►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
D
There's
a
committee
economic
development
committee
that
has
several
of
our
members,
so
we
might
wait
about
three
or
four
minutes
and
give
them
time
to
get
here.
D
E
E
D
Chairman
before
we
get
started,
we
have
some
grave
news
and
I'm
gonna
pass
it
over
to
one
of
our
state
reps
that
served
in
the
marine
corps
representative
cook.
C
Thanks,
mr
chairman,
I
know
everybody's
been
up
here
at
the
state.
C
L
M
D
Okay,
some
more
somber
news
is
I'll
pass
it
over
to
to
the
co-chair
representative
miller.
K
K
His
sports
coats
were
wildly
colorful,
my
gold
sport
coat
and
chairman
bratcher's
light
blue
are
in
his
honor,
but
they
wouldn't
have
been
bold
enough
for
brent.
He
was
a
chair.
He
was
chair
when
I
passed
my
first
two
bills,
both
retirement
measures
at
the
time.
I
did
not
understand
how
much
he
went
to
bat
for
me
for
a
freshman
in
the
minority
and
and
brent
always
was
a
good
mentor
to
me
in
those
days,
and
I
asked
for
a
moment
of
silence
in
memory
of
representative
brent
johns.
D
D
Okay,
we
need
to
approve
the
minutes
from
last
meeting.
Can
I
hear
a
motion?
D
Second,
any
objection
passed.
Okay.
We
got
a
full
agenda
today,
some
very
interesting
topics
and
we
will
bring
up
right
now,
we'll
bring
up
representative,
branscomb,
decker
and
tipton
to
talk
about
house
bill,
574
our
elections,
bill
and
they're
going
to
give
us
an
update
and
some
more
hopefully
good
news
about
the
future
with
it.
D
M
My
name
is
jennifer
henson
decker,
I'm
state
representative
from
district
58..
Thank
you
all
for
having
us
here
today
to
talk
about
house
bill
574
during
the
period
in
which
it's
being
looked
at
and
implemented
during
the
2021
session.
I
worked
with
representative
branstam
and
representative
tipton,
and
we
had
various
co-sponsors
with
the
goal
of
strengthening
the
integrity
of
our
elections
in
kentucky
and
to
boost
the
confidence
of
voters
in
our
electoral
system.
N
For
the
record
state
representative,
josh
branskin
from
83rd
district,
thank
you
co-chair
bratcher,
and
thank
you
to
all
the
committee
members.
We
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
here
with
you
today
to
provide
an
update
on
house
bill
574
and
its
current
implementation.
N
N
N
But
the
important
thing
is
that
we
put
it
on
everybody's
radar
to
be
thinking
through
implementation
and
to
let
us
know
if
there's
some
things
or
some
items
that
need
to
be
addressed
or
possibly
cleaned
up
from
last
year's
bill.
We
look
forward
to
continuing
our
meetings
here
in
the
interim.
You
know.
The
good
thing
is
we're
in
the
interim
addre
or
looking
at
the
bill
or
potential
bill
for
for
next
session.
N
If
you
recall
574,
we
we
that
was
drafted
and
passed
through
both
houses
and
put
into
law
within
a
short
session.
So
we've
got
a
good
time
time
period
here
to
to
start
addressing
anything
that
needs
to
be
looked
at,
we'll
continue
to
throw
out
some
ideas
and
look
at
ways
in
which
we
can
refine
the
bill
if
needed.
C
Mr
chairman,
members
of
the
committee,
I
want
to
thank
representative
decker
representative
branscomb
for
the
opportunity
to
work
together
on
this
legislation.
Their
leadership
they
were
the
they
were
the
rookies
last
year.
I
was
the
one
that
had
been
through
a
few
pieces
of
legislation
before,
and
one
thing
that
I
have
learned
is
when
you
have
a
very
comprehensive
bill
there.
There
are
probably
going
to
be
some
issues
you
need
to
like
to
say
address.
So
that's
what
our
goal
is.
C
I
want
to
emphasize
to
the
committee
we're
not
talking
about
coming
in
here
and
reinventing
the
whole
program.
This
is
not
about
a
rewrite.
This
is
about
it's
identified.
Seeing
if
we
can
identify,
if
there
are
areas
that
maybe
need
to
be
strengthened
could
be
improved,
we
can
tweak
those
areas,
but
we're
certainly
looking
forward
to
the
conversation,
and
I
think
that
our
fellow
presenters
today
will
have
an
interesting
perspective
because
they're
the
ones
that
are
actually
dealing
with
our
elections
day
to
day.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
continue
this
work.
D
D
Okay,
we'll
go
ahead
and
do
you
have
any
more
anything
else,
jennifer.
D
D
Appreciate
you
guys
coming
and
giving
us
your
thoughts
and
ideas
going
forward,
just
state
your
name
and
then
in
title
and
whatnot
and
go
ahead
and
start.
D
You
have
to
push
the
little
mouth
down
there
and
get
the
red
light
to
come
on
there.
You
got
you.
H
O
I
am
yes,
sir.
Thank
you
for
having
me
today
also
with
taylor
brown
is:
is
karen
sellers
assistant
director
I'd
like
to
start
by
saying
thank
you
to
both
the
chairs,
as
well
as
the
committee
itself
for
allowing
us
to
speak
to
you
today,
and
this
is
an
important
topic
and
important
to
everyone
in
the
room,
and
so
my
thought
is.
O
While
I
can
definitely
talk
for
about
an
hour
about
elections,
because
I
get
excited
about
it
every
time
I
do,
I
thought
it'd
probably
be
more
appropriate
to
maybe
highlight
a
couple
of
things
that
we're
doing
for
implementation
specific
to
574
and
then
yield
my
time
back
to
the
committee.
If
there
are
questions
so
that
that
being
said,
one
of
the
things
that
we
did
immediately
after
passage
of
574
is
begin.
The
process
of
creating
emergency
regulations
they'll
ultimately
become
normal
regulations
during
the
normal
process
of
passing
those.
O
But
we
wanted
emergency
regulations
because
we
were
concerned
that,
even
though
there
was
a
year's
period
between
the
time
of
passage
of
574
and
the
next
election
cycle,
special
elections
do
happen.
Unfortunately,
for
for
several
reasons,
we
are
now
having
special
elections
that
will
be
coming
up
relatively
soon,
and
so
it
was
important
for
the
county
clerks
to
have
a
baseline
of
understanding
of
how
these
elections
would
be
operated
and
maintained,
and
that
voters
have
an
idea
of
what
those
those
processes
are
as
well.
So
they
can
effectively
vote.
O
So
in
our
emergency
regulations,
we
laid
out
new
policies
and
practices
for
the
clerks
to
be
able
to
maintain
their
elections,
to
be
able
to
create
election
plans
to
work
with
the
state
board
of
elections
in
that
process.
Work
with
the
secretary
of
state
and
other
stakeholders.
O
We
in
kentucky
are
really
lucky
to
have
some
of
the
best
local
elections
administrators
in
the
country,
who
have
been
working
very
diligently
over
the
the
last
several
months
to
work
with
the
state
board
of
elections
on
how
this
will
be
implemented
and
how
that
will
work
out,
and
I'm
I'm
happy
to
say
that
we're
we're
still
doing
training
we're
still
operating
under
the
the
ability
to
be
able
to
add
more
value
to
this
system,
which
is
what
574's
intent
was
kentucky.
O
Does
things
differently
than
the
rest
of
our
peer
states?
Obviously
you
know
in
the
middle
of
a
fairly
contentious
political
period,
kentucky
came
together
in
an
overwhelmingly
bipartisan
manner
and
passed
election
laws
that
not
only
added
access
to
the
ballot,
but
also
added
transparency
and
security,
and
I
am
very
grateful
for
representatives
decker,
tipton
and
branscombe
in
in
that
process,
as
well
as
the
entire
legislature.
So
that
being
said,
I
wanted
to
highlight
a
couple
of
key
things
that
are
in
the
the
bill
itself.
H
O
D
O
Be
moving
forward
with
is
what
we
call
risk,
limiting
audits
risk.
