Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee- House

Against the bill please sign up and we have a sheet out there you can sign up. So committee we have to bills this morning. And we will start we'll get into this because we have other meetings coming up later so we'll try to get this done before we have a conflict so we'll start with the S. B. seven thirty two Senator Johnson if you would go on the on the table to present your bill. Please introduce yourself for the record. Senator Blake Johnson district twenty Preciado opportunity chair members to present this bill my bill about coercion the backs a rag. For all people in the state of Arkansas not just in. And. It adds enough in the Arkansas code much like federal code is already it has the mathematical content occasions and the religious. Religiously religious exemption. in that in Arkansas Code now is philosophical beliefs so we mehr that and title seven and in Arkansas Code in this and title twenty so that's the exemptions that is in this bill and and whenever whenever I change with the amendments there was a. Possible penalty for incentives for for getting the vaccine and that was not my intention so I change that on my end so if you incentivize again that is an employer then you're not you're not going to be a under the US as a core aeration and also it includes any other federal funding and it does not include state funding so how would this how will this bill help anybody besides employment. If you're a if you're a business owner under persons the definition of persons on page two line seven. Any natural person corporation firm partnership limited partnership trust association or any other legal or commercial entity so it this is not just for use in visual but those persons that we recognize so if your subcontractor or something for a business that is requiring. The vaccine. You can't be coerced without these exemptions being considered. That's pretty much the bill in its. Entirety. So senator You said incentives are not in this bill now the if if you give an incentive for forgetting a vaccine that's not you know it's it's a positive so on one line thirty five page one. is where that is. However pop other positive incentives that are above and beyond expected cop a compensation benefits and employment shall not be included in the term coworkers. Right any questions from committee. Representative Payton you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr. Senator We've all been focused a lot we have another bill earlier than that with the employer employee relationship and I noticed this bill goes beyond that to citizen on citizen but also business on business so You know we've we've had I've had calls and emails from businesses they had no intention of of implementing a mandate but another business they do business with. I was trying to force them as a supplier yes to do a vaccine mandate is that what this bill addresses it It is and. This bill because the definition of person. Of a business that would want to require of its. Rating partner businesses. A consideration for these exemptions would have to be in there okay thank you. Thank you Mr president Boyd you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair so I just want to clarify it when I read this I don't see anything about us fine or this being a criminal act by the business or individual to coerce by twenty dash seven dash one seems to be a criminal code where would make it a misdemeanor for every day that that this happened is that mine in my understanding that correctly help me understand that it would give a possibility for civil action if if they could you know be if if these things were done it we get it we give them reason for civil action. Follow Mr yes you're recognized but it would not cause a misdemeanor which would imply a criminal I hadn't I hadn't seen that so. If the question is represented Bentley you're recognized. Representative Johnson Thank you for this adventure subcontracted out talk to me daily about this I would you agree that looking at the pleasure of the medically contraindicated that there are reported in the bears support over seven hundred fifty thousand reports of adverse reactions that gives should give some persons and legitimize some persons concerns about medical country indication as for this vaccine thank you Sir. Representative Pilkington you're recognized for a question thank you chairman Ladyman Senator Johnson can you give me a little more flushed out okay definition of of philosophical beliefs and how that is different than someone's religious beliefs you can give me some examples of when someone might have a fill Civil philosophical I believe that would prevent them from getting a vaccine that wouldn't be a religious one well region Pilkington those those were put in Arkansas Code whatever religious belief was challenged and I think it was written Arkansas Code in two thousand three in the educational immunization vaccination. Schools those have not been defined and. Allowed to be defined by the court. So you know the the religious and philosophical or very similar you can have sipil soft release without them being religious deeply held philosophical beliefs without being. Part of. Don't have religion and they have Phyllis I. It gives it is more broad for the first amendment to be considered so that's that that's what was taken in court in the federal courts said whenever ours is just religious was thrown out and was in. Okay thank you. Representative Dotson you're recognized thank you Mister senator Johnson as I'm reading through this. It seems to me as if the you've said that someone could bring a civil action I guess since against an employer under this I'm trying to find that in here it looks to me as if the employee can only seek lost wages according to the definition of this bill that's a remedy that's in here that I'm not all remedies if you're going to include that all remedies I mean there would be a. Let me and ever built we ever file so it's more expensive than what is just in I mean defined it as a limit that I mean I I guess you could put that in the bill. The That's a remedy this that is not considered now but these other. And the the. Lost wages that they would seek. It seems to be these would be payable by available federal funds yes exclusively the yes the state funds I did not mention that purpose with because I do not want to get in our budget so if there's federal funds available those are from funds run through. In mid term election and the possibility of a changing how those funds are are done there are other. For displacement through the actions is been taken prior to that so there no federal funds available the unemployment wages would not be that they would not be able to seek them this under this yeah this is not this is equal to just like whenever you're all the filings for the R. but funds this would be a possibility this is not putting money into an employee. Allowed them to ask us. So would be on top of unemployment stacking. Well if you if you get something like that then it affects your. In a moment to. Thank you. President Wardlaw you're recognized. Faller representative boy each question and he was he was actually on something Which is good represent what is very smart is reason I listen to it. When you look at section twenty dash seven dash one one which is what he was referring to on the misdemeanors and finds. This bill is actually going to be twenty seven twenty dash seven dash one thirty six. Which means that it will pertain to everything in that section so that the answer is yes this bill will create a misdemeanor antiphon for those persons that violate the things this bill sets up for those subcontractors do you agree or disagree with that senator Johnson well there's two smart guys saying it will so I'll agree with you. Okay with that. Somewhat devastating to our businesses wouldn't be a five hundred dollar fine not to a five hundred dollar fine we speak legally I make I I just pulled it all up and read it. Not if they consider the exemptions that are already pretty much and and federal law Mr follow up please. Yeah but you got to stay on the subject the bill is not on the subject I am a hundred percent on the subject so if I hospital in a federal contractor cannot follow this law. Because CMS an offence say X.. You're saying that we should find those people because they didn't follow the law because disappear being made them do one thing static correct superior in what way federal federal government federal government says everybody takes Medicare Medicaid is going to have to vaccinate we don't have the rules but that's what we know so if we have to vaccinate because we take Medicare Medicaid are we going to be fined and ticketed for misdemeanor our businesses never seen a business get fined for misdemeanor but I guess they can happen. I hadn't seen the rules. And that's not wine. Bill to to help the persons of Arkansas whether it may be corporation against corporation and that is not you know that was not in consideration. Yeah the things that are not in place. Representative Payton you're recognized. Thank you Mister senator I was pulling up the section a code that we've been a question in there and it's true that twenty seven twenty dash seven dash one oh one. The first paragraph talks about every firm person corporation