House Rules

May begin. All right this is a pretty small bill of surfboard and Johnson Johnson and myself or on this bill and is an active manager to bingo and Raffles enabling Act to authorize electronic and advertising on Raffles basically all this bill does it it takes the loss and authorize organization and uncompensated volunteers loss and organize. Authorized organization may advertise a charitable Raffles through the mail telephone Wasson authorized organization's website or social media outlets of this Lawson authorized organization or the Arkansas uncompensated volunteers of the last and. Authorized organization I believe this is really already in the law but we are clarifying the way they can do it so that's what this bill is all about I think let the questions. Madam chair since the sponsor don't know out to Conduct itself in front of your committee. I will table make a motion to table this until a later date. I'm not gonna take that motion. Thank you. Representative more you're recognized thank you madam chair of representative Cozart are you telling me that all those ducks unlimited Raffles that I. see advertise all over Facebook that's currently a legal. Yes really could be that's not escort who they are what they are I the way I read the language of if they already are licensed with the AG is pretty well that they could do this but I'm not a I'm not a lawyer so I'm never going to say that exactly but I just what it is but this was a from some of the people that actually represent the casinos in the state of Arkansas would rather this language be like this and what we had originally so it's pretty simple language in it and it directs it down to just Raffles on this so. Follow up. Is there any opposition to this bill the the number of not now votes which was as we amended it to get it here there's no I've had nobody contact me in opposition. Representative Jane you're recognized thank you madam chair of rigid Cozart. Are you reading this bill for the casino. No Sir will you be referenced in. Well I represent they had they had opposition to originally will work for you on this bill for I'm running this for charity organizations that could so they could be able to do their any in particular no Sir okay thank you. Representative Cavenaugh you're recognized thank you madam chair so I think we had to do a raffle one time for nonprofit on an automobile to help us raise money and we had to get we had applied for a permit to do all that but is we're not changing any of that so you still have to apply to get the start but you have to be licensed. Authorized organization with the AG's office to be able to do this okay he. I guess I will I just don't know what we're accomplishing because when we did that we could advertise everywhere for this raffle. It was a one time permit you probably could if it would have been a link the of. Thing away I read it you have to have a special license to do that but you know I'm only getting for what I get from who who will who opposed it why we were at a problems this would open it up for the a church that wants to have a raffle of the shot gun or anything they want Raffles that they could they could advertise all about the advertising how you advertise it and they could not originally advertise on the web or anything that was electronic to do that they just had to sell locally hand to hand selling our people you know he's gonna bottom that's the way it used to be now they can now they can advertise on those of a mail telephone other website things like that this with this well to do okay I'm just confused because when I when we did ours we could do on the internet everywhere else to buy these we did commercials for motivate me we did it so I'm just curious and I know and I'm not sure if that was the legal or not but you like I said I'm only do what they ask us to do so we would be in conflict they would oppose it so. President Sasha recognized thank you madam chair. It for some reason I was thinking raffle here in the state of Arkansas there was a cap that could exceed a certain amount and I understand that was language that. That was based in our constitution that own a raffle it couldn't go over certain amount I can't remember what that amount is this is no way is violating that type of language that agenda constitution or exceeding that amount that's allowed in the constitution is that correct no Sir will. Representative bill you're recognized thank you madam chair of Mister Cozart my understanding in some conversations with senator Boyd that the purpose of this bill is simply to allow fund raising. For some good causes in this state because it's my understanding that casinos. Can go online with online gambling now. And collect money for March tens in the form of gambling and what this bill would do would would allow our Kansans legally to raise money for good causes and currently it is not legal in certain circumstances them to do that in this bill would clarify that in allow our cans to raise money for a good cause is that correct that is correct it was the legal form to do it before because of some of the laws of the gambling casinos are put in place. Are there any other questions. Seeing no other questions there's nobody to sign that speak for the bill or against the bill is there anybody that would like to speak for the bill. Against the bill was the will of the committee. Motion do pass all in favor say aye. Opposed no. Congratulations you pastor bill thank you madam chairman next we have Senate bill sixty six. Senator these are presented back Landon please identify yourself for the record and then you may begin. Staff is passing out an amendment for this bill. I'll give you all a few minutes to go over that amendment. Are you ready to explain your amendment interlace yourself for the record thank you thank you members thank you