Limiting
audits
are
an
ability
for
the
state
board
to
work
with
a
county
and
then,
ultimately,
the
larger
state
system
in
574
gave
us
the
ability
to
have
a
pilot
program.
O
So
a
risk
coming
audit
is
a
type
of
post-election
audit
and
what
it
does
is
it
allows
the
the
county
and
state
to
work
together
to
randomly
sample
a
number
of
paper
ballots
and
a
large
enough
sample
size
that
would
give
us
a
confidence
level
of
ensuring
that
the
policies
and
procedures
that
went
through
how
people
cast
their
ballot,
the
tabulation
machines
that
there's
a
confidence
level
that
the
audit
itself
matches
the
numbers
that
came
in
from
the
tabulation
right.
So
what
we're
looking
for
is
anomalies.
O
Those
anomalies
will
stick
out
like
a
sore
thumb
with
a
large
enough
sample
size
and
that
will
both
show
that
if
there
was
a
problem
in
procedures
when
it
comes
to
the
voting
machines
or
the
tallying
process,
but
it'll
also
show
if
there's
outside
influence.
So
that
is
one
of
the
things
that
we
asked
for
from
the
state
board
of
elections.
Perspective
when
we
were
asked
what
are
some
of
the
things
that
we
wanted
to
see
past,
and
we
were
very
grateful.
O
That's
in
that
policy
will
be
forthcoming,
hopefully
by
the
primary
of
the
midterms
in
2022,
we're
working
with
kcca
to
see
how
that
is
going
to
be
implemented
effectively
and
we'll
be
able
to
bring
back
more
information
that
comes
forth.
So
that
is
one
of
the
things
that
we're
working
on.
Besides
that,
I
think
it
was
just
important
to
note
that
the
emergency
regulations
are
now
in
place
and
the
county
clerks
have
a
process
that
they
can
follow
for
these
special
elections
coming
up.
H
F
Nemes
you,
mr
chairman,
currently
the
law
requires
the
attorney
general
after
every
election
to
audit
a
random
sampling
of
six
counties.
What
counties
were
they,
what
what
did
it
come
back
with
and
what,
when
we're
talking
about
audit,
what
does
that
mean?
What
do
they
look
into?
How
in
depth
do
they
go?
Take
us
through
that
process?
If
you
would.
O
Sure
I
actually
would
actually
defer
back
to
either
some
of
the
county
clerks
association.
That
is
a
process
that
actually
is
outside
the
state
board
of
elections.
So
we
are
not.
We
are
not
an
investigative
body
and
the
statutes
that
govern
that
post-election
audit
specifically
are
dealt
with
with
entirely
the
attorney
general's
office,
as
well
as
the
county
clerk's
association.
O
However,
in
a
very
brief
sentence,
what
I
would
say
is
that
the
random
pull
of
those
counties
takes
place
and
then
the
attorney
general
will
go
in
with
their
criteria
of
the
things
that
they
want
to
see.
They'll,
usually
look
at
absentee
ballots,
they'll,
look
to
determine
whether
or
not
there
are
any
allegations
of
fraud.
The
state
board
of
elections,
the
secretary
of
state
and
the
attorney
general
all
work
together
during
an
election
to
ensure
any
complaints
that
come
in
are
then
funneled
to
the
investigative
body
of
the
attorney
general's
office.
O
D
I
I
can
I'd
like
to
ask
the
question
in
regards
to
mr
brown
and
and
mr
deering
and
the
sellers
in
regards
to
the
post-election
analysis
process.
Is
that
all
internally
done
or
are
we?
How
is
that
done
in
terms
of
is
it
done
within
the
agencies,
as
well
as
with
the
county
clerks?
But
it's
no
outside
entities
which
come
in
and
make
that
analysis?
O
Yes,
version
that
that
is
the
the
benefit
of
this
process
is
that
by
codifying
it
into
law,
the
legislature
has
allowed
for
elections
administrators
in
in
a
very
transparent
process,
which
is
the
key
to
this
right
that
when
you're
doing
an
audit,
you
want
everything
to
be
transparent.
Otherwise
it
doesn't
mean
a
whole
lot
to
anyone.
So
the
the
process
itself
will
take
place
publicly.
O
There
will
be
a
very
public
viewing
of
the
randomization
of
how
the
ballots
are
pulled
and
what
those
sample
sizes
are,
as
well
as
how
those
ballots
are
pulled
at
the
county
level.
The
the
state
board
of
elections
will
then
direct
the
counties
to
pull
a
number
of
ballots
randomly
selected
from
a
specific
race
or
in
every
race,
as
well
as
specific
precincts
as
well.
O
O
It's
a
way
of
being
able
to
show
that
the
machines
work
the
way
they
were
supposed
to
work,
that
there
was
no
outside
influence
within
the
system
itself
and
that
just
procedurally,
things
worked
as
they
were
supposed
to
and
having
that
tool
in
our
toolbox
now
is
really
important
and
the
only
reason
why
we
can
now
do
this
is
that
over
the
last
four
years,
we've
been
updating
counties
to
be
fully
paper-based
systems.
O
We
still
have
ballot
marketing
devices,
which
are
an
important
part
of
the
process
to
ensure
that
our
our
voters
with
disabilities,
our
senior
voters
have
the
ability
to
cast
a
ballot
effectively
as
well,
but
every
county
is
using
a
paper-based
system,
and
that
means
there's
a
voter
verified
paper
audit
record
at
the
end
of
that
vote.
That
voter
will
then
cast
that
ballot.
They'll
review
it
to
make
sure
that's
exactly
how
their
vote
was
to
be
counted,
and
then
that
paper
ballot
goes
into
a
scanner
and
then
drops
into
a
secure
ballot
box.
O
Those
paper
ballots
can
now
be
auditable
right,
so
we
can
now
go
back
in
and
verify
that
the
tally
count
from
the
machines
matches
the
actual
paper
record.
There
are
still
some
counties
that
are
using
some.
What
we
call
dres
or
machines
that
do
not
re
leave
a
paper
record.
They
are
mostly
using
those
for
accessibility
purposes,
but
they
are
still
on
a
paper-based
system.
O
So
the
majority
of
their
voters
used
paper,
as
did
the
majority
of
all
voters
in
the
commonwealth
during
the
2022
president
or
2020
presidential
cycle,
so
that
process
is
still
ongoing.
We're
still
continuing
to
to
help
counties,
update
those
systems
and
make
sure
that
you
know
going
into
the
next
several
election
cycles.
O
We
would
like
to
see
100
of
all
ballots
cast
on
a
paper
record
that
is
verified
by
the
voter,
and
I
would
not
be
doing
my
job
if
every
time
I
come
before
this
committee
or
the
elections
committee,
if
I
didn't
say
that
it's
it's
highly
important,
that
we
continue
to
fund
our
election
systems
as
critical
infrastructure
as
important
as
they
are,
so
that
we
can
have
security
and
transparency
and
access
to
the
ballot.
O
I
Just
to
follow
up
just
to
make
it
clear
these,
these
analysis
that
are
taking
place
after
the
after
the
voting
has
been
done.
It
is
done
internally
by
those
who
are
responsible,
whether
it's
the
county
clerks,
the
board
of
elections,
it's
done
with
no
outside
ciders,
coming
in
to
participate
in
that,
when
I
say
outsiders
are
not
from
kentucky
they're
completely.
Those
individuals
who
are
responsible
for
holding
elections
and
to
carrying
out
the
responsibility
and
the
administration
of
those
elections
is
that
correct.
That
is
correct.
O
I
O
I
D
Thank
you
well,
thank
you
guys
for
coming
and
presenting
and
jared
appreciate
you
always.
P
P
P
So
with
that
analogy,
that's
what
we're
doing
right
now
we're
starting
to
learn
how
to
play
with
the
new
rules
that
were
to
go
by
a
lot
of
clerks
right
now
are
working
with
their
school
boards
to
because
of
the
vote
center
capability
that
we're
allowed
to
now
early
voting
coming
in,
we
need
locations
and
we
need
space.
