital investment in six months to be sold in six months to reach that amount of gain. If you look at adding the projection in for the next year, which they say is a loss of $68.5 million, then on July 2nd, you would have to invest $13 to $14 billion in Arkansas's economy to see that kind of capital gain. And I think that would be a great thing. So I'm hoping, I'm trusting that DF&A's numbers are right, because if they are, we're going to have to reconvene and figure out how to spend all the tax money that we've got coming into the state. Thank you, and I appreciate a good vote on Representative Garner's bill 1002. Representative Westerman has spoken for the bill. Representative Nichols, you are recognized. Come to the well. Speak against the bill. You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm not very good with numbers, but I do understand policy a little bit, And I think that the passage of this bill is shifting the tax burdens to the working families of this state to finance state government. And there are various needs out there that this state has, and we need to be covering those needs. Now, I think most of you in both parties would agree that Abraham Lincoln was probably the best Republican president this country has had. Abraham Lincoln said that labor comes before capital. But we are putting capital first here. So just remember your Republican roots, colleagues. Labor comes first, and don't be taxing labor and the working families of this state to finance state government. And that is the shift that we have. Thank you. Representative Nichols has spoken against the bill one wishing to speak for the bill Representative Sanders you are recognized come and speak for the bill Thank you Mr. Speaker I appreciate this members and it is nice to have a debate over what we're going to do and what the future of our economy is going to look like and what the future of our state is going to look like. I want to commend Representative Ed Garner for putting this out there. I think this is a good debate to be had. I think also Representative Bubba Powers has hit on something that I think other legislators have dealt with several times, and that is the reliability of DF&A's numbers compared to Michael Pacow, who worked for, before he came to Arkansas, worked for the Federal Reserve Bank in St. Louis, who was a quite reputable economist. Now look, the fact of the matter is that this is to create an environment of opportunity in the state of Arkansas, bottom line. That's what we're sent here to do. There is no revenue impact on this bill unless somebody decides, I'm going to take a chance in the state of Arkansas rather than Mississippi, rather than Tennessee, rather than Missouri, rather than Louisiana or Texas. There is no impact unless somebody says, I'm going to take a chance in Arkansas. So you want to tell people don't take a chance in Arkansas? That's what it's about. It's not about the revenue impact. The revenue impact will come only if people invest money here. That's money. That's capital. That's jobs. That's tax revenue. That's tax revenue for cities. That's tax revenue for counties. That's tax revenue that goes to schools. Those are new jobs. Representative Garner, you're right. It is no guarantee. We get no guarantee at all. But the only thing we can do is to give people an opportunity to create an environment where people can create jobs. President Bill Clinton cut the capital gains tax for the United States of America when he was president in his second term. As part of the budget reconciliation with Republicans it was a bipartisan bill. An amazing... And y'all remember this back in 1997. Remember what the economy was doing? We're kind of in good area. And then if you actually look at capital gains tax receipts, go back, pull the numbers. The president talked about this. They went up. So he took a chance. Bill Clinton took a chance and signed on and cut the capital gains tax. I think this is the right thing to do for all the reasons that have been said here. And again, I commend my friend Ed Garner and all the others who have come to the world to speak for this bill. Appreciate a good vote. Representative Sanders has spoken for the bill, anyone wishing to speak against the bill? Representative Cheatham, you are recognized to speak against the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll be very brief. It's kind of difficult for an old codger like me to follow Representative Sanders and Representative Westerman. I didn't play with the Razorbacks, but at Sam's Yellow Jackets back in the old days, I was like a 145-pound end, and Bubba was against me up there at the Bobcats. But anyway, Mr. Garner has been a friend of mine for a long time. Some of you don't know that his dad was my preacher back 1978. And, you know, good man, good man, good duck hunter, and we had a lot of good time. But there's been a lot of things talked about, And Ed, I think I was on your bill two years ago and supported that. It didn't get out, but there have been a lot of states mentioned around us. Just remember one thing, and I know this is important to Ed. It's like birthed a baby, Ed. But we talked about these other states, Representative Saunders and others mentioned that. This one reminds you that, and I'm not an economist like Mr. Westerman is, But how many states currently have balanced budgets? How many states we're in as good a shape as we're in? And why are we that way? Is there something else that we're not doing or not seeing? This is a good bill, but not at this time. Thank you. Representative Cheatham has spoken against the bill. Representative Hubbard, recognize to come and speak for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is my first time up here, and I just wanted to make one quick comment. Like everybody said, all of us aren't experts at numbers or anything like that. But just think back just a few years ago when the opportunity for, I believe it was Nissan, was going to bring a plant to, and I think it was Osceola, Arkansas, if I'm not mistaken, And we pretty well thought we had that plant coming to Arkansas, and all of a sudden, at the last minute, an announcement comes in that it was going to Mississippi. And it wasn't anything about Mississippi being a lot better place to take a Nissan plant, but Mississippi did some things. I am guessing probably Capital Gains was one of those things Mississippi did to make it more attractive for Nissan to bring that plant into their state as opposed to Arkansas. Just keep that in mind. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Cowling, what purpose? Motion. What's your motion? Immediate consideration, please. Proper motion, non-debatable. All in favor of motion for immediate consideration of House Bill 1002, say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Ayes have it. Mr. Clerk, question for the, I mean, members, question for the House, passage of House Bill 1002, prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. everyone voted everyone voted cast up the ballot Mr. Clerk by a vote of 53 53 yea, 43 nay and one present you have passed the bill Representative Garner moves to the clincher all in favor say aye Aye. Those no, clincher adopted. Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 1056. House Bill 1056 by Representative Lindsey and Ault to provide additional income tax relief to head of household taxpayers with two or more dependents. Representative Lindsey, you are recognized to explain the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members of the House. House Bill 1056 is a tax relief bill that's a little different than most you will see in this session. It basically is designed to correct an error in the tax code. Prior to 2007, there were three basic codes, the categories. You either filed single or you filed as married or you filed as head of household. In 2007, the General Assembly amended that bill and added four categories. splitting the married category into one dependent or less, two dependents or more. The heir, DF&A, or the General Assembly in this case, failed to do a head of high school with two dependents category in the low-income tax tax. It's purely an heir. The cost of fixing this problem is $3.7 million, dollars and it seems almost to me that from an issue of equity we've been collecting three point seven million dollars in error in excess of what we should have been doing since 19 since 2007 this bill fixes that it's unique good vote in the in revenue tax in the house and quite frankly seven of the eight members on Senate revenue and taxes time those co-sponsors I would be hopeful that we can move this to the Senate and to see it move through the Senate and on to the governor's signature. I'd be happy to answer questions. Yield for questions, Mr. Speaker. Representative Lindsey has explained the bill. Any questions? Seeing none, anyone wish to speak against the bill, for the bill? Representative Collins, you're recognized come speak for the bill i just want to come down and thank my colleague representative lindsey for taking the lead on fixing this uh... in this very very difficult economy uh... it's absolutely the right thing for us to do to take care of these low income families so representative lindsey thank you very much for your leadership, and I'd appreciate a good vote. Representative Collins has spoken for the bill. Anyone speak against the bill or the bill? Representative Lindsay, if you want to close the bill, Representative Lindsay is closed. Question for the House. Passive House Bill 1056. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Everyone voted. Everyone voted. Cast up the ballot by a vote of 93 yay, 0 nays, 0 present. You have passed the bill. Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 1305. House Bill 1305, Representative Williams and Shepard, to clarify the requirements to revive a judgment and perfect a judgment lien. Representative Williams, you are recognized to present the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, unlike the three bills before this one, it has nothing to do with taxes. This bill is a bill on behalf of the Arkansas Bar Association to clarify a portion of the code related to judgment liens. In Arkansas, if you are successful in court against a defendant, that judgment constitutes a lien on real property for a period of 10 years. There is a procedure that uses a Latin term that I think is something like serifacis, but I'm not a Latin expert, but that means to know the causes. This lien that you have on real property can be extended for a period of 10 years. in other counties if you file that lien before the expiration of your current lien. This bill is to clarify two confusing aspects of that procedure. First, this bill will make it clear that in order to extend this lien for an additional 10 years, you must file the lien in the other county where the property is located before the expiration of your first 10-year lien. That's the first thing it does. The second thing it does, it requires that if you're going to do so, you have to provide certain notice with regard to that filing. That's the only thing this bill does. It's a clean-up bill to clarify the code on behalf of the Bar Association, and I'd appreciate a good vote. Thank you. Members have heard an explanation of the bill. Anyone wishing to speak against the bill? For the bill, Representative Williams is closed for your bill. Representative Williams is closed. before the House, pass your House Bill 1305, prepare the machine. Mr. Clerk? Everyone voted? Everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Mr. Clerk, by a vote of 95 yea, 0 nays, 0 present, and you have passed the bill. Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 1318. House Bill 1318 by Representative Tyler regarding parole release when an inmate's parole release date falls on a weekend or holiday. Representative Tyler, you're recognized to present the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I'm carrying this bill on behalf of the Department of Corrections. Basically, what this bill does allow is that when a parolee's parole eligibility date falls on a weekend or a holiday, day, it allows the Department of Corrections to parole that individual on the Friday before. It saves the Department of Corrections several days of expense. It saves the Department of Corrections potential medical expenses if this person were to get sick during that time, and it's a good efficiency bill, and I would appreciate a good vote. Members, you heard an explanation of the bill. Anyone wishing to speak against the bill, for the bill? Representative Nichols, you are recognized. Come to the well. Speak for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Tyler talked about efficiencies in the state prison system. And that is the byproduct, I