of violates this act this section of code the subject to a fine of a hundred to five hundred dollars. But I I found it very interesting and you I'm wondering if you're aware of this but the third paragraph. Says during the corona virus twenty nineteen public health emergency a farm person or corporation is not liable under subdivisions of this section. can't be fined. Paragraph four very similar during the coronavirus virus twenty nineteen public health emergency other state agencies so some of this section a code is already had all the penalties wiped out of it for anything that resembles corona virus and I just wondered if if you are aware that. Well I appreciate that the representative Payton and and a sounds like the it's a moot factor and and it is just I mean this bill is specifically for this situation. And this time under corona virus in this but actually it's not a general provisions that apply across all vaccines in the future providers. Yes. In fact your I think your bill specifically narrows at the corona virus does not yes so it would be impossible for the penalties in paragraph one to be applied to anything your bill does because of paragraph three of four. Yes thank you thank you Mr. Resented Bentley you're recognized. Thank you chairman senator Johnson have you up like myself heard from your constituents that they have been denied religious exemptions when they have filed those collaborations I've seen a I've been forwarded those I don't know if they're in my district specifically but I've been forwarded those. In my district so your help your hope that this bill will help those. That would be my hope thank you Sir. The other questions. Seeing seeing none we do have some people signed up to speak for against the bill. So. We have a number of people that are signed up to speak on the bill and I'm going to ask those to come forward first. Jim Hudson. And my first in my Christian. Gentlemen if you would please introduce yourself and who you represent the record Mike Preston secretary of commerce. Jim Dotson department commerce. You're recognized to present. Thank you Mr chairman and thank you to centered Johnson and usually Senator Johnson I of support all his legislation on this when we're a little bit a part on it so I just wanted to come on behalf of the department of commerce and convey our concerns with the bill I think a lot of it was just pointed out by some of the members obviously the detriment to our businesses you know forget the fact on economic development in recruiting with the disadvantage but the to our existing industries who are already here part of the issue that comes up about the funds that we made available in lost wages as a consultant through the FNA has talked about that are both fun to not be allowed to be used for this so the mechanism in which is I think people have to try to go through would be our unemployment insurance trust fund this body is going to great lengths to make sure that trust fund is solvent and above and and in the area that's going to cause it automatic trigger which would essentially be attacks on our businesses. If you look where this comes into an and we ran the numbers on it you know the maximum you I benefit that someone could realize the seventy two hundred sixteen dollars typically an average claim is less about half that about thirty five hundred. So freshly one percent of our work forces impacted on that that's fourteen thousand people such a range anywhere from forty nine million two hundred one million impacted that you're looking at our unemployment insurance trust fund that's going to end it initiates an automatic triggers that would allow our businesses to have to increase their experience rating increase the business is cost to them additionally there's no cap on this so I'm just using very conservative number of one percent that could go much higher than that which again would have a very detrimental impact to our trust fund. Thank you. Mr if I may just add a couple just to smaller more administrator points but I think they're important points to that the committee was getting to just a few moments ago the bill is a somewhat generic in terms of the mechanisms for filing claims there is no agency this designated as the agency to educate claims and so who's to receive the claim and how are they to actually process that from which funds are going to pay you have any benefits to somebody that that is absent from the statute nor is there any statutory grant for rule making and so we don't know the lead agency is we don't know if that agencies empowered to flesh this out so to speak any rule making that any agency would do is a creature the statute and the statute doesn't give us that authority and so this is as specific as it can get and I think it is still you know very very general in terms of market sector prestigious making as well even if the unemployment trust fund awfully didn't have to pay it somebody would be looked to as a source of funds and so for a range of liability between fifty million eight hundred million if that ultimately as was suggested by by Senator Johnson that could be a cause of action now you're talking about civil lawsuits of a penalty of fifty to a hundred million dollars for every one percent of the work force axing actually takes advantage of this of five percent take advantage of it you can potentially a five million dollar exposure you know for companies in Arkansas. Thank you Sir that will take any questions. Representative Gonzalez you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr Senator president you said that you mention in automatic trigger that would cause them to pay unemployment where did you find that in the bill because I I didn't see that it says specifically that it would be paid from the American rescue plan but there's nothing in here referencing unemployment that I saw will I I think that speaks to Mr Hudson's pointed because there are no funds or or deem not eligible the next most likely source would be the unemployment insurance trust fund because that's what we have available to support lost wages so it doesn't speak to it specifically but will be probably the most likely scenario and if it's not then who is going to pay for it okay but it's not an automatic trigger it doesn't it doesn't it will be an automatic trigger if it was utilized in the trust fund was used and spend down to the numbers that we're seeing here so I'm just using the average of what it potentially would be if that is the source but my point is that it doesn't require the unemployment to pay this if the funds aren't available it I mean they would be eligible for unemployment let mistrust you testified on the bill the on a couple other bills I believe that. If someone is fired in a case like this that they can file for unemployment potentially be eligible for employment. Regardless right so how is this any different from from the previous ones we've heard on the unemployment issue yeah so Bruce what we discussed was someone filing a claim under existing law and I guess I shouldn't committee back and forth between United even that it's a facts and circumstances test it's not an automatic they'd have to prevent present the evidence employer it's not ten percent the evidence as well and the claims adjudicated by a neutral third party in this case Division workforce services this particulars bill tipped the scales and it does I think create more of an automatic scenario the the the funding issue I think the secretary is referring to is different statutes when the trust fund balance for unemployment falls below a certain amount there are some taxation measures that kick in for employers to bring that funding mechanism back up to it the needed amount if we're talking about potential five hundred million dollar exposure trust fund balance today is about a hundred fifty million dollars so it could potentially take out two thirds of the trust fund balance as it stands today. So what is that trigger that you speak of. I have to get you specific numbers but once it falls below five hundred million in the five hundred million to three fifty million there's an additional tax that employers have to pay to keep the stabilization stabilize Trust Fund. Thank you. Representative Bentley you're recognized. Thank you chairman Secretary person could business is not just avoid this if this fall this exemptions that are already in federal law and follow these exemptions at centre Johnson spring for this would simply because they would not have a reasonable one point which is that not follow through to use if they would just follow these exemptions of all the current exemptions under federal law they would not have this issue somebody filed for employment yes ma'am. Representative Wardlaw you're recognized thank you senator Preston of president Payton alluded while ago that these these fines and penalties were exempt one corona was the reason. The reading this bill thank you and talking to a few attorneys it looks like that's only true if we're under an emergency so and I see Mr hunt's and nine cents is that emergency ended last week there would be no exemptions for those people following federal law today and you would be fined and penalized with that misdemeanor is that correct I'm not attorney but that is my interpretation of it yes thank you. Presented Payton did