P
So
a
lot
of
clerks
are
working
hand-in-hand
with
a
lot
of
local
government
entities
to
find
space
for
that
along
with
that
we're
working
as
far
as
early
voting
goes,
we
have
to
get
staffing
prepared
for
that
and
so
yeah
that
we're
we're
at
the
point
now,
where
we're
starting
to
see
this
form
together.
A
We're
all
just
still
learning
reading
understanding,
as
you
know,
with
any
bill,
there
are
things
in
it
that
some
people,
maybe
not
caught
or
didn't,
understand
and
were
we're
learning,
educating
getting
definition
of
things
and
the
preparation.
A
D
You
know-
and
I
think
I
think
that's
great
for
you
to
say
that
that
the
the
baileywick
of
elections
is
so
unique
in
in
our
typical
operations
in
the
legislature
and
that
my
point
of
view
is,
if
you
don't
have
both
parties
involved,
then
it
just
doesn't.
D
You
know
you've
got
to
have
buy-in,
I'm
not
saying
100
percent,
but
it's
it's
so
much
better
and
now
and
we
and
we
did
do
that.
Representative
wheatley
worked
with
representative
tipton
and
decker
and
and
branscomb,
and
that
was
great
and
we
appreciate
that
and
it
was
just
great
to
have
bipartisanship.
D
P
P
That's
when
we
approached
decker
and
tipton
and
branstam
and
and
the
work
that
they
put
into
it,
along
with
the
secretary
of
state
and
the
state
board
of
election,
and
then,
ultimately,
you
all
as
passage
of
this
bill
it.
It
was
a
beautiful
piece
of
legislation
and-
and
now
it's
it's
just
kind
of
polishing
it
up
with
a
clean
up.
So.
K
It
just
makes
sense
to
do
it
and
that's
what
this
bill
did
with
the
vote.
Centers,
it's
going
to
allow
us
to
reduce
the
number
of
precinct
officers.
We're
required
to
have,
which
is
one
of
our
main
problems
in
kentucky
and
across
the
nation.
Right
now
is
recruiting
precinct
officers,
and
it's
also
because
we
don't
have
to
have
so
many.
We
don't
have
to
pay
so
many.
So
it's
going
to
it's
a
cost
savings.
K
K
Please
pass
that
along
to
anybody.
That's
confused
about
it
and
thankfully,
in
this
in
this,
what
we
do
with
this
next
piece
of
legislation,
we'll
codify
that
in
law
it's
in
reg
now,
but
we
will
codify
that
in
law,
no
county
clerk
anywhere
in
the
united
states
that
I
can
imagine,
wants
their
piece
of
equipment
hacked.
K
D
H
All
right,
well,
just
just
briefly,
I
would
also
say
this:
whole
process
is
kind
of
kind
of
still
a
work
it'll
be
very
fascinating
to
see
how
things
go
in
the
primary
in
the
journal,
this
next
general
election.
How
how
it
operates.
I
think
in
most
states,
where
you
have
even
a
little
bit
of
early
voting,
unexcused
no
excuse
needed
early
voting.
You
have
a
big
decrease
in
people
vote
on
election
day
and
our
plan
in
jefferson
county
is
as
much
as
possible.
We
want
to
keep
jeff.
H
We
want
to
keep
election
day
normal
you're.
We
have
about
200
locations
for
voting
in
jefferson
county.
We
want
to
on
election
days.
We
want
to
make
that
the
primary
goal
so
we're
up
and
running
staff,
so
your
normal
voting
place
in
your
neighborhood
is
going
to
be
available,
but
these
other
voting
centers
on
during
the
day
the
weeks
the
days
before
and
then
election
day,
will
also
be
an
option
for
people.
D
H
D
G
G
I'm
hearing
talk
of
changes
to
house
bill
574
and
as
someone
who
reluctantly
embraced
some
of
the
reforms
that
that
were
in
the
bill,
I
want
to
caution
that,
if
you're
going
to
come
with
a
cleanup,
just
make
it
a
cleanup
bill,
don't
try
any
more
policy
changes,
especially
any
more
days
of
early
voting,
because
I
will
oppose
them
vehemently.
G
I
reluctantly
agreed
to
three
days
of
early
voting,
which
is
about
two
days
too
many
for
my
liking.
I
think
we
should
have
respected
the
sanctity
of
election
day
on
tuesday,
but
I
understand
the
times
they
are
changing
and
a
lot
of
folks
have
a
hard
time
voting
in
my
district
with
toyota.
You
know:
there's
a
lot
of
people
are
working
during
that
12-hour
time
period.
So
representative
decker
convinced
me
to
make
the
change.
G
P
I
would
just
say
that
I
can
put
your
your
concerns
to
rest,
that
there
is
no
extension
of
early
voting.
It's
just
a
few
things
that
we
have
seen
as
far
as
there's
a
gap
in
time
between
the
end
of
mailing
ballot
and
the
beginning
of
early
voting
that
there's
a
dead
spirit
dead
period
there.
D
Great
representative
smith,.
H
H
The
ballot
would
come
to
your
location
on
the
address,
you'd
mark
it
and
then
you
could
either
drop
it
in
a
drop
box
or
mail.
It
back
in
is
that
the
same
thing
that
we're
looking
at
this
coming
election,
the
they
can
go
on
their
phone
without
having
any
medical
issues,
disabilities.
They
can
still
go
on
order,
a
ballot.
So
that's
taken
away.
The
ordering
of
the
ballots
is
taken
away,
so
the
paper
will
only
be
at
the
polling
place.
H
When
I
go
to
vote
I'll
fill
out
the
paper.
Stick
it
in
the
machine
and
I'm
done.
That's
the
only
place
I'll
be
able
to
get
it
other
than
a
absentee
similar
to
the
old
days
of
you.
You
request
it.
They
mail,
you
something
you
have
to
fill
it
out
and
then
you
send
it
back
in
then
you
get
the
ballot.
You
know
that
that's
a
like
back
and
forth
process
is
all
that
still
in
place
the
same
way
as
the
old
absentee.
H
Well,
I
guess
when
I'm
asking
mr
chairman,
or
what
can
we
expect
this
election
to
look
like
when
we're
campaigning,
because
the
last
time
that
I
campaigned
I
had
to
campaign
for
early
votes,
I
had
to
go
out
30
to
45
days
early.
I
had
a
matter
of
fact.
My
name
is:
I
had
to
get
a
month
before
then
to
get
everybody's
names
and
get
all
the
lists
and
get
all
the
families
organized.
H
So
so
I
could
get
the
ballots
in
early
enough.
The
request
to
get
the
ballots
back
to
get
mailed
in
what
does
this
election
look
like
compared
to
last
election?
If
you
can
summarize
it?
If
that's
all
right,
mr
chairman,
what
were
what
we're
looking
at?
So
we
can
anticipate
on
the
type
of
campaign
that
we
would
put
together
sure.
P
I
would
be
glad
to
the
answer
is
yes
and
no
the
mail-in
ballot?
The
requirements
go
back.
They
revert
back
to
the
old
statute
as
far
as
age
disability.
All
the
requirements
that
limited
those
so
there
is.
It
is
an
excused
mail-in
ballot.
You
have
to
have
an
excuse
going
back
to
the
process,
that's
for
a
mail-in
absentee
ballot,
correct,
correct
and
the
only
change
that
we
have
is
an
increase
in
security,
and
that
is
that
the
portal
still
stays.
P
So
you
have
to
go
online
or
you
can
call
your
county
clerk
and
they
can
put
it
in
enter
in
your
information.
But
but
the
portal
increases
the
security
and
it
also
is
less
cumbersome
for
the
county
clerks
that
have
to
process
sending
out
an
application
having
it
signed
and
sent
back
and
then
processing
it
and
then
turning
around
and
sending
a
ballot
out.
So
the
the
online
portal
is
truly
just
a
secure
measure
to
make
sure
that
the
mail-in
excused
ballot
gets
to
the
right
person.