think, of her bill. But it also has a human side to it. And this is a mother who's been trying to get her son out of prison. She contacted me back months ago. Her son missed by one day getting out in December. One day. Okay. Now his due date to get out is this Saturday. He can't get out Saturday because the Department of Corrections does not process people on Saturdays. He cannot get out Sunday for the same reason, of course, but Monday is a holiday. So he's going to have to wait until Tuesday before his mama can take him home in her arms. So it has a human element to it, and it also is efficiency and will open up a bed three days early. So I'd appreciate a good vote for this bill. Representative Nichols has spoken for the bill. Anyone wishing to speak against the bill? Representative Tyler, you close for your bill. Representative Tyler is closed for her bill. Question for the House, passage of House Bill 1318, prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Everyone voted. Everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Mr. Clerk. Vote 95, yea, 0, nay, 0, present. You have passed the bill. Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 1015. House Bill 1015 by Representative Woods and all to mandate an additional fine for any person convicted of a felony sex offense. Representative Woods, you are recognized to explain the bill. I just had several legislators come up to me and beg me to keep it short. So there are three pieces of legislation regarding this topic that I've been working on for about four months now, and this is the last one, and basically is brought to my attention by ACIC. There's an existing fine that is already on the books. It's already there. It's just not being collected. We have a victim's fund that once this fine is imposed or collected, it goes into this fund, and those monies are divided among ACIC and Department of Corrections. 800 new convicted sex offenders each year times $250. The ballpark is between $200,000 and $300,000 of new revenue that would go into this fund that would generate more income so we can hire, or more revenue so we can hire more employees to speed up the assessment process, which is the goal. Right now, the fine's not being enforced. It's not being collected. The maximum amount in this fund that there's been, I believe, is somewhere in the range of $10,000 to $15,000, which is unacceptable. So what we're doing is we're striking undue hardship out and making it mandatory. I'd appreciate a good vote. Thank you. Representative Wood, explain the bill. Anyone wish to speak against the bill for the bill? Representative Woods, are you closed for your bill? Representative Woods, close the bill. Question for the House, passage of House Bill 1015. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. If everyone voted, if everyone cast up the bell, Mr. Clerk, by a vote of 94 yeas, 0 nays, 0 present, you have passed the bill. Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 1302. House Bill 1302 by Representative Hyde and Aul to amend the Arkansas Scholarship Lottery Act and laws related to the Arkansas Scholarship Lottery Act and to declare an emergency. Representative Hyde, if you want to come to the well and explain your bill. After completing his exercise routine, Representative Hyde, you are recognized to explain the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I probably need a couple more left beyond that. members this is a little bill we worked on for the past year bring love and cheer to the chamber I'm glad to be here to deliver it to you as most of you know the lottery oversight committee is a joint committee that oversees the lottery operations and scholarship operate scholarship operations and they are charged with delivering a report to the General Assembly at the end of each year and that report is to include the recommendations of the committee. This piece of legislation is, in fact, a compilation of those recommendations. Each one of you should have on your desk this table that details out each one of the recommendations that was agreed upon by the committee and references back to the section of the bill. I'll give you a quick overview, and then I'll be glad to answer questions. I was about to give a quick overview of the 21-year bill. Oh, okay. Well, I was reading something else, and the parliamentarian told me you'd explain the bill, so I was deferring to the wisdom of the parliamentarian. You may continue, Representative Hyde, your explanation of the bill. I will try to be brief and quick. One of the things, and I'll just try and hit some high points for you, is we corrected some problems. Most of these things were input from constituents, higher ed, the institutions, constituents, different situations or questions or problems that arose over the course of the last two years with the lottery and the scholarship program. One of the things we did was try to provide an exception for people who are called to military duty that might interrupt their concurrent or their consecutive semesters to maintain their eligibility. It allows them the option to pick up when they come back from active duty where they left off. Made a change to allow students to count their summer school hours to maintain their 30-hour requirement for each year. Required students to disclose all their scholarships, including private scholarships for the purpose of stacking. One item that is probably of interest to a lot of folks here but really doesn't have a lot to do with the oversight of committee's abilities is the restriction that was put on scholarships originally concerning grade inflation was handed over last year to a task force that was supposed to come back with an answer of how that would be handled in the bill in the future. The recommendation of the tax force and the result is the removal of grade inflation control or monitoring from this bill, and hopefully we'll see another place or another separate piece of legislation that will deal with that grade inflation problem. I made a change on defining traditional students that was just a legal clarification. Basic eligibility, that had to do with the, I guess for lack of a better term, I'm going to call the professional student that kind of just keeps on going. We cut them off at 130 hours or near the completion of their program. The scholarship doesn't allow you to seek multiple degrees. On page 10, you'll