madam chair Tyler D. Senate district thirty five. At represented many macula den House District ten you may explain your Amendment thank you so much we we have a slight amendment to Senate bill sixty six which we'll discuss more and in detail the amendment today is really a clean up on language to help support and strengthen after talking with with many lawyers throughout different agencies go through those real fast it changes in it at the word war and to the ward and in section on on page three line thirty strengthens the ability to make sure it includes everything on the descriptions and then the rest of the changes that have to do with changing the phrase of may be harmful to is harmful and so just adding clarity of what we're talking about is harmful to children instead of leaving it up for interpretation of it may or may not be harmful we're clarifying that it is harmful I have to take any questions on on those amendments. Are there any questions on the amendment. Thing no questions there anyone that wants to speak against the amendment for the amendment. The will of the committee on the amendment. Motion to pass on the amendment all in favor say aye. Those opposed congratulations pastor Amendment ninety may explain the bill. Thank you members. I appreciate the opportunity to bring this this bill representing the Clinton and I we have make one and I we have been able to work hard on on these issues I'll tell you what we presented and communicated of why this bill is important I'm thankful that we get as a body of of house and Senate members we get to solve problems and this is a problem that's needed to be solved many many parents have reached out and said this is an issue that needs to be taken care of I I view this as a upstream solution based issue that we can actually affect Senate bill sixty six is about protection of of of our minors against harmful material online in the for most of that is **** is so that's what this does it ask for at a reasonable age verification process in order to consume material online in efforts to protect our miners and so that's what this does according to why this matters is because we are seeing damaging ramifications downstream if you will that are affecting our youth affect our culture and so here's some statistics to help drive home what we're seeing according to one of the largest **** sites porn hub the word teen has topped the search engines across their sites for six years running and so they are preying on young and youth and with over five billion hours of a proxy viewed and over thirty three billion individually visits this is definitely an issue affecting our culture child porn is one of the fastest growing online businesses with over fifty five percent of the time is just ten years old or younger. Now in many studies and I think this is this is in very important to realize that many studies are starting to come back to show a linkage to porn use to be directly to tie things idea depression of our youth and we've got to make sure that we as a body figure out how ways that we can help with that many citizens from the National Institute of health are showing that even married couples who are viewing **** are more than twice as likely to divorce or claim of let's fill in relationships and so we're also seeing according National Institute of health a higher rate of sexual violence and abuse against women tied back to consumption and exposure to **** and so it is our attempt that we put in place a bill like this that helps protect upstream helps protect our children that they're not exposed to this type of material. The reasonable age verification process in this bill would be very similar to what you would expect when you go to a convenience store and asked to buy cigarettes or alcohol there's an a reasonable age verification process that's ask for that we as a society have said this is the correct measure to protect people in our in our care and so we have for some reason not taken that care when it comes to online **** and today I believe we're seeing the damaging ramifications of that with some of the statistics I mention before so my prayer for this bill is that not only do we passes for in Arkansas you take a stand here in our state but we sent a loud clear message across the country we're gonna protect our youth protect the people that are most vulnerable which archer our children in our in our future so I'd be honored that we pass this and be happy to take any questions about this bill. Represented the field you're recognized thank you madam chair representative McClendon and Senator dis up commend you for coming forward with this and I agree with everything he said I know that **** is an issue for in a lot of different areas in regards to this bill I've received some emails from my constituents with some concerns about data breaching. can you kind of address that please thank you absolutely thanks for the question so I I to have received some of those concerns and I'll take the language that we have in the bill is purposely addressing some of those concerns in fact we we the teeth that we're putting on this bill is to bring liable charges for if there's damages not only to our youth but also liable charges if there's damages if there are if there's a leak personal data being exposed out there we are not it in fact is against the law to hold the personal data so that's what we're saying here it is it is intended to verify end up there's no there's no intention to hold or consume or capture any personal data in this I'd also add that anybody who does have concerns you should have concerns you should always have concerns about your personal data online I wish you all the whether that's online banking online purchases through Amazon dot com any anything should be held with regard of protective nature but your personal data in