H
H
H
So
if
I
go
out
in
an
election
year-
and
I
gather
two
or
three
hundred
people
and
tell
them
they
can't
be
there
on
election
day,
does
that
mean
you
know?
Do
we
go
back
to
those
old
requirements
they
put
on
there
and
say?
Yes,
I'm
going
to
be
out
of
town
or
I'm?
I
don't
feel
good,
I'm
not
I'm
going
to
be
sick
during
that
time.
So
you're
saying
all
we
do
is
go
on
to
portal
the
same
way.
H
H
H
Got
close
it
hit
between
okay,
I
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
was
clear
on
what
so
we're
going
back
to
the
absentee
old,
the
old
requirements
on
the
portal
correct,
so
that's
not
used
for
for
filling
out
for
clerks
to
mail
out
ballots
to
to
vote
on.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I'm
clear
with
that.
A
We
would
still
mail
the
ballots
out
from
our
county
clerk's
offices.
The
application
process
is
the
same
as
that
piece
of
paper
that
they
would
normally
come
in
and
signed
and
attested
to
it
is
just
it
is
as
secure,
if
not
more
secure.
On
the
back
side,
the
the
mailing
out
of
the
ballots
is
the
same
process
as
we've
had
in
the
past,
and
all
the
requirements
are
the
same.
P
These
these
are
really
actually
great
questions
and-
and
this
helps
alleviate
a
lot
of
the
misinformation
out
there,
because
the
portal
is
online,
the
state
board
of
election
can
track
an
ip
address.
So
if
you
have
someone
sitting
in
a
room,
that's
just
processing
these
applications
or
requests
for
ballots.
That's
going
to
raise
red
flags
at
state
board
election
and
then,
obviously
that
would
be
prosecuted
under
under
law,
but
really
good
questions.
P
K
Go
ahead,
one
thing:
that's
going
to
interest
you
guys
that
are
at
the
legislature
that
run
multiple
counties
in
the
past.
There
was
no
requirement
for
the
maximum
number
of
days
to
have
I'll
it's
mailed
by
absentee
male
voting.
That's
what
you're
talking
about
it's
by
for
illness,
age,
third,
trimester,
pregnancy!
There
are
several
reasons,
but
that's
me,
one
of
those
being
out
of
town
is
not
one
of
those
where
you
can
vote
by
mail.
K
You
must
vote
in
person
or
early
if
you're
going
to
be
out
of
town,
but
something
interests
you
all
is
so
there
was
a
minimum
number
of
days,
but
not
a
maximum.
So
you
could
have
an
opponent
you're
running.
You
have
two
counties
in
your
district
opponent:
a
lives
in
this
county.
They
vote
for
60
days.
In
this
county
opponent
b.
You
live
in
the
other
county.
They
only
vote
for
45..
K
D
G
You
know
three
months
earlier
than
usual
and
yard
signs
and
road
signs
going
up.
That
was
a
once-in-a-lifetime
pandemic,
voting
that
that
was
devised
by
the
secretary
of
state
and
the
governor,
because
the
general
assembly
made
the
one-time
mistake
of
handing
over
the
manner
in
which
an
election
is
held
to
two
people,
and
I'd
like
to
note
that
that
manner
in
which
an
election
is
held
is
now
back
where
it
belongs
with
the
general
assembly.
G
So
let's,
let's
never
do
that
ever
again.
The
manner
of
an
election
is
to
be
decided
by
the
general
assembly,
not
two
people
who
got
together
in
a
room
in
the
executive
branch,
so
we're
we're.
We've
got
three
days
of
early
voting
instead
of
three
weeks
representative
smith,
so
we
should
have
more
compressed
election
cycles
and
I
think
people
will
will
enjoy
that,
but
I
just
want
to
comment
a
little
bit
on
the
nomenclature
over
here.
You
were
talking
about
mail-in
voting.
G
G
G
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
before
we
get
into
this
this
new
law.
We
don't
call
it
mail
in
voting.
It's
absentee
voting.
I
think
that's
really
critical,
or
else
you're
going
to
start
getting
people
really
fired
up
and
last
time
I
looked,
they
got
plenty
of
other
things
to
be
fired
up
about
right
now.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
F
F
We
have
to
have
both
of
those
things
and
I
think
we
lack
sometimes
the
perception
of
integrity,
whether
it's
on
the
right
or
the
left.
We
have
some
people
thinking
that
trump
didn't
win
the
first
time
we
have
some
people
thinking
that
trump
did
win
the
second
time
the
governor
of
georgia,
the
lady
who
lost
stacey
abrams
goes
around
saying
she
won
the
election.
She
still
has
not
conceded
so
this
is
not
a
right
or
left
issue.
This
is
a
citizens
issue.
F
We
need
to
have
integrity
in
our
elections
and,
as
importantly,
we
need
to
perceive
those
elections
to
have
integrity.
I
am
very
happy
that
our
county
clerks
are
here.
I
trust
our
county
clerks
julie,
barr
in
oldham,
county
and
bobby
host,
claw
in
jefferson,
county
there's,
no
better
clerks
than
those
two.
They
run
honest
elections.
I
believe
I
believe
in
our
elections.
F
The
first
question
is:
there's
an
organization
that's
identified
counties
throughout
the
country
where
there's
been
some
anomalies,
24
counties
in
kentucky
have
been
identified
as
having
potential
anomalies.
I've
looked
into
jefferson
and
I've
looked
into
odom,
at
least
my
areas,
and
I
believe
those
anomalies
are
explained.
But
my
question
to
you
is
the
same
that
I
asked
to
the
the
board
of
elections,
and
that
is
what
does
the
post-election
audit
look
like?
F
I
know,
anderson
county
was
one
of
the
six
I'm
informed
after
I
asked
the
question:
what
does
it
look
like
and
is
it
as
as
as
beefy
as
strong
as
it
ought
to
be?
That's
question
number
one.
A
Anytime,
an
audit
is
mentioned:
if
you
of
the
clerk,
you
don't
need
to
be
too
passive
about
it.
You
need
to
understand
how
important
that
audit
is.
We
are
audited
numerous
times
a
year
on
our
finances
on
our
our
decals
on
our
plates
etcetera
through
the
year
and
through
a
strict
audit
from
the
auditor's
office.
A
When
the
attorney
general's
office
walks
into
your
office,
I
breathe
a
whole
lot
harder.
My
heart
pumps
a
whole
lot
more.
I
have
total
confidence
actually.
This
year
we
had
the
highest
turnout
of
any
county
in
the
state
and
when
we
were
chosen,
I
went
yes
because
that
may
would
show
the
public
that
our
elections
were
true
and
accurate.
I
can't
speak
for
every
county.
I
can't
speak
for
other
states,
but
I
know
the
processes
in
these.
Other
counties
are
just
like
ours
in
anderson
county
they
go
in
and
they
check
the
accuracy
test.
A
There's
a
test
deck
run
to
be
sure
every
candidate
every
question
has
counted
and
when
it
goes
through
that
machine
it's
scanned
and
that
race
gets
that
or
that
marking
gets
identified
by
that
end
of
that
paper
tape
at
the
end
of
the
night
we
have
to
sign
off
on
that.
They
look
at
that
accuracy
test.
A
A
A
A
A
Every
election
and
most
of
us
go
testify
ourselves
and
if
there's
anything
that
makes
me
feel
not
warm
and
fuzzy,
I'm
going
to
mention
it
right
then,
and
there
they
look
at
every
voter
absentee
application
for
a
ballot.
They
look
at
those
they
can
they
have.
So
if
there
is
doubt
at
the
polls
on
election
day
that
somebody
lied
on
an
oath
of
voter
card
or
voter
assistance
form,
they
have
access
to
look
at
those
and
they
have
jurisdiction
to
investigate.
A
F
Mr
chairman
can
ask
her
yes,
so
senator
julie,
rocky
adams
and
I,
on
behalf
of
our
constituents,
have
written
a
letter
to
the
attorney
general
asking
for
random
audits
of
the
six
of
the
six
of
the
24
counties
that
have
been
identified,
and
so
I
hope
that
that
process
goes
forward.