notice that under accounting, there was a consider mandating ACES. That was the amendment that we approved yesterday. The requirement to use ACES for the lottery was spoke against by DF&A, and we were advised that that wasn't a good fit, would cost an awful lot of money, and would provide zero benefit. As a result of the most recent audit, we did legislate some specifics for the Lottery Commission in the minimums that they would require and cause to be reported on on a regular basis of what the work of their internal auditor was. Overall, this bill does not set the scholarship amount for the coming school year. It does not yet handle the problem that has been discussed to correct the error that was made a year ago in changing how unclaimed prize money or really cash flows are handled within the lottery. Those two items are still on the table of now the new committee and will be handled by them. At that point, I've probably given you the overview. If you've got some questions, I'll do my best to answer them. Reverend James Smith, what purpose? You're recognized. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, Representative Hyde, for bringing this bill. I have an issue with the delay of notification to some students that were currently enrolled when this came about. Did you all get any complaints about that? I had one student that was almost Christmas before she was notified. She was eligible for last fall semester, an A student. and she's a student at one of our universities in the state. Has that problem been, have you been notified of that at all? Does that work into this bill? I'm sure that your student is a five individual and a very good student, and we've dealt with numerous concerns and complaints and requests for help, and I think that they've all been resolved. students who would have just received notification before Christmas are students who would have not successfully or properly applied for the scholarship originally. And in your student's case, higher ed may have simply made a mistake and determined your student to be ineligible. But I can tell you that I was probably involved in 40 of them where emails just either weren't read or weren't received and I think the most common is in a few of the institutions the transcripts weren't transferred didn't come through as requested and I think it was the responsibility of the student by email that they were notified that the transcripts hadn't come through that they need to get them released or they needed to get them delivered or they needed to give an update that seemed to have been the most common but but at At this point, we had an overwhelming response to this program. I think it's doing great. We've got over 30,000 students right now under scholarship, and I've been assured, and there's been a ton of attention put on this from the governor's office, from higher ed, and certainly from the members in this room and at the other end of the building. And I think higher ed has resolved all those issues to the very best of my knowledge. There's no more on the table, and we stand in much better prepared and much better experience to address the upcoming application season. Thank you. And if I can help you with your situation, if it's still hanging out there. She got her money, but it was almost Christmas. Representative Putter-Arts, with purpose. Thank you. Question, Mr. Speaker? You recognize. Thank you. Mr. Hyde, first of all, I want to say thank you for your chairship of that committee and to all the members of that Oversight Committee that did yeoman's work during the interim. And I attended many of those meetings, and it was quite fruitful. Just one question. First of all, thank you for this brief overview. It's very helpful. On the page 7, on scholarship award amounts, and, you know, we're going to get questions on that back home, So I'm just going to ask the question here, because I was there the day that y'all had a discussion about what might be actuary available to make those awards. So even though the amount is not set in this particular bill, did you mean to imply that there would be another separate bill that would actually have the amounts in it? Yes. Okay, that answers my question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Hyde. Representative Hobbs, what purpose? Jim, please, sir. You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Hyde, on page, I believe it's page four, successively completed is defined as a student completed a course at an institution of higher education and received the equivalent of a minimum letter grade of D. can you tell me how the committee came up with a letter D as being successful completion well I don't think it's page four but I remember what you're talking about that's fine actually what you're what you're asking about is a little out of context this is a request and an insertion by the Department of Higher ed. Originally, the statute didn't call out or describe successful completion as including receiving a passing grade. It just said successful completion. They had a, as resourceful as our college students naturally would be, it was their contention that successfully completed didn't necessarily mean they had passed. It meant that they had attended. They had stuck it out all the way through. So this was a response from the Department of Higher Ed to go ahead and close that door and to get rid of that argument, that you had to have at least a passing grade in that class to be defined as successfully completed. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Linderman, what purpose? Question. Recognize. Representative Hyatt, thank you for the work that you've done on this. I actually have a child that got a little bit of this scholarship money. I do have a couple or three questions. Do y'all still utilize students or allow simply the students that have completed the SMART Corps? And where I'm going with this is the foreign language requirement was dropped from the Governor's Challenge Scholarship and was not included in this. And personally, I feel like that was a mistake. Was that something that y'all looked at and was anything done about putting this in there? I offer my personal opinion that I think that that was a mistake for that to be removed elsewhere. In terms of the scholarship, the lottery scholarship, it goes back to SmartCorps, and there was extensive discussion on that item, and I think there's a pretty good contingent of folks who want to solve that. It would be my opinion, and I think generally most folks would agree that we don't want to just change it for a challenge scholarship. We want to change SmartCorps is the appropriate way to do it. And I think we're going to have to do that legislatively, and I hope we get that done in this session. But in fact, SMART Corps should include foreign language. Thank you, sir, and I appreciate your efforts. Thank you. I'm glad that was a short three. Representative Walker, what purpose? Question. Recognized? Has the department, or have you and the committee, today, considered the racial impact of the criteria in awarding scholarships, and also have you determined whether the criteria that you use are correlated to the courses that are being offered in all of the schools of Arkansas? I think that at least in general that consideration has been, and I don't want to say has been because I think it's incomplete. I think it's been requested and it is supposed to be worked on. It is being worked on, not only for minority concerns but for all students in all different areas. I would say my parting shot might be after putting two years in on this committee is the big issue before you in this session is not so much, you know, making these technical corrections, these legal fixes and all this stuff in here. It is making sure that we find the mechanism and that we all pull together to demand that we receive the data necessary from our institutions of higher learning. And that's data from where these kids come from, what their initial GPA was going in, what their ACTs were, how they did in that first semester, if they fell out or dropped out why they dropped out what you know what were they missing uh uh that data is essential for the members you know i'm in my last term so it is going to be essential for the members of this body and and and certainly at the other end of the building as well to make good decisions on changes in in making this uh program as effective as possible based on hard data instead of you know Our latest gut feeling or what a small group tells us is the right thing or what not to do. So I'm sorry for the somewhat indirect answer, but I think the correct answer is we have worked very hard in this committee and need the cooperation of the entire House to get the data that we need in general, as well as to make good decisions on what your question is. Mr. Speaker? You're recognized for another question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It was going too easy, wasn't it? Oh, no. Are you aware of the 1989 settlement agreement between the state of Arkansas and the three counties and the Joshua interveners? Generally. Are you aware that the House is mandated not to enact any legislation which has disparate racial impact upon African-American persons with respect to any programs or laws that this body enacts? In general. follow up then well is there anything this moment I'll recognize you thought I had somebody else standing I don't see okay Representative Walker you're recognized for another question thank you Mr. Speaker is there any writing which is there any writing which addresses the efforts of the group or of the committee to address this subject. I mean, it's pretty obvious that when you use a certain grade point average and you include in those grade point averages. Representative Walker, if you will, stick with your question. You were good on the question, but now you're getting ready to argue an issue. If you'll stick with the question, please. Let me restate the question. If students have to meet two requirements, and you are aware of that as a condition for the scholarship, have you made any report which shows how those awards are made on a racial basis? I think that you can find that information, or at least any information that's been compiled in in the reports that are coming out of higher ed and and also the other side of the calculation is terms of where the where the uh... uh... uh... the lottery being sold you know where the dollars getting spent in some of the demographics demographics that are coming from the commission on that and and i'll be glad to work with you and and hear you because there's been other voices uh... and and and i would have to tell you that i don't think that we have all the information that you're interested in but i'd have to go on to tell you and that's why my earlier comment about holding the institution's feet to the fire to get this data out of them is almost every area that we want to be able to do a better job of making decisions going forward on the scholarship are lacking or incomplete would probably be the fair word. Thank you. Members I need a good vote on this and this is about kids in your district that are on scholarships and I want to take this opportunity to point out that the members of this committee put in numerous hours and I mean dozens and dozens of hours for this work and when you get a chance please thank them thank you members heard an explanation of the bill anyone wishing to speak against the bill for the bill, Representative Roebuck you are recognized to come and speak for the bill thank you Mr. Speaker members Representative Hyde is exactly right lots of hours and hours and I commend everyone in the chamber that that worked with us and it you didn't have to be on the committee those of you that emailed us with your concerns which every concern seriously so what you say before you have answered those concerns as well as all of your constituent concerns there were hundreds of those that we took from you and we worked through them just a couple of clarifications that i want to make uh... on representative has comments how the reason they did some of these deals were not notified in a timely manner as Representative Smith pointed out, is because each of those that were denied then were given absolutely individual attention to make sure that ADHE had not made a mistake. And in that case, Representative Smith, ADHE had made a mistake and we corrected that. I talked with numerous members that we looked at some of your constituents and I want to commend ADHE because every single complaint was checked and checked again, and many awards were made late. The question that has to do, Representative Walker, about data. One of the mistakes that we made, unintended consequences when we wrote the first