so if you are if you have those concerns as an individual I would also tell you if you don't believe that site has the ability to accurately protect your data I would like you not to visit the sites as well and if I can add the way that this is been implemented in other states like Louisiana is that they typically go through a third party identifier would use for a lot of different sites right now it is literally easier to get on a plan have than it is to go look at the Budweiser website so something needs to be done without question but in Louisiana what they do is they have contract with a third party identifier who goes in you you pull up porn have and this pops up and asks you to put in your information you put it in that third party thing is L. A. ID and Louisiana they verify it and then they allow you into the poor have site support have is not capturing any of that data so so if someone were to happen it would be hacking porn have not this third party identifier the third party to a fire that. Is to get rid of your information is in their best interest to be on top of that because otherwise their business model fails so that's how it's typically done. Follows you're recognized the world of photography is an international business so they're these porn sites that are based all over the world. This bill in regards to this process of showing your identification in order to access the sites. And it's my understanding that **** is still the most downloaded viewed. It to tier thing whatever you wanna call it on the internet. I guess what I'm asking is is the scope of **** is so large across the world. I guess can you kind of go into some more detail about the management of of how this propound this is going to work and in the little bit more on the data as to where that information when someone does choose that's of age to view this material when they do scan it and their information is taken where is that information go. So to to clarify your last part first and when they win a consumer goes and in this model on this bill when they insert any personal information where that data go it is it after verified is immediately deleted and that seemed to and that's that's the legislative intent of this process there is no other Legislative intent to hold on or validator checked and other any any other capacities and so you're right this is that it's an epidemic I believe across the across the world in in this right here gives us the ability to say in our state we're going to take a stand in I can tell you we've also had conversations with our our federal delegation as well to encourage that knowledge we we set up our our our our barriers here for our state but this encourages the rest of the country to say we're going to do something federally to take a stand on this and I believe we are seen state after state finally start to say enough is enough for some reason we we have said that we believe the same concept of logic when it comes to alcohol tobacco but we don't do the same way when it comes to online consumption and I I think that I'm not in my district I hear from our parents to say thank you for allowing us to to actually address this issue and that's that's what we're trying to do we are not trying to be big government and control people's lives this is being viewed as a partnership with our parents and that's intent today. Representative Cavenaugh you're recognized thank you madam chair so my question is since this is a worldwide situation that we have with porn it's not just in America it's everywhere it's the most downloaded. How are we going to get these websites be forced to do this how are we going to do that if we've got a if we've got a company in England and they're actually able to access a single at website anywhere in the world so how how are we addressing. That. Sure it's a great question I would say this is the first step in this this helps us put up borders and controls for our state in and I'll be Frank with you I don't believe will be able to stop everything and entities to be able to come up here and tell you that this will stop everything I I believe would be a misconception I do believe it will it will take us in the right direction I can speak personally that I've been reached out to from individuals have said whether he passes or not we are already starting to put a healthy amount of at. The. Consideration for initial individual who said should I be looking that or not you know what I thank you for for putting this concept together because also act have to put my name out there for second or and I identification for second makes it actually a deterrent a little bit of friction is what what the term is a little bit of friction helps deter a little bit of this consumption and so we we we today I believe today we're taking a step forward to send a message to across the other areas where we don't have jurisdiction but today we can stop we can't stop and that's the intent some of the larger website I'm sorry follow up Mr manager you're welcome you're recognized we're talking about international but our jurisdictions Arkansas so how are you going to stop it from California in the state I mean how are we going to make these and I like the concept but I'm just asking in reality how are we going to make a website that's hosted in another state. That's accessed in Arkansas go through this process how are we going to force them to do that. Thank you so I will say some of the the larger porn sites are complying with this because they don't want legal actions brought against them anyway they're gonna be plan websites that kids can find that are going to comply with that and that's just gonna have to be something that we follow up with probably in a different bill but is Senator Teague said this is kind of that first step in trying to protect our children and trying