Joint Budget Committee

Uh, next thing we'll do is adopt the rules in front of you. Uh, Mr. Anderson, you got anything you want to go over? Uh, Mr. Chairman, the only change in the rules, you want me to go over that? is on page 4 at the very bottom. It's uh, to, uh, so that our rules align with House rules, all amendments to bills presented to the Joint Budget Committee shall be in writing. A verbal amendment may be presented in a subcommittee if it is deemed by the chairs as minor or technical, and if a verbal amendment is to a bill is to be adopted by a subcommittee, the amendment shall be reported to the full committee, Joint Budget Committee in writing in the subcommittee report. Mr. Chairman, that is the only change to our rules. Any questions on the rules? Uh, hold on just a second, senator. You're recognized. OK, I just, uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to get clarification on this. So if I read D1, it says all amendments to to bills presented to the joint Budget Committee shall be in writing. My question is going to be, is should that say joint budget committee. Or the subcommittee of joint budget and my reasons, reasoning is this because if you go down to 2A where it says a verbal amendment in the subcommittee will just be minor of technical. We're not, we're not in any way trying to say that the subcommittee could not do any amendments that they wanted to, are we? Because that's kind of what I'm looking at. It's because I'm looking at it for the subcommittee. Of this body wants to make any amendment, whether it's technical or not, they should be able to. I In answering your question, yes, I, I see your point, and that, uh, change could be easily made if this committee wants to do that. OK. I, if the chairs are OK with it, then I'd like to make that motion because I want to make sure, I want to make 100% sure that a subcommittee can make any amendment. If they get the votes that they want to, not just something that's technical in nature. Well, without objection, Senator Hickey will add that to it. Thank you, sir. We need to. Any other questions? Well, we need a motion to to adopt the rules as amended. Have a motion in a second, any discussion? All the favors. Hold on, hold on, we got discussion. Hold on. I, I want to make sure where are we at in the motion to adopt they are how they are. I, I think we need to make sure our staff understands what we've agreed to amend and if that is actually going to track the way we want it to track. So if we can just let them have just a minute to make sure we don't do something we don't intend to do. I mean, and staff can maybe better articulate it than I than I can at this point, but let me get to the, the rule here. At the end of the day, if a subcommittee were to do a minor verbal amendment that verbal amendment then has to be put in writing and then approved by the, the Joint Budget Committee. And I think what it's saying in the way that it's worded was intentional so that everything that happens ultimately has to get approved in writing by the joint budget committee. Which is and and I is that fair and then this is partly due to potential conflicts with how the house is set up with their rules. OK. So I, I, I guess. What we're saying is, do we really want to give Subcommittees the right to overrule the major rules of the joint Budget Committee, and I don't think that that's what the intent is, but I think the change would allow. Hickey You feel comfortable with it or do you wanna? Oh, you turned yourself off, OK, go ahead. I think that I don't think it's an overrule. I think it's much like ALC of a subcommittee of ALC. So those are gonna be heard in the subcommittees first. So if enough members of that subcommittee want to make any amendment, whether it's technical or not, I do agree that it should be in writing. But the way that it's written, the way that it's written, it's like that the joint budget committee shall be the only one that could do any type of, uh, Uh Amendment that was not technical. So I guess what I'm saying is, is I feel like the subcommittee. Just like an ALC should have the ability to make an amendment. To any bill after it's introduced and I do understand that there's no alterations from the way that it came from, uh, whenever we had our budget hearings. But it looks like to me that they can make those. Make those amendments any way they want, and then they're presented to joint budget. Now if joint budget does not want that to happen, of course, all they're gonna do is just amend it whenever it gets back here. You finished? I got some other questions. Senator Hammer, you got a question. the to convince the committee that it's only minor and technical. G, you want to come to the table and answer these legal stuff. Um, what the, the, the that normally falls back on the chair. We defer to the chair to uh interpret this. We, we've the joint budget and subcommittees. We always let the chair make that determination. Uh, that's where that would fall to, but that is not, um, in anywhere else in these rules, but that, that's how we default on items like this. Because I hesitate to say this, but I think the conversation using words like fair and reasonable and minor and technical, are going to be subjective to the, to the chair then, but we don't have a precedence anywhere else that these words are used in our rules, and I think so the chair could also call for a vote if they wanted to do that at that point in time if the chair was unsure, they could ask the committee if they wanted to vote on if this is a technical change or a substantive change. All right, thank you. Senator Payton, we recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um I guess I don't know if I can articulate this right, but if, if a subcommittee votes positively on a verbal. Amendment And then it it's presented to the whole committee in writing. Will the whole committee have the opportunity to consider the bill as amended only or consider the bill without the amendment. Well, it, it