Anderson
county
was
not
one
of
those
24
counties,
so
we've
sent
that
earlier
this
week.
F
The
the
second
question
I
have,
I
asked
I'm
asking
on
behalf
of
a
constituent,
and
please
know
I
want
to
stay
up
front.
I
believe
that
the
election
in
2019
was
was
the
result,
was
what
the
elector
the
the
voters
put
in
the
ballot
box.
I
think
governor
beshear
won,
but
I
had
this
question
and
that's
this
a
lot
of
kentuckians
watched
on.
I
don't
know
if
it
was
cnn
or
msnbc
or
fox
news,
saw
the
numbers
transpose
or
change
right
in
front
of
our
eyes.
F
And
so
could
you
explain
to
me
how
that
would
happen?
My
understanding,
I
won't
tell
you
my
understanding.
Do
we
know
what
happened?
Has
it
been
looked
into
and
if
not,
who
can
we
contact
to
make
sure
that
we
have
the
facts
for
our
people
to
know
that
that
election
for
them
to
believe
that
that
election
is,
as
I
believe,
and
it
was
legitimate?
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
P
That
was
a
widely
spread,
video
and
and
obviously
a
lot
of
people
have
seen
that
and
and
raised
a
lot
of
questions,
including
myself,
but
when
it
comes
down
to
it,
we
are
reporting
these
numbers
and
the
news
media
is
putting
it
online
and
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge,
it
was
just
an
actual
key
in
stroke
that
one
went
up
and
one
went
down
and
it
was
corrected
while
it
was
on
a
live
feed.
P
So,
but
once
again,
these
numbers
are
not
certified
until
it
goes
before
the
state
board
of
election
and
that's
done
days
after
so,
though,
even
though
they're
seeing
these
numbers
and
the
reporting
of
the
election
night
results,
those
are
unofficial,
results
until
they're
certified,
so
that
video
showed,
as
the
media
took
hold,
of
the
numbers
that
they
were
receiving.
That
was
just
a
correction
during
the
live
feed.
P
It
caused
a
lot
of
doubt
in
our
our
elections
and
unfortunately,
it
was
one
of
our
kentucky
races.
I
will
tell
you
this
that
I
don't
know
one
clerk
in
the
state
that
wouldn't
want
an
audit.
Our
names
are
on
the
line
as
well.
Our
integrity
is
on
the
line
as
well,
more
so
than
anyone
on
the
ballot,
and
we
take
extreme
pride
in
what
we
do
and
I
think,
with
house
bill.
574
takes
the
security
of
kentucky
elections,
a
step
further.
O
Mr
chairman,
I
wonder
if
I
might
answer
that
as
well.
O
Oh
thank
you
representatives.
I
just
wanted
to
step
in
just
because
I
think
it's
a
really
important
question
that
you
bring
up
and
I
really
value
the
fact
that
you
did
bring
it
up.
I
think
it's
really
important
to
start
from
the
idea
that
cnn
any
other
news
station
local
news
or
newspapers,
they
do
not
certify
our
elections.
O
Not
only
do
they
not
certify
our
elections,
but
they
are
not
connected
to
our
election
night
return
system.
The
that
process
is
a
secure
connection
between
the
counties
and
the
state
board
of
elections,
and
those
numbers
come
in
and
they
are
not
certified.
Just
like
clerk
denny
was
was
mentioning
until
weeks
later.
What's
important
about,
that
is
some
of
what
clerk
cockrell
was
was
mentioning.
Is
that
what
happens
on
election
night?
Is
the
ap
edmunds?
O
A
lot
of
other
news
agencies
will
have
what
they
call
stringers
in
the
state.
They
literally
have
people
that
are
going
from
precinct
to
precinct
and
from
county
to
county,
employing
those
election
results
on
their
own.
What
we
do
in
kentucky,
that
is,
a
safety
control
about
how
our
election
results
come
in,
is
that
at
every
precinct
those
election
tapes
from
the
machines
actually
have
to
be
posted
on
the
window
of
the
precinct.
O
They
are
signed
by
the
poll
workers
that
night
before
they
closed
the
the
polling,
location
down
and
a
second
tape
that
is
also
signed
by
the
poll.
Workers
goes
to
the
county
clerk's
office.
O
This
is
that
they've
had
an
individual
in
their
back
room
and
their
election
results
side
typing
in
what
the
election
results
are
in
each
precinct
in
each
state
and
they
that
figured
it
in
and
unfortunately,
a
new
site
that
you
know
not
not
everyone
watches,
but
a
news
organization
that
people
have
now
watched
on
youtube
and
seen
this,
and
they
take
this
misinformation
at
the
fact
that
somehow
cnn
counts
our
ballots.
They
do
not.
O
They
have
nothing
to
do
with
that
process
and
it's
important
to
know
that
from
a
security
standpoint
from
a
process
standpoint
and
know
that
our
election
results
are
tallied
by
poll
workers
by
the
county,
clerks,
the
county
boards
of
elections
and
the
state
board
of
elections,
and
they
are
also
submitted
to
the
secretary
of
state.
So
there
is
a
a
group
of
control
that
people
have
to
work
together
and-
and
these
results
come
through
that
process
and
it's
a
very
articulated
process.
So
cnn
has
nothing
to
do
with
that.
D
K
Representatives,
I
appreciate
you
bringing
up
what
your
constituents
are
asking
you,
because
it's
you
need
to.
Everybody
needs
a
better
understanding
of
what
we
do
in
the
process
we
go
through,
because
before
now
you
couldn't
talk
to
anybody
about
elections.
Nobody
was
interested
at
all.
So
I
think
it's
it's
a
good
thing
in
a
way
that
people
are
more
interested
now.
But
just
like,
I
want
to
reiterate
what
jared
said.
Cnn
is
not
connected
to
anything
in
the
state
of
kentucky.
K
There
are
people
in
my
courtroom
on
election
night,
getting
totals
off
the
board
and
calling
on
a
cell
phone
and
telling
someone
else
and
they're
compiling
those
results
and
who
knows
how
they're
getting
the
math
right
and
then
it's
going
to
the
media.
The
media
is
there
to
sell
ads,
so
they
want
to
get
the
results
out.
First,
they
don't
care
if
they're
accurate.
They
want
them
out.
K
First,
they
want
people
to
watch
their
programs
and
we
want
accurate
results
and
there's
a
lot
of
pressure
on
election
night
for
us
to
get
those
results
out
as
quickly
as
possible.
We
do
everything
we
can
because
we
won't
know
people
want
to
know,
but
likes
been
said
already.
Those
are
completely
unofficial
until
certified
by
the
state
board
of
elections
the
week
later
and
on
thursday,
by
the
local
board
of
elections.
D
Yeah,
the
the
media,
I
mean,
I
had
an
election
one
time
where
I
was
my
opponent
had
like
3
000
votes,
I
had
88
votes
and
it
was
stuck
there
all
night
long
and
I
was
and
everybody's
like
man,
you
got
creamed
like.
Obviously
there
was
something
going
on
there
didn't
find
out
the
true
score
until
the
morning.
So
I
mean
it's.
If
you're
going
to
rely
on
media
or
whatnot
things,
it's
a
big
operation
and
things
happen
and
the
official
account
where
people
are
putting
their
name
on
the
line
is
what
is
important.
E
D
Good
point:
okay,
thanks,
gentlemen,
appreciate
it
great
discussions
today,
we'll
have
more
on
this
stay
tuned:
okay,
representative,
luckett
and
your
group
will
come
forward.
Q
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
My
name
is
matt
lockett.
I
am
the
state
representative
for
the
39th
district
and
I
want
to
to
first
start
off
and
apologize
that
if
I
do
get
up
and
leave,
I've
got
to
get
on
the
road
to
paducah
to
a
funeral.
I'm
sorry
for
my
aunt,
so
I
will
be
doing
that
shortly.
Q
When
I
was
approached
to
carry
a
bill
about
convention
of
states
and
an
article
five
convention,
my
reaction
was
an
absolutely
yes.