you have another question. Yes Sir thank recognized thank you Mr so I was listening to your fiscal impact. Analysis. On the unemployment. And. I mean do you just. Is that based on the premises or an assumption that the businesses that want to implement. Or course or force people take the vaccine or just going to ignore the the law and and operate normally and create. demand on the unemployment trust fund I. Your your whole fiscal impact seems to be based off the premise that business is going to ignore the law and create demand against the unemployment trust fund my premise on the fiscal impact is that ninety nine percent of businesses comply so I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to to businesses that they're going to comply and it's going to work as it should we're saying one percent we just want to put in perspective of one this impacts one percent of the work force that's what the impact would be thank you for clarifying that. Resented Dotson you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair So I guess I'm. I'm not completely clear on what the American rescue. Plan act funds can totally be used for by comparison to what I'm more familiar with cares Act funds I know last year we reimburse the unemployment trust fund out of those federal funds I can't remember hundred sixty million dollars or something like that number and so Can the arpa funds be used to reimburse the unemployment trust fund is that allowable expense it is allowable expense for lease to for to to Mister Hudson was had some conversation with the C. tech Haggerty folks well it's you know that the statute itself gets very particular about how much money you can put into a trust fund using our own funds there's actually a reference date for that it's for me the prior to cope and you can bring about. This man and our calculation that would suggest that the most that we can put in the trust fund babies. Under terms of the future are allocation the hope on that was that if we were to do that we can use that funding to provide a non shall. Body has to pass statute and during the during the session saying that you gave a Director Childress that authority to do that so that we don't harm trust fund we're able to kind of give the employers for some relief for the latter part of twenty twenty one they're still seek. We have to use our funds to you you know fun part of this that we would be able to. Okay. So If these federal funds are not available within this the framework of this bill you're saying this bill changes the current status quo as far as what the state law is. And would trigger more unemployment claims. My understanding that correctly yeah I think to be clear. The bill is unclear as to what the exact funding mechanism is going mechanisms. Funds he uses this very general statement other federal funds so you know I don't trust fund has some federal funds and you know I think that's the thing we have to acknowledge as employer contributions in there but there's money challenge to from the phone number as well and so you know what are the federal funds are gonna get tapped to fund this it is it's very very big it was so it's your contention that. Potentially the unemployment trust funds which have federal funds in there could be used with this law in order to reach into the unemployment trust fund and pay claims yeah I don't think it takes to clever lawyer to look for any funding source possible to fund his or her legal claims. Yeah do you have any idea what percentage of federal funds are in that. I don't want trust fund good day and I don't know okay thank you. The other questions from committee. Seeing none thank you for your comments. Lowthian you would please come in the table. Please introduce yourself for the record. All of your Department Fund is ministration thank you you're recognized thank you I have one comment to make it's about the art of funding. as discussed earlier the Arkansans are not eligible to be used to pay these claims directly. As outlined. Page two line twenty six. I'm not aware of any other funding source that would be available either. The only comments yes Sir the any questions from committee. Seeing none. Thank you thank you for your comment. Mark white you would please go the in the table. Please introduce yourself and who you represent thank you Sir Clark what department and services no spoke with me before about the possible impact of these bills on the seven healthcare facilities were operate donor repave a lot of ground there I you know as I said no we have some still is where we have more than three thousand ploys caring for more than a thousand clients who live in this facility total federal funding about hundred thirty million dollars the update I want to bring you is this late last week the federal government released additional guidance on how vaccine mandates to apply for federal employees just wanna know for you that in that guidance while they do allow for religious exemption they do not recognize the philosophical exemption so if CMS issues got issues got is that consistent with what they're now doing for federal employees that does mean that this bill will conflict with that CMS requirement and social make sure the commander stands with that new development I would that be happy to answer any questions. Representative Wardlaw you're recognized. So Mr white as long as we're not in an emergency this conflict would cause a finding a misdemeanor to be a placed on those employers for following federal law is that correct yes Sir thank you. Other questions from committee. Seeing none thank you for your comments thank you. Okay committee we have a number of people. For and against so we will start out with. Speaking against the bill. Ben Gilmore. I'm sorry I'm sorry that's thirty nine excuse me. We need to look you would please go in the table. And please introduce yourself and who you represent. Thank you Mr chairman Randy Zook Arkansas state chamber of commerce you're recognized. B. as in earlier conversations and testimony about this and similar bills still there remain two overarching issues or concerns with. It's simply a government over reach into the employee employer relationship and imposes on reasonable mandates on private businesses and business owners across the state. And it puts Arkansas companies and small businesses in the position of determining whether to follow state law or federal law. Many Arkansas businesses large and small have put vaccine policies in place relying on federal EEOC guidelines Gavin's. Under that guidance which interprets existing federal law an employer who implements a vaccine policy must include exemptions for medical reasons and religious beliefs the religious belief guidance is broad and it also includes moral and ethical beliefs income you can can even include opposition to receiving injections of certain chemicals but this bill takes things even further to require that employers consider the person's philosophical beliefs what does that term mean the term is not defined in the legislation does it simply mean I disagree with the vaccine I don't like needles or I have some other. Questionable. Philosophical expression. Not necessarily view it could under this bill this is a case were broadly undefined exemption. Would swallow the rule and effectively do away with the business owners ability to set a policy requiring vaccines and do away with their ability to operate their business in the way they think best keeps their employees and customers site and now we've heard discussion this morning about this applying to subcontractors I would raise the question does not apply to the maintenance people who serve my office building and I'm not allowed to require them and their employees to be vaccinated before they enter our premises to clean our office. Does that apply applied to delivery services can you not specified to a delivery company that whoever brings packages to your office has to be vaccinated in order to enter does that not applied to the pest control company that serves our business can we not require this the technician be vaccinated to enter our premises and service does this apply to any service so not only are we telling business owners how they can deal with their employees now we're telling them that they cannot coerce a subcontractor by saying if you don't meet this requirement we will terminate our contract. So we're now interfering with contractual rights with the Serbs is what subcontractors as well as employees. And I guess said that basically of the points that would like to raise this morning I'll be happy to take any questions. Any questions from committee. Seeing none thank you for your county is. Okay to speak for the bill the Craig Matthews would come to me in the table. Please introduce yourself and who you represent. Good morning Mr chairman honorable members Craig Matthews just a private citizen I just like to say we've heard a lot about federal legality versus state legality and is representative Bentley pointed out a clearly philosophical and religious exemptions are in trying to codified in Arkansas state law which to my limited understanding of the Republic we live in trump's federal law but I admit I'm not a legislator so I don't want to but to define the idea of conformed and sent informed consent since we've heard a lot about the contractual