bill, is that we actually asked to collect data on awardees, and we did not have data on actual applicants. What you see in front of you is a correction to that. Our bureau staff now will be collecting that data on applicants. so we can tell you exactly where those applicants were who was denied why they were denied as well as telling you who was awarded and that's very important because we do want to know that and we want to know how many students applied we also want to know the students that were awarded and we want all of the demographics there represented Walker so we appreciate that to address the D as As some of you know, I've spent much of my career in higher ed. Sad to say, a D is a passing grade. And so when we put that in there, I too felt, oh dear, we're telling students it's okay to make a D. Well, it is okay, and naturally with our 2.5 minimum grade point, you can't make too many of those, but occasionally you may have one. So that's why that's in there to clarify to students that that is a passing grade. You do get a quality point for that, and in some institutions, certainly most of our institutions discourage it, but it is a passing grade. The last point that I'd like to make in asking you to give a good vote on this bill is SmartCore. SmartCore does not include foreign language, and you're right. We probably made a mistake, because the old academic challenge did require foreign language. When we wrote the original bill, we said SmartCore. And so that is something we've asked the state board to address, and certainly we've looked at legislation. Representative Stewart's looked at it many hours because of his wife being a foreign language teacher. We do know today that that's affecting our enrollment in foreign language classes across our state, and it is something that we need to address. We're looking at that in separate legislation, but not in this bill. So I appreciate a good vote, and thank you, Representative Hyde, for your leadership. But what purpose, Representative Walker? Question. You want to take a question? Yes. Representative Roebuck. Certainly. You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Roebuck, did the committee consider whether the 2.5 and the 19 on the ACT have a disparate racial impact? We looked, yes, sir, we looked at data from all over our state. ADHE showed us all the data. The ADE showed us the entry data, but we did not see anything that would keep us from looking at that. We did refer, as you know, to a committee on grade inflation. We wanted to look at that as well. So there are many issues that we considered, but we feel like that that is a fair assessment of a student's ability to say a 2.5 or a 19 on the ACT if the student has completed SmartCore. Without SmartCorps, we say to the student, you have to have both, a 2.5 and a 19. May I follow up, Mr. Speaker? I understand that the Department of Higher Ed Director acknowledges that there may be a racial impact. And the question is, if there is one, which I know there is, and I think I'll acknowledge that, the Department of Education also acknowledges that, is there anything that is in the bill that allows the Department of Higher Education to fix that and to modify it so as not to have a continuing impact. I'm sure Representative Walker, that's the committee, and I'm not on the committee any longer, but I'm sure that Representative Hyde would like to do that, and Representative Pierce, I'm looking at that, Representative Perry is the chair, and others in the chamber. There are six House members on that committee, and I would certainly invite you to contact them and talk about your concerns. Thank you. Representative Roebuck has spoken for the bill. Anyone wish to speak against the bill or the bill? Representative Hyde, you're closed for your bill. Question before the House is passed to House Bill 1302. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Voting on the bill and the emergency Clause. Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot. Mr. Clerk, by a vote of 94 yeas, 0 nay, 2 present, you pass the bill and the emergency clause. Mr. Clerk reads, Senate Bill 42. Senate Bill 42 by Senator Johnson, an act to authorize dental hygienists to perform dental hygiene procedures for persons in public settings without supervision of a dentist to create a collaborative care permit program for dental hygienists and for other purposes. Representative Gaskell, you're recognized to explain the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair. God, I feel bad. So don't give me any gum. This is a very, of course, all bills are simple, we say, but this is a very simple bill. just allow the dental hygienist to go outside their office in rural areas to do the job that they do. These people in Arkansas especially, their training is invaluable. These people, I wouldn't want to ever practice dentistry without one of them. I'm going to give you a little bit of history. I sit here and listen to you all all day. This is how valuable a hygienist is. I had one named Carolyn Jenkins. We accidentally got involved with a child at St. Jude's. Carolyn is a crier. The family asked us to see the little girl, and we did, and she didn't have any hair, and she had a wig, and she had a better attitude than we had. And so we saw her one evening after our practice was over that day, and Carolyn And Carolyn said, why can't we do this once in a while, Dr. Gaskill? And I said, well, we can. So she goes to St. Jude's and tells them we'll see some of their kids. It was the greatest experience I ever had in my life. These children were far braver than us. I had two terms. I called them jarhead and knucklehead. And you had to graduate from one status to the other. and uh carolyn was a crier many of you remember coach bill davidson the head coach at asu he was coaching football at earl and he worked for me on saturday he was a he was a pitter miss littlejohn was a kisser flora was a do-gooder but together we all worked good and so one evening i'm back in the office and carolyn comes there and makes a motion to me to come up there and to be quiet which is extremely difficult for me and she said listen and I heard these noises in the waiting room and she said I said what are they're doing she said they're mimicking your voice and I said what she said listen and one of the cutest one try to get her deep voice she said all right go ahead get up in the chair open your mouth wide I need to walk around in there a while and they just cracked up and we loved it and one of them died but so it goes all this does is just expand them let them go into the rural area and do the same thing that they're doing I appreciate a good vote thank you members heard an explanation the bill anyone wishing speak against the bill for the bill. Representative Gass, will you close for your bill? It's closed. Question for the House. Passage of Senate Bill 42. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Everyone voted. Has everyone voted. Cast up the ballot. Mr. Clerk, vote 93 yea, 0 nay, and 0 present. You have passed the bill. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 43. Senate Bill 43 by Senator Johnson, an act to authorize physicians and nurses to apply fluoride varnish to a child's teeth after appropriate training for other purposes. Sam Gaskell, you recognize, present the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 43, all it does is let the pediatrician put sealants and fluoride on kids' teeth. Now, the reason this thing is so good is if you round the dental office and you pack the dentist, we don't see kids until they're 8 and 10 years old. Many times a six-year molar is rotted out. But the pediatrician who brought them into the world sees them every day or whenever they're sick. He opens the mouth, he goes in, he looks around, you need to see the dentist and so forth. So if we take about 30 minutes and show him how to dry the teeth, apply the sealants, this starts paying off in about six years when you notice that there's not very much tooth decay there. And I have thought about this. It's nice that they say that the pediatricians can do it, but I don't believe you can prevent them from doing it anyhow. Yeah. They practice medicine, and that means from the top of the head to the bottom of the feet. So they can even extract the tooth, you know. That's not limited. But this is very—it just allows them, and it's good for the kids. Members, I heard an explanation of the bill. Anyone wishing to speak against the bill, for the bill? Representative Gassby, close the bill. It's closed. Representative Mark, what purpose? speak for the bill. You're recognized. Come and speak for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess I want to make sure y'all don't think that I'm going to support this bill, okay? Really, there's a lot of misinformation about fluoride out there, and this is a pharmaceutical-grade fluoride that's applied to the tooth, and I fully support this bill. And thank you, Mr. Gaskell. Representative Marks, spoken for the bill. Anyone who wants to speak against the bill or the bill, you close for your bill. Representative Gaskell, close. Question for the House. Passes Senate Bill 43. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Everyone voted. Everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Mr. Clerk. By a vote of 94, yea, 1, nay, 0, present. You have passed the bill. Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 165. Senate Bill 165 by Senator Johnson, an act to clarify the licensure process for dentists and registered dental hygienists to provide for criminal background checks of dentists and registered dental hygienists to remove obsolete language regarding licensure tests and for other purposes. Senator Gaskell, you recognize. Present the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The hydrocodone is beginning to kick in pretty good. so i may tell you some truth that i shouldn't have told you when i when i first saw this bill i thought oh my god you know wonder how far they go back into my life uh because you know i've been in jail a time or two and uh i i thought wonder how far they go But then I discovered when I got on to the second page, there were the infamous crimes and all that. So regardless of how many misdemeanors I had, I still hadn't committed a felony. I remember one night that I... Representative Gaskell, you want to speak on the bill? Wait a minute, I'm speaking on the bill now. Let's get to the substance of the bill, then. We'll all be interested. when I thought about the ways that they are going to do background checks. You know, it seemed a little far-fetched to me. But when I got to the second thing about the infamous things, you know, I thought being thrown out of a beer joint, I didn't know how many they were going to use, I knew how many they were going to take. So it didn't apply to me. This is a good thing that they do these background checks, And it's another good bill, folks. And let's end the day on a good note. Representative Gaskell has thoroughly explained the bill. Thank you. Anyone who is speaking against the bill? For the bill. We'll be closed for the bill. Question for the House is passed the Senate Bill 165, a pair of machine. Mr. Clark. Everyone voted? Everyone voted. Cast up the ballot. I vote a 95 yea, 0 nays, 0 present. You have passed the bill. All right, members. Get out your budget calendar. Yellow sheet. Mr. Parliamentarian, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, I gave you a yellow sheet out. We're going to match these bills, and from our understanding, the last time we were here, you have two choices. One, you can just ask that a bill be passed over and then brought up at the end of the voting for further explanation, or you can ask for one to be taken completely off the calendar, and of course it can go back again the next day. In the meantime, you can check with an agency head or whatever. So does everybody understand the two choices that we can make here? And if you hold up your hand, I think the speaker is going to ask you for a determination on which way you want to go. So here we go. There's no questions. We're developing a calendar here now, and the clerk behind me has these entering these in the machine, and then they will take these out anybody puts a hand up house bill 1345 yes sir you what do you want representing Walker where you wish to have that removed from the calendar or you individually removed from the calendar okay clerk make that notation Senate bill 196 Senate bill 223 224 225 two thirty two thirty one two thirty two two thirty three two thirty five two thirty six two thirty seven two thirty eight two thirty nine two forty and two forty one a speaker by my calculation the yellow calendar will be complete with with the exception of the first