Yes,
I
will
because
I
believe
that
our
country
and
our
federal
government
is
at
a
state
where
it's
time
that
our
state,
our
states
step
in,
I
believe
it's
important
as
we
look
around
the
country
and
we
see
our
parties
and
it
doesn't
matter
who
has
been
in
the
white
house
that
are
spending
our
children
and
our
grandchildren
and
our
grandchildren's
children
into
oblivion.
Q
So
how
do
we
stop
that?
I
want
to
read
this.
This
comes
directly
from
the
convention
of
states
website.
It
says
the
root
of
the
frustration
felt
by
citizens
across
america
is
that
our
federal
government
does
whatever
it
wants,
and
there
is
nothing
that
that
citizens
can
do
about
it.
It
it
doesn't
seem
to
matter
who
they
send
to
represent
them
in
washington
dc,
but
they
have
lost
control
of
their
own
government.
Q
Q
M
Let
me
move
this
around
in
front
of
me
because
I'm
not
really
technologically
blind
here
so
chairman
and
honorable
members
of
the
state
government
committee.
I
want
to
thank
you
all
for
allowing
me
to
represent
our
volunteers
throughout
the
state
here
today
to
talk
to
you
about
not
only
article
5
but
also
the
convention
estates
action
project.
M
Now
I
am
my
name
again
is
mary,
jo
wedding.
I
am
a
lifelong
northern
kentucky
resident.
I've
lived
here,
my
entire
life
actually
right
across
from
cincinnati
in
senator
schroeder's
district,
and
it's
important
here
today
that
I'm
I'm
coming
to
you
as
a
concerned
citizen
concerned
citizen
about
the
condition
of
our
constitutional
republic,
but
most
important.
M
M
M
Secondly,
we
have
a
team
of
volunteers
that
actually
physically
calls
that
petition
signer.
They
call
them.
They
thank
them
for
signing
the
petition
and
then
they
ask
them.
Do
you
have
any
questions?
Do
you
understand
what
article
five
is?
Do
you
understand
what
we're
request,
what
we're
trying
to
do
if
they
don't
answer
the
phone
and
we
have
to
leave
them
a
voicemail?
We
leave
them
that
message.
M
We
also
send
them
a
text
message
and
we
send
them
another
email,
because
those
petition
signers
in
those
emails
that
always
are
discarded.
I
know
I
understand
you
get
tons
emails,
I
get
it
they're
real
people,
they're
real
people
and
real
voters.
This
room
today
is
filled
with
convention
estates
and
I
didn't
pay
these
people
to
come.
M
I
did
give
them
a
t-shirt
to
wear
all
right,
so
I
appreciate
them
coming
out,
but
these
people
are
the
voters.
These
are
the
individuals
that
need
to
know
that
you
are
supporting
their
choices
and
making
sure
that
when
you
take
that
oath
to
defend
the
constitution,
you're
actually
defending
their
liberties.
M
Again,
I
said:
there's
35
000
petition
signers,
but
that's
not
all
of
the
volunteers.
Those
are
the
just
the
ones
that
will
sign
the
petition.
There's
not
a
there's,
some
conservatives
that
won't
sign
a
petition.
They
won't
put
their
name
on
the
dotted
line
but
they're
here
and
they
support
article
5..
M
It
is
within
your
constitutional
duty
to
call
an
article
five.
It's
in
the
constitution,
you
took
the
oath.
It
is
part
of
your
state
legislators,
responsibility
to
not
only
call
a
convention
but
to
assign
and
make
sure
they
give
the
focus
to
those
legislators
they're
going
to
send
to
that
convention
to
represent
the
state
and
the
constitutional
questions
and
issues
that
the
people
behind
me
are
here.
M
M
Sorry
wait
a
minute
kevin
hold
on
a
second
real,
quick.
This
is
the
constitution
that
you
guys
all
have
on
your
desk
right.
This
is
the
constitution
that
we
live
under
today.
These
are
supreme
court
rulings.
We
need
to
get
back
to
this,
because
if
we
continue
this,
we
have
no
republic.
Thank
you.
Now
you
can
go.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
members
of
the
committee,
by
the
way,
the
title
unbelievably
because
I
got
one
of
those
by
mistake.
Originally,
it
just
says
on
the
spine,
the
constitution
of
the
united
states
of
america,
centennial
audition,
and
that's
actually
really
important,
because
I
hear
people
say
all
the
time
well
mark.
Why
do
we
need
to
amend
the
constitution?
I
mean,
after
all,
this
document
is
beautiful,
succinct.
It
says
what
we
know.
It
says
we
all
understand
what
it
says.
Why
do
we
need
to
amend
it?
B
The
answer
is
because
this
is
not
the
constitution
under
which
we
live.
The
federal
government
deems
that
to
be
the
united
states
constitution,
call
the
government
publishing
office.
Today
you
could
order
one
when
I
did
it,
it
was
about
130,
it's
a
little
bit
ironic.
Today
they
say
they
don't
have
the
money
to
publish
those
anymore,
so
you
can't
order
those
from
the
federal
government
anymore
yeah
that
wasn't
in
the
trillion
dollar
bill
that
they
just
passed.
B
I
want
to
back
up
a
little
bit
and
again
thank
you
for
letting
me
be
here.
It's
an
honor
to
be
with
you
guys.
In
my
opinion,
having
traveled
all
over
the
country
been
in,
48
states
been
in
the
legislatures
and
most
of
those.
This
is
where
america
actually
works.
When
you
look
at
washington
dc
and
what
goes
on
when
we
watch
television,
whatever
media
outlet,
you
happen
to
watch,
what
we
see
is
the
brokenness
and
the
dysfunction
of
the
united
states
of
america.
B
72
percent
of
all
americans
feel
that
the
federal
government
is
too
big
and
does
too
much
it's
just
involved
in
too
much
of
our
business.
We
might
have
partisan
differences
about
what
they
should
or
should
not
be
involved
in,
but
the
vast
majority
of
the
american
people
are
disgusted
dissatisfied
disenchanted
with
the
federal
government
and,
as
the
representative
said,
we
believe
we
can't
do
anything
about
it,
but
we
were
given
this
power
in
article
five.
B
It
was
given
to
us
literally
two
days
before
the
end
of
convention
in
1787,
colonel
george
mason
stood
and
he
addressed
the
men
assembled.
This
is
september
15th,
two
days
before
the
interconvention,
and
he
said
we
have
a
terrible
problem.
We've
given
the
power
to
congress
to
propose
amendments
should
they
deem
them
necessary,
but
not
to
the
people
acting
through
the
states
and
then
he
asked.
Are
we
so
naive
that
we
believe
that
the
federal
government
that's
a
tyranny,
will
ever
propose
amendments
to
restrain
its
own
tyranny?
B
I'm
guessing
they
laughed
and
we
don't
have
video,
but
we
do
have
madison's
notes,
they
say
nincom,
not
one
person
even
commented.
There
was
no
debate.
It
was
unanimously
put
in
the
constitution
to
give
you
this
power,
the
power
to
step
into
the
breach,
to
step
into
the
line
of
fire
and
to
stop
a
runaway
federal
government.
Why
you
of
everybody
they
could
have
given
this
power
to
only
you,
have
the
power
to
call
a
convention
to
propose
amendments
and
then
to
ratify
those
amendments,
thereby
changing
the
structure
of
our
actual
constitution.
B
Why
you
of
all
people
and
the
answer?
Actually,
if
you
think
about
it,
is
obvious,
because
the
founders
were
you
most
of
them
sat
in
in
legislatures
in
the
states
they
sat
on
city
councils,
they
understood
and
believed
in
government
close
to
the
people.
So
when
they
said
we
have
to
have
a
protector
for
our
country.
Ultimately
they
look
to
you
because
that's
what
they
understood.
B
That's
where
they
understood
that
the
preservation
of
liberty
would
come
from
from
you,
so
they
gave
you
this
power
and
now
the
question
is:
do
we
exercise
that
power
245
years
later?