to stop kids from accidentally getting into being able to to access that information. Louisiana also being being a few steps ahead of us on this has seen websites start to comply in in you know I think that's that that is what we're seeing and I'm thankful we're seeing that because we're bringing liable charges were hitting them in their pocket book and we will keep hitting them as much as possible again because I believe this not peddling garbage that's out there is an issue and so you know if if today if this only stops a small percentage it's a worthy cause and that's what we're going going to do it again the intention to the second code is that we encourage other states to as well we take a stand say this is not right we need to be a leader in this and then at the next step would be that we encourage a national view of this so you're right it may not solve all problems but solving where we can. Representative more you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair so. My first question from a lot of follow up at this is. On the amendment and I was trying to figure out how to phrase it when we were passing the amendment I think it's a good amendment but my question is is a substantial portion as defined as one third of the total material site how do you quantify that one third and if I'm not clear further questions is it a certain portion of one third of the data used on the website or is it if it's streaming footage How do we clarify with that one third means I believe is one third of the information that is house there so the accessible not how many times some it's not one third like one is downloaded a hundred times it's not that is one third of what is available on the website is deemed to be pornographic and I believe that number was originally lower and the attorney general's office assets to increase that number. You're recognized for follow up My follow up and I appreciate you to bring this issue because our society our culture is too focused on the sexual is ation of everything in court is a massive problem or are you today it really is my other question is. How do you account for kids getting on there and circumventing this process or not even kids with anybody's argument against process through VPNs or different IP address. That is not addressed so again this is using this is not perfect in anyway and this is not all encompassing and anyway but it is a first step to say what I don't want is my kid to accidentally pull up one half by giving example I worked at a Christian record label and it was in the early days of the internet and I tie I had an album is a great album one of our top sellers it was Caldwell okay so I said you know what we should have a website so cutting edge at the time so I typed in wow and hit enter and instead of my Christian record label computer I got women of the web popped up and I was like to leave so you're saying you can accidentally find that information kids are on the internet all the time and if we can at least put some areas to some of them I think it's a great help we're not gonna get them all by any stretch kids are smarter than we are they can get around all of those things and they know how to get around those things but we can at least start to put those barriers in place to protect them. President of Holcomb you're recognized well I think they just answered my question I was going to ask about the verification process because you know I'm not technology smart like my grand child who's in middle school you can take my phone and just you know. So you know I'm just concerned I'm not concerned I think it's a good bill but I'm as I'm just worried about I know they're gonna be able to get around this verification process how's that going to work is that you go are you gonna show an ID disco fell out of form cannot connect just tell us what's what's taking place there because there again I think our our kids going to get around it somewhere so we'll. Great question and for little bit clarity we do have some some language in the bill it talks about additional identification and I would I would say the most easiest concept you're recognized would be a driver's license something like that driver's license ID driver's license number and that's the intent to to prove age exact like we would do again it's not a foreign concept exactly what you would do when you you pursue a call exactly you do when you go purchase cigarettes but I get that is a little bit different application what's the most online but I can tell you that the concept as it into tallies the same be done for years that's or trying to do we're trying to bring friction into a progressively frictionless world that is that is harming our children I'll say it you know for my children I've got three under thirteen and there is a tablet A. S. phone a watch at all that capacity with internet access your them at all times the most is so anything we can do to stop the for the put friction and barriers to say hold on we're gonna try to protect you that's what this is trying to do and we did just pass the additional ID bill to the house yesterday so that is available for people to have their ID digitized their driver's license digitized and to be able to use that information. Last year yours you're recognized thank you madam chair my question is how is it going to be placed can you explain that to me I know a couple questions have been asked in certain directions but can you tell me how it is going to be placed. Sure so the the teeth to the bill is around liability charges in so if if there's a check if there's an instance where a child has been exposed to inappropriate harmful material as defined here in that site enact content did not follow the age verification requirements then the AG's office is involved as far as bringing charges to be content providers so that's that's