rights of businesses which and once again my limited understanding do not apply to the bodies of their employees regardless of what other contractual obligations they may hold but I would like to read to you from the United Nations document this is the UNESCO universal declaration on bioethics and human rights which was signed as a treaty by the U. S. so hold the weight of international law and human rights law. And it states. Under article three human dignity and human rights of line to the interest and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society. An article six under consent. Any preventive diagnostic or therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior free and informed consent of the person concerned based on adequate information the consent should where appropriate be express and may be withdrawn by the person at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice and without being redundant I would argue that this holds the weight of law since it was signed on to by the United States. And also I would just like to read from vitamins chart of coercion this is a chart used in cases of war crimes and increasingly increasingly now being applied to domestic violence issues. It states one of the methods of coercion. Makes resistance more costly than compliance I think clearly we've seen a lot of that at the federal level starting off with bribes and now would force creates anxiety and despair by outlining cost of non compliance. Suggests futility of resistance and develops habits of compliance and with respect to the chairs time members time that's all I have. Representative Dotson you're recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chair You you reference that is the treaty the United States is entered into so it's binding upon the federal government as well as states I guess it are you contending that if we have some sort of federal mandate coming down that you it would be subject to litigation based off this treaty that the federal government would be in violation of with respect Sir I'm not sure I'm knowledgeable enough to answer that question but it certainly seems to me that at the very least there is a conflict but I've I'm sorry I don't really know enough to answer as far as litigation we go thank you thank. The other questions from committee. C. nine thank you for your comments. You speak for the bill Wayne beach if you would come the on the table. Please lose yourself and who you represent. Make sure you get this thing out. I'm going beach I'm representing myself. Analyzed I look at this. This real simple deal here. We've got we've got evidence we get testimony from both the CDC. International health folks and the bite administration. That you can take all the shot you want including all three of the butcher to. And you can still carry the fires you can still spread. Tell me something. If you can still spread it have to take the vaccine how can you for somebody to take a vaccine if you still spreader the guy that goes down there and works on your building it just contractor. You know what he's been. Twenty shows up there. He could still be vaccinated and instill courage that the person to your facility. So actually trying to. For some. Somebody take a vaccine that doesn't work. In it works for that person but it doesn't protect the rest of public. I just want to bring that out. Did you say I look back at the constitution and a look back at Thomas Hobbes was a big influence back in the sixteen hundreds of big influence on how or how our founders actually looked at the constitution and how it was actually brought up. I believe that every individual. Every individual. Has the right to make his choices. His choice. The individual is also responsible and accountable. And must accept the consequences of his personal choices. And that's all I have to say thank you very much. Any questions from committee. C. nine thank you for your comments. To speak for the bill Paul Colbert you would please come to the in the table. Please introduce yourself and who you represent. Yes my name is Paul Calvert I appreciate your time today The so one of the things that This bill kind of give me some heartburn over the rain is a kind of brought up some. At some point so I'm sympathetic to the free market principles of of business owner of private business owners should be allowed to make decisions about their business. And even if they're on reasonable decisions they should be able to be allowed to make those decisions and fire people who don't want to comply with them because it's their private business. so I am sympathetic to that a really great deal however. In a lot of cases we're talking about businesses that have become so entangled with government that they're not private businesses to a great extent anymore. And so. it. It gives me pause. To consider the the possibility of supporting legislation that maybe would take away some of these. freedoms if you will from businesses that may not actually be quite private anymore because there's so much entanglement between private business and government that. There's not a lot of separation sometimes and so that that's kind of. My rationale for being able to support this that I normally would not be able to support and and so that's. Where I am thank you. Centreboard you're recognized for a question. Mr caller thank you for being here today and I think we all have you know concerns one way or the other I mean I we understand the need balanced with what is this do long term so on some level the the what we're talking about free markets and consumers are making a choice and they continue to. Support these larger businesses rather than the small independent businesses so. I guess my question is is this the right way to regulate the market or is there something that we should do to stimulate competition somewhere else so that people might have other choices thank you. It's a good question so that the I think one of the one of the problems that we have is we've got So much government involvement and we don't have a good. Desire to de regulate in such a way that we could actually make free markets possible and the so what when when government. Regulate so heavily that we have one choice or only a couple of choices and a lot of us if if Walmart sells milk for three dollars a gallon or the mom and pop store sells it for eight dollars a gallon. Most of us don't feel like we have enough. ready cash. To justify spending eight dollars a gallon milk so we go to Walmart and buy it at three dollars a gallon. In the end there's examples of that all across. The the way that it probably some of us have known small business owners of the past that. That They can't buy wholesale products. For the price. That Walmart sells the retail or not and I'm using Walmart for example but it could be many other large box type stores and and so that small businesses cannot compete for prices standpoint not I like my neighbors so I might go ahead and hire him to do whatever it might be and I might pay extra for that but I can't always justify spending the extra money to hire my friends and neighbors. When they really just can't compete on a financial basis I'd be better off to just write them a check for five hundred dollars and say Hey I like you but I'm gonna hire this other guy that's going to save me a thousand dollars per year price and that's That's kinda where rats sometimes there's so much government involvement already that give some of these very large operators such a severe advantage over others because they've been so involved in and in politics and and the the laws are in their favor if that makes any sense at all. Any other questions from committee. Seeing none thank you for your comments thank you Committee. To speak for the bill heather beach if you would come to the on the table. Please introduce yourself and who you represent good morning my name is heather beach I am a small business owner here in Pulaski County. I am so I own a architectural design company I'm also a contractor a business client a at building contractor so I understand government regulations and how they hinder my business I deal with city building codes day so I understand this I understand too much government regulations as Republicans and we should be for private property unless government however the foundation of our constitution is based on individual rights and I think that's something that we all need to remember Also as a business owner. I don't feel comfortable telling my employees that they should get a vaccine I just don't feel like that's my business that should be something that's personal between them and their physician plus you don't know what people's the background is what they had a and three medical health condition I'm such as I am my best friend who is a thirty seven year old a breast cancer survivor and she is still under chemotherapy one of the side effects to the vaccine as blood clots and that's also a side effect to the chemotherapy so um she's a single mother she is the sole provider for her family there is no father income coming in she's a radiographers so she does make pretty good money but this is her this is only income that she has she just received an email last week stating pretty much you get the backs or you're fired and she'd they're not offering any type of medical exemptions