bill, the House Bill 1345. Thank you, Mr. Parliamentarian. Mr. Clerk, read the bill. Senate Bill 196, Senate Bill 223, Senate Bill 224, Senate Bill 225, Senate Bill 230 Senate Bill 231 Senate Bill 232 Senate Bill 233 Senate Bill 235 Senate Bill 236 Senate Bill 237 Senate Bill 238 Senate Bill 239 Senate Bill 240 Senate Bill 241 Representative Webb Recognize We'll batch them all Is that what we're doing? We're just going to do If you'll just explain one more time Members how we're proceeding through here Thank you Mr. Speaker And yes we were going to batch all the bills All of the bills except the first bill Not the first bill that was taken off But the first bill that remains on or reappropriation, the first bill that is on, is at the exact same level as last session for the county collectors and treasurer's continuing education. Thank you, Representative Webb. I just wanted that explanation additionally as we begin to go through the budget process that we'll proceed at the beginning to find out if there are bills that will be, The members wish to have removed or called individually for questions on an individual bill. Otherwise, we'll be proceeding through batching those that are not called out and voting. You'll vote one time, and your vote will be recorded for each of the bills that's batched. We'll be voting on the bill and the emergency clause. Mr. Clerk, prepare the machine. voting on the bill and the emergency clause everyone voted everyone voted cast up the ballot by a vote of 95 yeas zero nays zero present you have passed the budget bills enumerated by the clerk Representative Allen, you're recognized for a motion. After the announcement, reading of the bills, transferring bills, placing the calendar on the desk, amending members' own bills with their own amendments, members withdrawing their own bills, finalizing resolutions, reading communication, and any remaining committee reports, I move that we adjourn until 1.30 tomorrow. Proper motion, non-debatable. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Carrie's announcements. Before we recognize announcements, I did want to recognize, for the benefit of Representative Word and Representative Bradford, who did have some guests in the gallery, and while we were in the midst of our debate, they departed before I had a chance to recognize them. So please, sorry we didn't get to recognize the 7th, or the history class from Watson Chapel High School, but we did recognize their presence here. Representative Cheatham, what purpose? Announcements, Mr. Speaker. Two announcements, Mr. Speaker. First, education will meet tomorrow at 10 o'clock, room 138. Second, the Fourth Caucus and Friends had a meeting in the governor's room scheduled for today at 2 or 2.30. We evidently missed that meeting. That will be rescheduled at 10.30 on Monday morning. if you're interested in talking to the governor about Lignite, 10.30 Monday morning. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Cowling. What purpose? Announcement. Recognized. Action revenue will meet at 10 o'clock, 151 in the morning. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Perry. What purpose? Recognized. Lottery oversight upon adjournment of both chambers at room 138. Representative Bibiano, what purpose? Announcement. Recognized. The freshman caucus will meet tomorrow at 1130 at the AEA building. Representative Clemmer, what purpose? Announcement. Recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I announced it yesterday, and I'll probably announce it one more time tomorrow. You have an invitation on your desk to a UALR ball game. We are having a pregame reception at 530 p.m. I have tickets here in the chamber. I have parking passes. There will be food and beverages, and we'd love to see you there. Thank you. Representative Woods, what purpose? You're recognized. Public Health Committee meeting tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock, room 130. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Representative Barnett, what purpose? Announcement. Yes, sir. You're recognized. House Transportation, 10 o'clock tomorrow morning, Big Mac, room B, be there. Thank you. Representative Cowling, what purpose? Announcement. Recognized. Do we have nice weather tonight in our country caucus? We'll meet tonight if you want to go out there. Thank you very much. Any further announcements? Representative Meeks, what purpose? Announcement. Recognized. A newly formed conservative caucus will meet tomorrow, room 272, at noon. thank you representative hutchinson what purpose you recognize just a reminder of all the ladies we will be having breakfast at seven with a tennis group with a lot of college girls who want to follow you around and learn i hope you'll come and share your wisdom even if you aren't in a mentor and also we'll be having lunch with them at the little rock club so i hope to see you at 7 at the Capitol Hill apartment dining room. Thank you. Any further announcements? Rate the bills, Mr. Clark. House Bill 1423 by Representative Westerman, an act of objection. Rage the second time. House Bill 1423. House Bill 1424 by Representative Westerman. Rage the second time. House Bill 1424. Rage the second time. House Bill 1425. Rage the second time house bill 1425 house bill 1426 second time house bill 1426 transportation house bill 1427 house bill 14 27 house bill 1428 game house bill 14 house bill 1429 second time house bill 1429 house bill 1431 house bill 1432 house bill 1432 I have objection. Read a second time. House Bill 1432. City, county, local. Senate Bill 222 by Senator Jeffress. I have objection. Read a second time. Senate Bill 222. Education. Senate Bill 263 by Senator Teague. I have objection. Read a second time. Senate Bill 263. Senate Bill 264 by Senator Laverty. An act to establish that... I have objection. Read a second time. Senate Bill 264. House Bill 1433 by Representative Roebuck and all to establish... I just met Ms. Clark. We don't have that one. You have Senate Bill 264. I have House Bill 1433 and I have Senate Bill 264. We're showing that we already have signed that to education. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, read House Bill 1433. House Bill 1433 by Representative Roebuck and Aul to establish performance ratings for education service cooperatives. Without objection, read the bill the second time. House Bill 1433. Education. Senate Bill 233. Thank you.