the model model is we are seeing children being harmed and hurt across the board so now there's a way for parents to say you should follow you to follow the law one or trying to work on here in so there's actually a damage process for libel charges there in in so what department did you say would be policing that through through the AG's office and that is part of the ages not policing it so that the parents have the cause of action so the pair I as a parent can say Hey you're supposed to have some sort of verification you did not my kid got in in the AG's office will defend that they will defend the parent in that but they are the AG's office is not policing websites to make sure they're doing it. You know the cost of this. The cost the cost to be able to do that I don't to implement this what would you like I think it's a great I think it's great for our children but I'm just trying to figure out coming from a law enforcement background first of all how at least. And how we police said and the cost of that I appreciate the concern there there is not any expected cost with this I believe this is a framework to be able to give our parents the ability to bring litigation to and hold accountable to the harmful material it's this it won't be an agency overhead expense I understand. Thank. Representative Cavenaugh you're recognized. Thank you madam chair. We talk about the safeguards that are in here so I'll be honest with when I was a child appeal to me I could do something not a went right out found a way to do that was just my personality probably still is so just full disclosure probably still is so is it so the safeguard for the company if the child's deals ninety whether it's in the form of a hand held or digital that we just passed what is the safeguard for the company if they did the verification but the child still got on child got caught. Child doesn't say mom dad has told your ID where where is the lab where is the lab billete check off because if the company's doing what they're supposed to be doing and we're dumping the record so we don't really know so I mean we're safeguard for the company against that liability great question the the company they are we are requiring them to H. verify that's it in our that boys in from being liable for any charges. That that's that's the language here that's what that's what's being presented so as long as the the company is following that report then there they are avoiding any libel charges at this bill brings. Follow up manager you're recognized I guess where I'm going through this is. A child if they're going to go looking for they're not going to tell their parents they still their ID and got on and if we're creating a liability that all the parent has to do is go to the AG and I got a question about that about. That they say my child they did show an ID and got on how are we provide that and I'm not trying to defend the porn sites I'm just looking from a business standpoint how are we able to put it safeguard in there that those companies do have a defense that yes I did do it but the challenges to fight one so the company that put like porn have is contracting with a third party identifier so they can verify with that third party identifier that yes we are in place and yes we have been doing that so there's sounds to me that there is actually a safeguard because date the company cans can show proof that they have had this in place of the system hasn't gone down the I mean companies have records of those things even if they don't have record of your ID they record that yes they have been running yes it has been accessed and so they can show that that verification has been in place that I think the next logical conclusion is they use someone else's ID to verify so I think there's some protection there for the company okay and. Does the AG really have the ability to bring lawsuits for individuals so I get mad and I want to go to a G. and I tell him to bring a lawsuit against court or whatever can't we we keep same **** but it's up over and over but. Does that does the AG really have the ability and is that what the AG should be doing handed individual lawsuits we'll fortunately and our Attorney General is is about following all laws for state. And so I I think if he is elected representative and his team is is about protection about take care of this entire state in all those different avenues of capacities and so I believe this will be this this is and worthy enough endeavor that that they will very much so take it take it with all intensity and ensure that our children are protected I understand that but when we start allowing the AG to represent individuals in lawsuits. Do we not open up. Some questions should I not be representing other people because I mean my thing is a represent individual and I'll be honest with that we've had ideas that would represent representatives on a bill that they passed when they got sued so I guess I'm I have a little bit concerned that we're saying telling the agency that you're gonna handle which is essentially a civil lawsuit that you're going to handle that for a citizen rather than this isn't going to a I private lawyer to handle that we're putting it on the state and there is a cost to that to the state. Correct there is there it will be a cost of the eighties involved but I think in the same way that the AG will go out if there's fraud right if there's mail fraud or some sort of mail scam against older people the AG jumps in and it's not the eighty defending the individual is the AG as a state we are going against whoever created that fraud in this case I believe would believe that the agency would be going against porn have because they're violating the laws of Arkansas it is not the AG sitting next to mom in that civil lawsuit. Okay thank you representative Dalby you're recognized