or anything so you know and she works for Baptist hospital Baptist hospital is one of the largest hospitals and clinics in Arkansas so you know it is not just bad this is altogether hospitals too so she has to go to work so is the biggest faxed or she's fired you know and what is she gonna do how she can provide for her family I think that's something that we all need to really consider is that you know this isn't a one size fits all of these vaccines so we really need to consider you know being able to have medical exemptions religious exemptions I just I think you know. Everyone in this room it doesn't matter if you are a Republican or you're a Democrat. We all know that this is wrong if we know it deep down in our service we know that it is wrong for us to have this mandate on people you should always consider people's individual rights and as far as you Mr Dick back there I'm. I would like to see a list of the businesses that you actually represent I know I've seen you in here several times and that you represent thirteen hundred something businesses in Arkansas but so you do not represent mine but nor do you represent a lot of my friends businesses so anyway that's all I have to say Daddy questions. Any questions from committee. Representative Alan you're recognized thank you Mr chairman I think education nine at the beach okay miss beach would you agree that every time we pass a bill up here aw in other states that the mandate. Not necessarily now I'm. Okay. Okay thank you. But quite understand what you said so was that you said that like all the bill that we passed our mandates every bill that we passed appeal is amended now I don't think anything is a mandate I don't know and I know that mandates are not laws. Okay thank you yeah. Any other questions from committee. Seeing none thank you for your comments yes thank you. Okay to speak for the bill. Libourne Robertson I don't I get that right or not please come the in the table. Please introduce yourself I may have messed up your name there. Most state. Please enter self and who you represent yes Sir my name's Levine a Robertson live around Searcy I'm actually representing my family and all of Arkansas I have many friends that are business owners I have friends who work in professorships your friends your guts library in universities Is nurses doctors as coca Cola distributors as in filling up the machines at the different stores also a stalkers all these different places I myself In the care giver AV of permanently and totally disabled spouse who is deployed nine times to protect so all of the rights and freedoms of everyone sitting in this room everyone in Arkansas and everyone in the United States of America which seemingly seems to no longer matter to most of the people who are our representatives and that would be in all three branches not just the executive branch because it's not as if just one administration has started pushing these mandates or these laws are. These executive orders or all of the slippery slope items this is been coming down the pike My husband took the anthrax vaccine. three different versions of it because it was experimental then and since there are laws put in place to not be allowed to experiment on our military members you have to go before Congress and get permission to use the medication that hasn't been FDA approved to use for national security reasons during wartime. And so that was approved for our military members. So he took that medication multiple times twenty seven injections if I remember correctly. And because of that he has seizures he's Parkinson like tremors his dementia spells he has permanent nerve damage he has thirty seven service connected disabilities along with others that are service connected but I just don't want to go to that process anymore because it's horrible. That was a vaccine that wasn't properly study for its usage it was due for a emergency use. Now military members at that time had no exemptions there were no way to say no this isn't been properly studied this hasn't been properly vetted I don't know how it's going to affect me while I'm trying to protect everyone. So they just took it and there are the contracts they sign their bodies away they essentially when they sign up for the military become property of the United States of America and they're okay with that my husband was okay with that I was okay with that because we were protecting the constitutional rights of everybody else and we were okay with that we made that sacrifice. However. It only destroyed my husband's. We destroyed thousands upon thousands upon thousands of military veterans. To the point that that anthrax vaccine debacle put in motion exemptions for military members that never existed before. I would appreciate if people would listen because it's actually importance. My husband is currently disabled is important House member that's ignoring means speaking of into the table is disrespectful. Please proceed. I apologize. Now. The exemptions are put in place for them now right now all the exemptions for the military or even being used the way they were meant to be use their military and religious exemptions only not philosophical which I will cover for the supplement because some people seem to be confused about this. And I am a little long winded so I do apologize chair. But. The religious and medical or the only things allowed for the military and then the religious supposed to be approved by the chaplain and the medical approved by the medical personnel no right no that's not the way it's being treated because for some reason too many exemptions are being approved so they decided that now only command is to approve the vaccination exemptions that's kind of messed up. Now. This is something you will have to think about. If the military putting exemptions for something that was rushed and disabled so committee members because it wasn't properly studied. Now we have big businesses. And the chamber of commerce who speaks for so many businesses. And all of these other saying that the constituents and the employees do not deserve the minimum rights of saying that we should have the right to say something does not belong injected into our bodies because it has not been studied the proper amount of time it has not been properly vetted it has a large amount of adverse reactions so much so that I have family members that. I have thirty nine percent. Hurt. Functionality like they will die before a heart ever becomes available. There's something wrong when your employer is saying that you don't have a choice. Like Chris Beachum was saying aye. When you've gone through cancer and chemotherapy and and you have a high risk of blood clots you're being told you have no choice but to get an injection that may cause you to have blood clots Furthermore that you or your risk for but you can't get exemption in my family's case we would use all three exemptions medical wise we would have a medical exemption because of a certain of thing because of the the mammalian lifted that encapsulates. Arounds but only certain doctors right watchfully recognized that exemption we would have a religious exemption but your employer gets to choose whether they accept a religious exemption if I worked for Tyson that would mean that I would not get to work for a year so they want to fire me but they would be paid leave for a year it's basically fired I would still lose my house. So think about that I will pay my utilities I can't pay for my house and I can't buy groceries so I still end up with children who are starving I have eight children so you guys can figure out the food bill there. on the philosophical. Philosophical belief is anything that would not be typically covered under religious beliefs that doesn't mean that you're not a religious person you can be a religious person but you may not believe that your personal religious tenets. Are being abused or costed by about. Things so you choose a philosophical it also means that maybe you're agnostic or atheist. And you have a strong philosophical personal life believe that you is being accosted by this thing but whatever medical. In whether it be this vaccine or whatever medical procedure now. It also may be the fact that you have a strong constitutional believe life liberty pursuit of happiness I believe paying my mortgage. Feeding my children. Being able to pay for prescription medication. All part of my pursuit of happiness and I don't know surviving. Mr trump's and I hate to cut you off but we're limited on time I understand your liver. One this covering fills all the because you got the ball out about philosophical what it is and no one's been able to answer and legally according to the Supreme Court and multiple states they've spoken about philosophical beliefs are and this is what philosophical beliefs are courting to those. According to philosophical also couldn't covers those those constitutional beliefs which also means liberty which means my body. My body is is my personal rights. My personal autonomy. It is not the right of my employer I am not owned by my employer when I start working for that. Nobody owns me now some say just quit and go to another job. However if the majority of Arkansas is mandating these vaccines. Where am I supposed to go to work where is my eighteen year old supposed to go to work I she ages