can vote down the amendment. And then consider it, but so if it's the intent of the subcommittee that a bill come out as amended and would not have come out. Unamended Then basically. The, the, the committee as a whole could consider it unamended. If they choose to do it, yeah, the committee could do that. Is it currently that way or would this just be the a change this is created that way. OK, thank you. Senator Hammer, you back up for a question question who's the, uh, did the chairs bring this recommendation or who brought the recommendation to the rule change. Staff did. OK. Can we get just a little perspective as to what The reasoning behind it is what's driving the decision. I'm, I'm thinking of history as far as sitting in committee, people wanting to make amendments and you got to go write it up and bring it back kind of thing. Could you just refresh my memory of what's, what's driving the reasoning. Hold on just a second. Thank you. OK. Thank you. Um, The House rules prohibit verbal amendments, and they were trying to clean up our rules to make sure it matched and, and we did want to do something that might not, might not be, uh, legal in this committee. Therefore, this language was added to add to match the house rules. But the House rules aren't changing, so we're doing this to be able to work within. The house rules, is that correct? Correct. Be consistent. That's correct. Correct. OK, thank you. It, you don't mind I just kind of further explanation, I think many of you, I think you have to read it in context, which is what I was just kind of discussing with staff. There's nothing that prohibits a written amendment being made in the subcommittee. That's not what this says. But when it comes to the main committee for final vote which the final vote has to vote on it before it can ever come to us on the floor that has that amendment that's presented to the Joint Budget Committee for a vote from the subcommittee would have to be in writing, whether it be a verbal one or one that is more, that is, you know, just purely technical in nature and verbal would have to go in writing or the bigger amendment if there were another amendment made by the subcommittee would have to be presented in writing to the main subcommittee that's uh. I'm not sure what we're circling here, but. And as we get close to the end of the session. This is where the verbal commitments have come in to subcommittees to save time, but they've always come back to the big committee in a written form, but, but we've done that since I've been here have verbal commitments on subcommittees special language, personnel, whatever, uh, because we're in the final week, and that's usually when this comes about, but anyway, Senator Hickey, you got a question. Yes, sir, and I think what Senator dismay is exactly what I was wanting to add. I'm just saying that the terminology, on, on its face is not what we're saying. And the only thing we were gonna do was under D1, if you put all amendments to Brazil's to bills presented to the Joint Budget Committee or subcommittee shall be in writing. And as long as we have clarification. That this language from our staff that this language. is not going to limit the subcommittee for making any motion that they want. I understand what's been writing. I agree with that. I guess that's the thing that I'm just wanting to make sure that the subcommittee can do any amendment that they want to do with this language. Whether it's technical or not, I understand it has to be in writing. So if I could get that clarification from staff or. Again, it just looks like to me it's cleaner if we put joint budget committee or subcommittee there and then that. If you don't mind, flip to page 10. Section 15. The rules of the Joint Budget Committee as set forth herein shall apply to the proceedings of the subcommittees of that joint budget committee and show control over any rules adopted by the subcommittee that may conflict with these rules. The rules of the joint Budget Committee. Dictate the rules of the sub the subcommittee, and we're saying that any amendment that is not purely technical in nature must be put in writing. That would, that would carry I understand. I'm just saying that and if staff could clarify it or both chairs want to say that any subcommittee can hear any amendment and vote on it, then that's fine. All right, Senator Blake Johnson. You got a question. I think what the Senate is telling you. As we function better with, with flow of thought. It is, if, if, if it's technical in nature. Or substantive in nature, those things can be written and presented at that time. This would limit it to technical in nature. And we do better under our rules where we'll get rid of this rule if you have to. So this, this is uh Whether it be substantive or or technical in nature is what I think Senator Hickey is speaking to and the other members. Any other questions? Let Hold on. There you go. Uh, Senator, Senator Hickey. You want to continue on with your motion as amended. OK, all right. All right. You want to re-clarify the motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are uh uh voting on approval of adoption of the rules as amended to add on page 4 or subcommittees after joint Budget Committee on D1. OK. All in favor we're gonna be voting for this and the amendment of Senator Hickeys. B I vote and a no vote would be to not accept the amendment, OK? Is that clear? All right, all in favor say aye. All opposed The eyes have it. All right appropriation bill Same as my This is a house bill of 1,0002 is a general appropriation bill. This is the bill that we have to pass in our constitution before we do anything else. Any questions on this? We need a motion to adopt. And, and a second, any discussion? All in favor say aye. Any opposed? It's due past. All right, members, we're not gonna meet again this week. Tuesday at 9 o'clock, which would be the 21st. Uh, we should have some bills ready anyway I appreciate y'all being here today. And we are adjourned.