thank you madam chair can you just explain to me how you reconcile this bill with the first amendment of the United States constitution the Commerce Clause US constitution and then there's a federal law the freight I don't have that site in front of me but the federal statute regarding the regulation of the internet can you explain how this all melts together would actually could even fit within those ramifications thank you. Great question I think my response that would be that we believe this is constitutional we believe this is in line we believe the the the essence of this in the legislative intent with this bill is is from a a a public need from a a public health issue with what we're seeing with with our children we're seeing downstream effects and so I believe it is still constitutional I believe it is at a point where we've got to stand up and make this change and an interstate as a partner for the parents and I do I do not believe it can conflicts with anything in our constitution and I did check with bill are on the Commerce Clause and she did say excuse me I was looking it up she did say that it would be a question of Trier of fact is how she worded it and that she did not up front you didn't have concerns there was an issue if it did go to a lawsuit and she said that the issue was the Trier of fact determines on how it was brought he was bringing it but up front she was not saying she wasn't ringing any bells. Okay I think I have a couple of questions now I am the rep that got sued to personally by somebody not from our state and the AG's office didn't offend me because I was alluded to on the front page as deann Vaught not representative Dan bot so I don't know that they can actually. That. Work for people outside of a and and representative Cavenaugh made the perfect point because they couldn't do they couldn't defend me because I wasn't on the front cover. Dan because I wasn't representative bought they couldn't even though ninety two pages was nothing but representative Vaught one did the AG thank thank. Actually do this or again I think it's the the AG would be taking action against the website and I guess I'm not not defending mom whose child has view the website a lot of those are two different lawsuits no I understand I do understand but he's still representing I that parents whatever he is going after the the sites he could they could represent me because. Of something very similar to that so I'm just confused and terrified it the clarity that I would like to bring on that would be my intent on communicating AG's role in this is more a holistic view of of defending the law the laws that we pass in it in in this case this law we pass and would defend the ability for civil litigation to go pursue there's been damage is done now court in this that's that's really framework that I meant from the AG's office involvement and so if this were to continue to pass throughout the AG's office would be adequately supporting the ability for this to be executed if you will not necessarily personally representing any damaged or personally even attacking but it but standing behind the the ability for this to be litigated. And that our I have one more question. And I know that we ask about the cost just a second ago. Who is paying porn hub to grab the or to monitor or whatever they're going to be doing nobody's Pat it's a free thing to every state that wants to implement and warn have has to take it upon themselves to do it so it is for them it will be a cost of doing business okay all right and then a I guess there would be a cost if the Attorney General had to courtesy right correct that would that would work where the cost right to me okay thank you very much representative Cavenaugh you're recognized thank you madam chair back to the lawsuit so currently the way the Attorney General works is they don't bring individual lawsuits what they do is a fraud is if fraud is reported to them they will file class action lawsuits for the state of Arkansas when things and they file lawsuits on I mean car dealers everybody else but it's multiple complaints it's not a one on one complaint so is that what we're saying and if one person makes a complaint. The age is going to file a lawsuit or is there going to be because to be honest with the people can make a complaint it might not be ballot and that's why I'm asking as a car dealer who always gets complaint on the card is determined next to lawyers we're probably the most and let people in the world but that's another story so is that what we're saying that the Attorney General to do he's going to handle it like a fraud and so it's going to be depend on how many complaints he gets in no that's not my interpretation of this law and appreciate the clarification that question I don't view it as an individual lawsuit coming from the AG's office at all I I view it as you know I believe how we have it written is it gives the ability for an individual who has been damaged the family's been damaged to be able to bring litigation and and the AG's office has has worked with us on the language to help make sure that that would be able to stand up in court and has advised on that from just a legal mind set in but not necessarily a at AG's office actually being the one that brings the litigation themselves so. I guess so we're going to we're saying that we're creating a civil liability that the person who got on the website the parents that child out on it shouldn't of they can bring a lawsuit against the company then where is the aging in the process because normally in civil litigation you don't have to go to the agent asked to bring that you know mind a bit about this bonds but it didn't happen and so I guess I'm kind of confused or the AG comes sure that's fair and I I'm I'm I I will well I I need not explain that well we worked with their team