where she's supposed to go to work. If when the federal mandate comes down yes today it's a hundred plus workers as with all of the executive orders it hasn't stayed at what it started out so it's a hundred plus today fifty plus tomorrow twenty five then everybody. If you all are acting as if you don't know that then you're either being feigning night even T.. Or you're just treating us as if for ignorance. Now I will go ahead I guess stop because I do not respect your time and accept any questions. Thank you. Any questions from committee. Seeing none thank you for your comments. All right. We have no one else signed up to speak for against the bill. Senator Johnson. Is there anyone in the audience would like to speak for against the bill I'd like to speak on the bills please come to the in the table notice yourself. Thank you. Are you signed up no I okay dog ate my homework okay please introduce yourself and who you represent I apologize the traffic coming into town was just horrible so I'm running a little bit late I appreciate you let me speak my name is Rahel Lehmann my organizations friends of Arkansas but I'm speaking on behalf of the individual a little over two hundred and forty five years ago we formed this great country based on individual rights based on putting the thumb in the eye of King George we may be looking in the past nine months or another similar King George incident going on in Washington DC but two hundred forty five years ago there was a constitutional bill of rights that came forward to talk about god given rights of the individual. The individual's right to privacy the individual's right to liberty I don't know the anywhere in there it says businesses right to liberty businesses right to privacy those laws have been written in the two hundred and forty five years of this country's existence I oppose the the initial loss the bill of rights the god given individual rights supplant replace any of the current laws that defend the business's supposed rights I want to give a couple of examples of how today right now in in this capital and also in Washington DC how we are losing our rates were there just being whittled away. Yesterday in the Senate there was a testimony by a senator I want to say who that said that if mandates don't become law then businesses will go out of business and his logic was that if your business is one that enters someone home someone's home such as a plumber goes into the home then a business you can advertise that one hundred percent of their employees are vaccinated would have an advantage over businesses that can't advertise their employees are one hundred percent vaccinated that is frightening the Senator feels it's okay to tell the general public about the medical records the medical history of his employees. That's willing away at our rates now I know that most of you don't feel that way in fact chairman I told you when I was checking your hand that I thought the twenty twenty one legislature was the most conservatively political and successful legislature I've ever witnessed in my life and I'm very proud to be an Arkansan a very part of the deal or leave me. I'd like to just. Two more points to more quick points in Washington DC and twenty twenty the national defense authorization act was passed in the national defense authorization act was a red flag law against our military and everybody was up in arms this year twenty twenty one there is another red flag law in the national defense authorization act against our military would away that's how in two hundred forty five years we've lost sight of the individual rates. And we've moved and shifted to the business rates were fortune Committee and actually see businesses have rates what they might have legal rights but they don't have god given rights and finally my final point I know you guys are probably tired of seeing this book but I've got to bring it out again all of the Republicans. The third and fourth plank of the Republican Party in remember this platform was voted on by every single Republican county committee in the state of Arkansas it wasn't built but boy weapon passed every council voted on this all of you all represent these counties the third platform says third plant compliance sorry just individual responsibility and initiative we Republicans support the fourth plank says individual freedom and liberty secured by a limited government. Ladies and gentleman we cannot force individuals to inject something into their body we can force them to dress properly when they come to work we can force them to take a shower every morning and Smith smell clean when they come to work we can force them to look can't and a good face for the business but we cannot force them to inject something into their body life liberty and the pursuit of happiness I'll be happy to take any questions. Any questions from committee. Seeing none thank you for your comments thank you for let me speak for anyone else in the audience would like to speak for against the bill. Seeing none. Senator Johnson are you ready to close for your bill. Other Senator Johnson you a close. Thank you members and chair and and I'm those who spoke against and for. The this is a. Is very divisive that's why we're here that's why we've that's why I wrote the bill. and I wanted to protect all citizens all the persons as defined in the state of Arkansas. The There's not a lot of specificity in this bill and The car systems can cook can flush that out. If we're not in an emergency. Then why we mandating. Undercity seeing under the sense you you can transmit this when you're vaccinated or not. One we one hundred percent compliance. I appreciate a good vote. Doing this out of respect to the people I serve thank you members. Thank you senator was will the committee. Senate bill you're recognized. I have a motion do pass the discussion on the motion. Representative gave you're recognized. Thank you Mr out I I appreciate. everyone's comments on this bill I'm going to be a novo but but I want to explain why the position while I'm on a well. I work in healthcare and. In health care facilities would deal with compromised patients. In nursing homes are compromised patients. The way I read this bill is if a nursing home decided they wanted their cleaning service to have fully vaccinate they've vaccinate people coming in that nursing home they can't do that and and for that reason I would be a no vote on the bill is this this affects not all businesses it really affects health care more than anything for forty two years I've been a position in this state and for forty two years every year I was required to get a TB skin test and take a flu vaccine to be on staff at a hospital. He noted that interfere with my freedom you know I the freedom I had was if I decided I didn't want to take that flu shot I was no longer on staff of the hospital that was set by the staff medical staff that's one of the requirements for being bills that and and and you know what freedom that comes personal responsibility and I have a responsibility to patients and those around me so so I think people should get the vaccine now whether it's mandated by employers or not I think I think that's up to the business and I think these bills are getting in the way of of of companies. Most companies they should have the choice as to whether or not they want to mandated do you think a drywall company for drywall contractors is always people will be vaccinated how many people show up more to dry wall company nobody. You know so so business will be will be reasonable about this they will they'll understand their employees understand what they need to do and and whether they need to have it up there are some businesses that need to be able to mandate and and so for those reasons I'm opposed to this legislation asked as I will be opposed other bills to thank you Mr. He further discussion representative Bentley you're recognized. Thank you chaplain. I've been in the business owner in Arkansas for twenty years and somehow we think that. Of the debate is that this bill if we pass this bill and other bills that we're compromising the Freedom of businesses and I I find that laughable I can look at my business and see I have thousands upon thousands restrictions upon me this bill is not going to make as a bastion of the free regulation Arkansas if we don't pass this bill I just want to for that as a small business owner in Arkansas and I think we're failing to see the debate that this vaccine is not one hundred percent safe and it's not one hundred percent effective if it was we wouldn't be hearing this but there have been on the figures reporting system over seven hundred fifty thousand adverse reactions reported fifteen thousand deaths on their seven thousand heart attacks sixty six hundred is since of myocarditis we had testimony of marker that is right here in our committee so I think we're failing to see the concerns legitimate concerns over constituents and I think if we had seen businesses actually of honoring religious exemptions and philosophical advance in those exemptions we wouldn't be here but they have not been honored we have been a history of our nation we have on individual liberties and freedoms and with flu vaccines religious exemptions have been honored but they're not being honored with this vaccine and that's why we're here