We've
never
done
so.
Why
haven't
we
done
so?
It's
hard.
The
founders
intended
it
to
be
really
hard.
They
wanted
a
really
high
bar.
It
takes
two-thirds
of
states
just
to
call
a
convention.
B
Both
houses
of
the
legislature
agree.
You
know
how
hard
it
is
just
to
get
a
legislature
degree
inside
itself.
Now
you
need
two-thirds
of
all
state
legislatures
to
agree
on
the
subject
matter
for
a
convention.
We've
never
done
it
in
convention.
What
happens?
You'll
choose
your
own
delegates.
You'll.
Send
your
delegates
to
that
convention
and
you'll
empower
them
to
do
certain
things.
You'll
tell
them.
B
There
are
certain
things
they
can't
do
and
they'll
get
there
and
they
will
convene
like
a
legislature
and
they
will
debate
and
they
will
argue
and
they
will
have
to
come
to
a
majority
to
do
one
thing,
and
one
thing
only-
and
this
is
important
I
hear
about
the
runaway
convention
all
the
time.
The
convention
is
so
powerful.
It
can
do
so
much
damage
it
can
destroy
our
constitution.
B
The
convention
itself
has
the
power
to
suggest
nothing
else.
I've
never
gone
to
a
meeting
and
thought
you
know.
People
like
this
is
an
interim
hearing.
There'll
be
suggestions
made.
It's
terrifying.
People
will
make
suggestions,
there's
nothing
that
can
happen
in
a
convention
except
for
suggestions
and
then,
whatever
those
suggestions
are,
if
we
can
get
a
majority
of
states
to
agree,
those
will
go
out
to
the
states
for
ratification,
and
then
it
takes
an
even
bigger
majority.
It
takes
38
states
to
ratify
anything
that
comes
out
of
convention.
B
This
particular
resolution
says
that
the
convention
will
discuss
anything
that
would
impose
term
limits
on
federal
officials.
That
would
mean
congress
which
over
85
percent
of
americans
want,
but
it
would
also
mean
what
we
now
refer
to
as
the
deep
state,
staffers
and
bureaucrats,
the
fourth
branch
of
government
that
was
never
supposed
to
exist.
It
also
potentially
means
federal
judiciary.
B
The
convention
would
discuss
anything
that
would
also
impose
fiscal
restraints
on
the
federal
government.
You
heard
30
trillion
in
debt,
but
actually
really
the
real
number
off
book
is
closer
to
150
trillion
dollars
numbers
we
cannot
even
imagine
we
could
impose
generally
accepting
accounting
principles
on
the
federal
government.
I
once
sat
in
a
meeting
with
the
omb
and
I
asked
them
what
accounting
principles
they
had
and
they
literally
these
are
senior
officials
at
the
omb.
They
said
we
don't
have
any
principles.
B
I
said
I
know
that,
but
I
was
talking
about
accounting
principles,
and
so
they
literally
don't
they
don't
follow
any
accounting
principles.
So
we
can
impose
those
things.
We
can
impose
taxation,
caps,
spending
caps
and
then
finally-
and
I
think
most
importantly,
we
can
impose
caps
or
restrictions
on
scope,
jurisdiction
and
power
of
the
federal
government.
There
are
many
things
the
federal
government
was
never
intended
to
be
involved
in.
In
fact,
the
founders
agreed
hamilton
and
jefferson
in
their
great
debate
about
big
government
versus
small
government.
B
They
agreed
that
anything
that
you
can
do
that
you,
as
the
state
legislature,
have
the
power
to
do.
The
federal
government
didn't
have
the
power
to
do,
and
vice
versa.
And
now
today
you
regulate
your
education
system,
your
environment,
your
health
care
system
and
the
federal
government
does
all
of
those
things
as
well,
and
that's
because
the
courts
have
given
them
that
power,
not
the
constitution.
B
So
today
we
come
to
you
to
talk
about
the
idea
that
you
could
step
into
the
breach
that
you
have
the
power.
One
last
thing
I'd
like
to
address,
then
I'd
be
happy
to
take
questions
that
I
hear
all
the
time.
This
argument
this
is
literally
the
only
argument
I
hear
against
the
idea
of
the
state
stepping
in
and
calling
in
convention
states
mark
it's
going
to
be
a
runaway
convention.
You
have
no
idea,
what's
going
to
happen,
we're
going
to
throw
it
open.
B
The
whole
constitution
is
at
risk
and
I'm
going
to
tell
you
straight
up
unequivocally.
That
is
false.
How
do
I
know
it's
false?
I'm
not
the
smartest
guy
in
the
world,
every
single,
nationally
known
conservative
commentator.
That's
commented
on
this
100
percent
of
them
liberty,
levin,
hannity,
shapiro.
All
of
these
guys,
glenn
beck.
All
of
these
guys
say
not
possible.
B
All
the
conservative
legal
scholars
in
the
country
that
are
nationally
known,
randy
barnett
at
georgetown
at
princeton,
robbie
george,
all
of
them
say
it
cannot
run
away
it's
limited
by
what
we
limit
them
to
and
in
the
end-
and
this
is
the
most
important
thing-
I'm
not
the
smartest
guy
in
the
world.
I
am
a
lawyer-
don't
hold
that
against
me-
we're
not
very
good
at
math,
but
I
can
do
this
math.
B
It
takes
38
states
to
ratify
anything
that
comes
out
of
convention
and
I
want
to
challenge
anybody
who
is
concerned
about
this,
and
you
can
call
me
directly,
I'm
happy
to
give
you
my
phone
number.
My
card.
Tell
me
what
amendment
you're,
afraid
of
and
then
tell
me
the
38
states
that
will
ratify
it.
I've
made
that
offer
to
millions
of
people,
I've,
never
gotten
an
email
or
a
phone
call.
It
cannot
run
away.
That's
a
fallacy
created
to
stop
us
from
using
the
constitution
to
save
the
constitution.
Mr
chair,
thank
you.
D
Thank
you,
mr
meckler.
We
have
teresa
cameron,
I
don't
know,
I'm
gonna
come
on
up
teresa,
I'm
gonna
butcher,
your
name.
D
Representative
tipton
did
you
have
a
question
for
mary,
jo
or
mark
okay?
Okay,
go
ahead
and
introduce
yourself
and.
R
R
R
R
R
R
Another
problem
that
caused
this
disaster
was
delay.
Lack
of
preparation,
lack
of
training,
people
reported
it.
Passengers
reported
it
when
it
was
still
a
small
fire
and
the
people
working
for
the
underground
went
down
to
check
on
it.
They
went
back
upstairs
to
call
the
fire
department
when
the
fire
department
came,
they
had
the
wrong
equipment,
it
couldn't
reach
the
fire,
the
fire
burned
out
of
control.
It
went
up
the
wooden
escalator
and
at
the
top
of
the
wooden
escalator
on
the
ceiling,
were
20
layers
of
old
paint.
R
This
huge
jet
of
flames
shot
up
the
escalator
and
filled
the
whole
room
and
and
burned
everything
that
jet
of
flames
was
totally
unexpected
and
it
even
took
them
a
long
time
to
figure
out
why
that
had
happened.
It
turned
out
that
the
30
degree
angle
of
the
escalator
created
an
unexpected
type
of
airflow,
which
they
finally
gave
a
name.
The
trench
effect.
R
R
R
R
We
also
have
a
false
sense
of
security,
which
I
just
heard
earlier.
It
can't
possibly
this
country
can't
possibly
collapse.
It's
never
collapsed
before
so
it
can't
possibly
collapse.
We
can't
have
a
runaway
convention,
we
know
for
sure.
That
could
never
happen.
I
believe
that's
a
false
sense
of
security.
So
what
could
go
wrong?
R
R
The
problem
is,
the
constitution
already
does
reign
in
the
federal
government,
and
the
problem
is
that
people
are
ignoring
the
constitution
today.
No,
no
amendment
will
fix
that
problem.
So
the
upside
of
a
constitutional
convention-
or
this
is
called
an
article
5
convention,
the
upside
is
zero.