on the language to make sure that this would pass legal muster if you will and then R. AG does defend our laws that we that we pass you know as as a body and that's that's what I really mean by their involvement by their support if you will but any any any litigation any lawsuit that is brought would be from an individual in a civil manner and they would use and another attorney not that what happened okay thank you thanks for asking. Represent Sabir recognized thank you madam chair I think that that is answered my concerns because there is no where in this bill the Attorney General is never ever mentioned in this bill so it. I think the previous testimony was somewhat misleading so that that is not correct and I guess so now I want to go to What keeps an individual from having a civil cause of action without this bill it appears to me that there is a civil cause of action without even the need to the building can you address that. Yes so the the bill is requiring porn hub sorry representative Cavenaugh requiring the website to have a third party identifier that's the crux of the bill is that you have to verify the I'm sorry I don't have to be third party you have to verify that the age of the person accessing the website I understand that that. But your previous testimony if I understand it maybe I've missed read the bill or misunderstood but your previous testimony was of the harm Effexor duties listed there are I think we're all agreed on that so that's really your cause of action is the harm to the child. Correct correct so that is already a cause of action that can be had without some age verification there I mean because that's what you're basing your cause of action is correct. Right I think you you bring up a good point that I think anybody who can Can bring proof of damages would would have the ability to bring civil litigation I believe this highlights I believe it also provides a solution that if the harmful material does not follow this direction then now they're now they're now they're willing and in which you could argue encouraging potential more damages and so we that's the intent today is you're right there there could be ability for any civil litigation to happen without this bill but I believe this strengthens it I believe it it gives a framework that that shows that the content that's out there that's being exposed to our children if they are if they if they are willingly going to disregard this law it now we're going to say you are legally liable and hopefully the damages would be potentially harm works for them. Representative Cavenaugh you're recognized. We're talking about liability in people's at a thank you madam chair. My they get stolen it could use on this website. What course do I have. It is I mean what what recourse might gonna have if it shows that Fran went to the website when she didn't on the website and now you talk about their their dumping the record but you're also saying the verified and then go back and say they did so with either dumping or they're not dampen and I guess it's kind of like was that medicine and whatever that was that website everybody was getting medicine yeah and so then they were looking at everybody I mean. What safeguards do we have it that happens and governor thank you for the question in the bill we talk about the same type of damages that if if your information whether still or not is exposed is late so they are also liable for that for that for those situations by that verify that verifier does not down your information or if their information before they could dump it is stolen then you do have a cause of action is thank you. Saying no other questions mark. Stodola is here to speak against the bill. For the bill sorry for the bill. Look for. Please introduce yourself who you're with for the record and then you may begin. Thank you madam chair my name is I Mark soda I'm an attorney at least at this point in time having had a couple has on in the past and I am with the barber law firm I represent the motion picture association. And I want to I want to express the support of the motion picture association of for this bill and is intended desire to try and curb the proliferation of of porn access to our minor children I'm I'm I'm here because this is something that obviously is of concern to the major video I the the major a movie studios and everyone that is providing certain content whether it be in the in in movies or whether it be streaming all of the kind of things that we know is happening We work with the we worked with the Senator Deason was representative Michael Linden on some amendments that were put in on today because we have seen this type of litigation we seen this type of legislation be litigated in other states and we wanted to try and help improve it which which in fact these amendments to. And I wanted to express our support for what time. The senator and representative or doing with respect to this legislation I can I can I think help offer a bit of understanding about the issue of the causes of action under this bill certainly from a public policy standpoint the Attorney General might very well be that might very well desire to take some action for violating this statute once passed in terms of sites that are obviously not providing the the kind of of regulation that this is intended to do but it also creates an individual cause of action on behalf of the the individual which would be the parents taking it on behalf of the individual and and taking a cause of action against them as well so it's it's a dual dual area of of of opportunity for taking action if if if if one chooses to do that so I think hopefully that helps clear up a little bit it's very clear on on on In the of language I'll I'm on page five of of the initial a bill which talks about the fact that it creates a cause of action