today we are a nation of god given liberties and they're on the line I'm sorry I really feel at about this the tear any is at the door and I owe a hundred percent support this bill every bill that that helps our constituents stand up for the individual liberties and freedoms and I speak that is a small business owner for the past twenty years thank you. Representative Pilkington you're recognized thank you Mr chairman thanks for the bill but but and I've maybe some other members of the committee can kind of help a light me on this this bill failed to pass its emergency clause through the Senate so we pass out here pass it on the floor to guess the governor says it still won't have an emergency clause so my concern and and like I said this is what I'm hoping someone in the committee can address is companies will see January first as a deadline of when this will go into effect so what they'll do is they'll force and make themselves have mandates now while they still have the option is it a windows January first of that they're in compliance with. The federal mandates coming down from the by an administration and so my concern is in trying to do good wind up doing something bad and so maybe some other is a committee kind of shed some light on that for me because it's something I was dealing with today and I didn't really hear any good explanation during the discussions so so that I'd like to to the forethought of some people's minds. Senate Allen did you have come in I do you're recognized thank thank you Mr chairman first of all I will say there's no bill out there on this bill it to this no medicine on the market. That does not call side effects even aspirin and even when you take the flu shot there's a possibility that you still can get the flu and that's a possibility that you can have some side effects from it and for those who will going through cancer treatment I'm still going and one of the first things that they want me to do at the council treatment centers of America they wanted me to get my faxing I got my vaccine I'm in the process of of get my booster. Also they want to I have to be tested every time I go they asked me if I'm I taking the test I don't in every employee at that hospital. Is tested or has been fascinated because every patient that comes in to that hospital is suffering from the disease and my meal system is totally different from anybody is amended system at this table. And that is one of the reasons why I continue to wear a mask and what I'm going to a medical facility I want to lease no. That the person has given me my treatment has been vaccinated because I don't want to to spread the disease to that numbers of that docked in a call home to give the kids and I don't want them to spread the disease to me so that is the reason why I believe in the vaccination and that is the reason why I probably will not vote for that bill today. Thank you. Any further discussion from committee. Seeing none motion on the floor is do pass all in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed nay. The ayes have it. Colorado. Representative Wardlaw. Representative Wardlaw. Representive Eubanks. Representive Eubanks. Representive McGee. Representative Dotson. Representative Dotson. Yes yes yes. Representative Miller. Representative Miller. Representative Payton yeah. Representative Bentley. Representative gray. Representative Gonzalez. Representative Boyd Now. Representive Allen. Representative Alan. Representive Coleman. Representative Pilkington. Representative wing yes. Representative Penzo. Representative Perry. Representive cloud yes. Vice chair Ferguson. Vice chair Ferguson. Senator Johnson your bill is fail. All right committee we're going to move on to the next. They. I'm sorry. The representative Davis I'm sorry. Representative Davis yes. Okay. Sorry senator bill still fail. All right thank you committee we're gonna move on to the next item on the agenda. S. B. seven thirty nine Senator hammer if you would go the in the table. Senator please introduce yourself for the record. Thank you Mr Kim Hammer state senator district thirty three you're recognized to present your bill thank you Mr chair and I believe you all probably heard the meat of the bill prior to so I won't go into great long explanation but I would like to just take the bill and flip through it would like to acknowledge just make sure the members know the bill came down from the Senate without the emergency clause being passed so we're debating the content of the bill of not the emergency bill though all refer to case somebody want to put an amendment on. Of section of one which is do not codified just simply gives the Legislative findings and intent that the federal government is mandating importers take actions related for over nineteen including forcing employees to be Max vaccinate against will mandates over region for Thor T. many employees and employers in Arkansas will be subject vaccinations and some against their will and desire even the employers Arkansas employees need to be protected from this type of overreach I did then put in the intent so as to be clear of what this bill is intended to do it is to protect the employees in Arkansas from any pending termination due to the vaccine mandates and then the second thing is to create the ability for funding to be available to assist employees in Arkansas with costs associated with testing related to the vaccination mandate through math as provided in this act and we'll get to those in the second. Section to is codified and so we get down to the primary point on line twelve page two that an employer that requires or is mandated to require vaccination for the employees shall provide a specific exemption process that's mentioned on line fourteen and that specific exemption process shall include two key points one that the employee would be allowed to produce a negative antigen detection test up to one time a week for to provide proof of the immunity from the virus that causes to COVID nineteen or experience any spells out what that means it would be done at least no more than two times a year but not less than one time every six months that kind of follows the get the the guidelines as far as expectations for how long the immunity would last the line twenty six the employee might choose to test the on line twenty eight the employee may provide the test results obtained outside the employer license health care provider if the test meets the guidelines contained in the policy for the COVID nineteen test so what we don't want is a bunch of to test products out there we want to one should have been a nationally recognized been through the process and are acceptable and that they would be able to use those as their means for taking the test one thing I wanna make point then are and where we had testimony a physician came up from down to Grant County and somebody made the comment that will the test cost about a hundred dollars and this physician who's been dealing with COVID nineteen since it began sometimes being the only provider in the area that did it made the comment said you know we get those tests are offices all day long for seven dollars so the cost there's a scare tactic that the cost a hundred dollars one reality you can get a test for seven dollars as well so I. I'm I'm saying that because of appointment get to in just a minute down on the bill so it has to meet the guidelines shows is not voodoo magic test and then when you get down to who shall bear the costs of that bottom line to the to the cost of the testing shall be covered through any state or federal funding a key word on line thirty five two key words made available there's a debate is whether not the current funding of forms of the the current federal funding that's out there could it be used could not be used that's one consultant's opinion I would remind the committee that we have fire consultants round here on a regular basis because we find out the sometimes what they tell us is not true once we verified so I just want to remind you that a consultant renders an opinion based on their professional opinion but sometimes they get it wrong we have a history of seeing that around here so please just put up there said wait on each side of the scale to balance what's being said because there is evidence out there it shows it yes we can use that funding so anyway the key phrase on line thirty five page two is made available if it turns out that that phone funding is not made available guess what it's out of the picture but if we do find some and here's the other thing I want you to know. They're they're still spending money up in Washington stand it down just like it's grown off this humongous money tree we don't know what's coming down the line and what might be made available this bill creates a pathway that if there's money coming down the line because we know that they of mandated but they haven't issued the rules which is a phrase I would use that includes the term backwards but they are there are there's a mandate out there but the rules themselves are still being developed we don't know but what the rules won't align with this and money may come with this to where we can for those who don't get the vaccine the ability to be tested so this language is written there in anticipation that something may be coming so that if it does we