specifically for the individual who who's violated the these the requirements in the statute so. I'm happy to answer any questions if there have to be. Representative Cavenaugh you're recognized thank you madam chair so we're talking about the the civil liability that we're talking about that candidate's done and we're talking about an individual breaking it against a company but how does the company have a defense if they don't have any record of the ID that was used to to access that I mean do they have any defensive thank what what defense are they gonna have to say or can somebody just say you didn't do it my process is this and well I think that the effort here is to make sure that you have that third party there that has documentation that verifies that that they have that they have done that check they have done that verification that would be a defense that they would have if there's an action is brought against them but they don't keep the information so they could not say that the ID what ID was used is that not correct. They dump the records is a testimony well I don't know exactly when they don't the record Well that was another concern that they help they dumped it quickly I think I know they can't retain the information but whether or not whether there's a length of time on that I'm I'm I'm sorry I. That was not our particular issue we wanted we were actually putting amendment sent to try to galvanize it against future litigation that we would anticipate might come. With the passage of this of this particular act in follow up manager you're recognized and I know you said you're with the movie supp the motion picture association that's correct what Steps do you all have to keep children from getting and appoint a motion pictures. Well I mean the motion picture association has a very strong process that they've had in place for many many years on movie right and they do not participate in in whole twenty graphic a distribution of movies I mean they have a they have aye aye aye I think probably everybody's aware they have a they have a movie rating system based on age. I'll and based on content and that's what they have been using successfully for years I've represented the motion picture association I think since probably two thousand seven. with a little hiatus in there when I was in public office but other than that I mean I can tell you that over the years that's been very very effective in in dealing with the issue of the distribution of movies through the major movie studios yes and I guess I'm talking about since we have so much stream in the movies now so how are we able to verify that that person that stream in a movie though it may be X. rated is not actually under the age or if it's R. rated or or what it is is do y'all have any process the reason I'm trying to say is it or if you've had a process this work will could it not be same with the association. Any of the member is so any of the member companies submit their submit their content for review for a rating from the motion picture association. But shall not include Travelex or pornographic but if a child is streaming information well that but again again that's not that's not I mean is similar to what the representative met Macklin and indicated I mean we. There may be there may be sites out there that where international sites that we don't have any control of their not members of the association they're not part of what we what we regulate Cadillac Disney plus you you don't you don't regulate any of the stuff that streams to them or HBR nine okay only only the membership but but that covers a vast you know covers all the major motion picture studios and some of the streaming services as well or are members okay thank you. Thing no other questions thank you for thank you to my manager there's no one signed up to speak against the bill is there anyone that would like to speak against the bill. Sing NO one which ought to close for your bill. Thank you members at this is an important bill it's it's one that I know I bring as a father with three young children that I take seriously I can I can speak to that from that context I know I've got a a twelve ten five year old and when we go to travel basketball games and in my my kids are with other twelve ten eleven twelve thirteen year olds and half of them have cell phones already we don't have in our house for our kids but they are passed around content easily accessible and I know that that is harmful and damaging to our youth is causing ramifications downstream I'm I'm doing everything I can as a parent to help guard them from that and I I can say I'm doing everything I can I can as a Senate member to make sure that we stand in the gap for parents to partner with them to help this and that's what this bill does it help our parents have another step another piece of friction to make sure that our children are exposed to harmful material online now the everything I can to to defend that so president Clinton yes thank you all very much for hearing the bill just I agree with senator dis I have four kids I've worked hard I've home schooled them for her to protect them from things that I don't think they should be seen because of their age and I think that is our job as parents but I also think as legislators that is our job our job is to protect those people who can't protect themselves kids make bad choices they don't know any better in as representative Cavenaugh said sometimes we have kids who just want to do the things because it will not to but it is our job as legislators to make sure that we are protecting our children from things that they should be exposed to that and I ask for a good vote. What is the will of the committee. Seeing a motion your bill can't advance at this time. Thank you members. We have no other business so this meeting is adjourned.