forgot the framework of that in mind here in the state now it also goes on it says that if the employee's health benefit plan does not provide coverage for testing but if it does there's a source to pay for the testing if the employees health plan does cover it then that can be it a source of pay for the cost but at the end of the day everything fails that I just said the employees responsible for paying for the cost of the test not the employer I could tell you some don't like that but you got to fall out one way or the other I know businesses that are in a position that they are mandating that their employees have to be vaccinated and they don't want to they're looking for a pathway for they're looking for a reason or opportunity to get out from underneath it without compromising a safe working environment for them or anybody that they offer their services to that's what this bill is intended to do but at the end of the day the employee is responsible now that doesn't mean the employer and employee could work out some arrangements I've heard of some pretty creative incentives by the part of the employer to provide for the employee to get the vaccination I don't know why they couldn't. Use that same money one company heard using up to fifty thousand dollar lottery drawing and if you get vaccinated put your name in the pot and you have a chance when that fifty thousand dollars if they can do that I don't know why they can't re direct some of that money to help pay for the cost all right so I just want to think about that if an employee complies with the requirements and I'm online nine and I'm about done line nine page three. If the employee complies with the requirements of specific exemption process that's been established that is required related to the COVID nineteen the employee shall not be terminated for mandates related COVID nineteen doesn't mean they can't be terminated for anything else then be terminated for anything else I want to know some line fifteen the employment at will doctrine is put in there just as a safety precaution because somebody raised the question so we've identified that in there and then finally when you get on down to the line DFA's going to stab wish the distribution of funding it'll come back before us and rules put in three key points just make sure it goes in the right direction to give a monthly report to a LC and then finally if an employee is terminated by the employer for violating this they have recourse but also want to know some line thirty one the key phrase may be eligible doesn't promise there'll be eligible for unemployment but they may be and that would be just like a standard person going to file for unemployment lasting is there's a sunset clause because this is a moving this is a moving picture and we won't be able come back in the general session and be able to make any adjustments and hopefully it'll go away in this bill would go away then to so I've kind of put a stop gap on the end of it to make sure this doesn't go on into perpetuity and gives us a chance to come back and address it with that Mr be glad to answer any questions. The representative Manzano's you're recognized thank Mr it Senator Hammer is this bill identical to the representative Bryant's bill that we pass out of this committee it should be identical to it but they want to take anything for granted so it should be identical we're running we're doing what we do down here we start on each and run down to for the sponsorship arrangement is a little bit different but progressing thank you. Representative Dotson you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair in light of that we've already heard testimony on an identical version of this bill if passed out here Friday overwhelmingly I would make a motion to pass the proper time. Okay. Representative and Bentley you're recognized. My questions are answered thank you chairman. Representative Boyd you're recognized for a question. Representative Dotson beat me to the punch. It further questions from committee a representative Pilkington since represented to me the point of this is a bill that we've already voted on is the exact same I make a motion for immediate consideration. I'd like to read a hold on that I would like to get people in the audience wanted to speak we got a couple people that did not speak on the last bill. All right senator thank you we're going to call a couple people that are signed up. Shared master question of the chair yes Sir I will be extremely brief I just want to know so whether I need to be listening intently to prepare for closing comments or if we go to immediate consideration I'll be precluded from that is that correct I just wanna make sure I'm on the same page with the chair you will be precluded from closing if we recognize that motion yeah okay just wanna be mentally prepared thank you but as an equal member legislature I would listen intently. The phone call would if you would please come to the table. This. Your time and efforts are Thank you thank you Mr over. The. Matt Gilmore and Laura shoes. So would go to the in the table. to speak against the bill. Please introduce yourself and who you represent. Your partner health RC general counsel for the department of health you're recognized. Thank you Mr chair as we spoke on this against this bill the in the previous testimony just want to mention a few things that we still have concerns about with the bill as far as to who would be required to test and not test the bill's not clear as to the that exposed individuals or as a surveillance testing that needs to be fleshed out we believe. The requirement to order the the the exemption that would allow you know one test per week that's been discussed before we thought they should be at least twice a week just because of the nature of the virus want to point that out and then also with the two times per year for proof of antibodies and immunity you know we don't really know is far as the time frame as to what length of immunity is is is a is with the virus looking at about ninety days about three times the excuse me every thirty three months is what we uh I have a looked at that so we appreciate those We appreciate what the bill is is trying to do in some ways but I think there's a lot of things need to be answered and fleshed out one more thing as well with the This section control processes for hospitals and other entities healthcare entities with if the federal mandates come down which we think they will this there may be some limitations there for hospitals to be able to do that and this bill may have some conflicts there so several things but again we will also emphasize that we think that businesses healthcare entities and so forth should have the right and should have the ability to require vaccine if they so feel that does need for their businesses for customers and employees so with that I'll be happy to deferred misuse anything she wants to offer. I have nothing else to add at this time thank you. I'm sorry what that was all your comments. Yes Sir thank you I was consulting here all right I'm not going to take questions Committee less someone have a question. Senate bill you're recognized as a real quick question thank you Matt in light of your statement you made before you not aware that there have been more adverse reactions reported for the specs and then all of the vaccines combined on the other bears reporting system of over seven hundred fifty thousand adverse reactions fifteen thousand this I will repeat again seven thousand heart attacks sixty six sentences of myocarditis that I know personally of my constituents of or have you not aware of those that we have concessions have very concerns they're not crazy people the people have legitimate concerns and are you not also we're that many people's religious exemptions and their medical exams have not been honored and they're still going to be fired are you not aware of that situation is to be more so with with the bears reporting that is a process that's gone that goes through the The vetting process you know anyone can report anything and I'm sure there are some concerns and some things have been reported that need to be fully investigated that ex that the process for that so they will take time to go through that and look at all that so I understand what you're saying there as far as exemptions I think that's important for conform lawyers to consider all that but at the same time I think it's important for specially healthcare entities to have the right to require vaccine if they so choose. All right thank you for your comments. Okay that one more person signed up to speak against the bill Joanne trip. Thank you. All right represent Pilkington recognized for motion. A motion for the late immediate construction. Immediate consideration that is a valid motion It is not debatable. So. The motion is for immediate consideration all in favor signify by saying aye All opposed nay. Motion carries. Okay a representative Dotson and made a motion of do pass at the appropriate time this is the appropriate time so we have a do pass by representative Dotson. Okay there's no closing and no discussion so the motion on the floors do pass all in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed nay. Motion carries resolution center your bill is passed. I no further business where adjourned.