It
won't
make
people
respect
the
constitution,
but
the
downside
is
huge.
R
R
R
One
of
the
people
on
facebook
from
the
kentucky
convention
of
states.
Supporters
said
that
what
we
want
to
do
is
make
this
like
a
snowball,
rolling
down
the
mountain
and
it
becomes
unstoppable.
R
What
do
we
risk?
We
risk
a
loss
of
our
rights.
First
amendment
rights.
Second
amendment
rights:
they
could
pack
the
courts,
they
could
eliminate
the
electoral
college.
I
mean
no
end
of
problems
could
come
out
of
a
convention
like
this,
so
we
have
the
matches
lit.
We
have
the
wooden
escalator.
We
have
20
layers
of
paint.
This
is
no
time
to
set
loose
the
trench
effect,
the
article
5
convention.
R
R
R
R
R
R
We
need
to
rebuild
on
the
existing
structure
and
and
build
back
the
constitutional
republic
that
we
are
supposed
to
have,
and
the
states
and
the
local
governments
and
local
people
are
going
to
be
very
instrumental
in
doing
that.
You
have
an
important
role
to
play.
You
don't
need
an
article
5
convention,
you
don't
need
a
constitutional
amendment
to
say
no
to
the
federal
government
when
it
starts
spending
illegal,
unconstitutional
money
on
unconstitutional
programs.
You
just
need
to
say
no.
R
R
It
is
playing
with
fire.
It
is
much
easier
to
stop
this.
This
problem
now
before
it
gets
loose
than
to
wait
until
we
have
a
runaway
convention,
and
we
have
that
snowball
rolling
down
the
the
mountain
and
all
of
a
sudden,
there's
momentum
and
you're
pressured
to
to
to
ratify
that.
R
D
D
I
do
and
it's
when
you
guys
talk,
I
identify
so
much
with
what
you're
saying
and
I
have
great
respect
for
the
tea
party,
especially
the
louisville
tea
party.
You
know
I
got
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
them
in
my
district
and
they're,
just
as
adamant
against
I'm
personally,
I'm
kind
of
torn.
You
know
it's
just
back
and
forth,
and
so
I
thought
it
would
be
great
to
get
you
guys
together
and
theresa.
D
C
Chair
like,
like
the
chairman,
brancher,
mentioned,
I've
kept
up
with
this
issue
the
last
few
years.
Now
it's
my
understanding
that
and
for
lack
of
a
better
term,
there
are
there's
more
than
one
article
5
convention
group
out
there.
There
are
other
projects,
other
proposals,
a
lot
of
proposal
resolutions.
C
Could
you
could
you
just
comment
on
that?
A
little
bit
am
I
missing
some
that
are
out
there
and
the
second
part
of
my
question
is
in
your
particular
resolution,
how
many-
how
many
states
have
adopted
your
resolution
at
this
point
in
time
and
how
many
more
would
you
need
for
it
to
go
to
a
an
article,
5
convention.
B
Mr
chairman,
representative
tipton,
you
are
correct.
There
are
three
primary
groups
now
pursuing
article
5
conventions.
One
is
u.s
term
limits.
I
believe
they
just
have
a
couple
of
states.
They're,
the
newest
group.
You
have
the
balanced
budget
amendment
folks
they've
been
working
for
about.
I
want
to
say,
40
years
roughly
now
to
get
to
the
requisite
34
states.
Last
couple
of
years,
they've
lost
a
few
states
that
some
states
have
flipped
from
red
to
blue
and
they've
rescinded.
So
I
I
would
guess,
there's
somewhere
around
25
26
states.
B
I
don't
know
the
exact
number
that
one
will
actually
be
litigated
in
federal
court,
unfortunately,
either
way
because
the
language
is
different
on
a
bunch
of
those
and
then
there's
the
convention
of
states.
Action,
which
is
what
I
represent.
Currently
15
states
have
passed
our
resolution
in
both
houses.
Another
eight
states
have
passed
it
in
one
house
or
another.
B
D
Any
other
questions
representative
nina.
Thank
you.
F
I've
got
a
quick
question
of
each
side.
I
want
to
see,
sir,
why
you're
so
confident
that
you
can
control
it,
because
I'm
going
straight
to
the
language
yeah,
it
says
they
can
shall
call
convention
for
proposing
amendments.
The
states
can
do
that.
It
doesn't
say
particular
amendments.
It
says
proposing
amendments
when
the
constitution
was
written,
the
folks
under
the
articles
of
confederation
thought
they
were
sending
people
to
write
amendments
to
the
articles
and
not
the
new
constitution.
F
And
then
you
say
what
about?
If
something
untoward
is
sent
to
the
states
will
three-fourths
of
the
states
approve
it?
It
doesn't
say:
three-fourths
of
the
states
have
to
approve
it.
It
says
three-fourths
of
the
states
approve
it
or
state
conventions
which
are
decided
by
congress.
I
don't
trust
congress.
F
R
R
O
R
Do
you
expect
to
get
a
an
amendment
to
the
constitution
agreed
upon
when
the
whole
country
is
split?
In
half
I
mean
it's
not
going
to
happen.
What
we
need
to
do
is
rebuild
rebuild
our
country
rebuild,
so
that
people
understand
that
fiscal
responsibility
has
to
be
has
to
be
the
law
of
the
land
and
we
have
to
be
fiscally
responsible.
R
We
we
have
to
do
it.
It's
hard
work,
it's
it's,
but
it's
it's!
What
we've
got
and
it's
the
best
constitution
the
world
has
seen.
So
I
don't
want
a
chance,
ripping
it
up.
It's
it's
as
it's
the
best
we've
got
and
by
the
way
we
elect
those
people
that
that
go
to
congress,
they're,
they're,
kentuckians
that
we
send,
and
if
we
don't
like
them,
then
we
get
rid
of
them
and
put
somebody
else
in
there.
But
we
have
that
power
as
the
people.
R
It's
not
like
the
state
is
the
people
and
the
people
we
send
to
the
federal
government
are
not
the
people
they're,
our
elected
representatives,
just
like
you
are,
and
if
we
don't
like
them,
we
boot
them
out.
We
put
somebody
else
in,
but
it's
up
to
us
to
do
that,
and
I
wish
all
these
people
behind
me
would
help
me
do
that
and
and
get
good
people
you
know,
but
that's
that
I
mean
there
is.
It
is
not
time
for
the
hail
mary
pass.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you,
representative.
Are
we
on
there?
Am
I
alive
just
real
quick.
I
have
to
defend
these
folks.
They
all
vote.
They
all
participate
in
elections,
they're
they're
all
doing
exactly
what
you
ask
of
them.
The
time
has
come
for
the
american
people
to
stand.
I
want
to
go
back
in
history
real
quickly.
You
brought
up
the
1787
convention.
B
It
actually
was
not
a
runaway
convention.
I've
read
the
commissions
of
all
the
commissioners.
You
can
find
those
linked
on
our
website
by
the
way
and
what
you'll
find
is
they'll
had
it's.
This
is
the
language
in
their
commission's
full
authority
to
do
take
any
and
all
actions
necessary
to
render
the
federal
constitution
adequate
for
the
exigencies
of
the
union.
B
There's
a
misperception
from
history,
because
congress
later
on
after
seven
states,
already
call
said
that
they
should
gather
to
amend
the
articles
of
confederation
congress
actually
did
something
where
they
didn't
have
any
authority
to
do
it.
Can
you
imagine
that
they
actually
had
no
authority
under
the
articles
of
confederation
to
call
a
convention
to
propose
amendments
or
anything
like
that,
so
the
states
had
already
fully
authorized
their
delegates
to
do
whatever
was
necessary.
That's
all
true
for
all,
but
two
states
by
the
way.
I
don't
want
to
dig
into
that
detail.
B
How
do
I
know
it
won't
run
away?
Well,
patrick
henry
said
in
his
famous
give
me
liberty
or
give
me
death
speech
that
I
have
no
lamplight,
by
which
my
feet
can
be
guided
other
than
the
lamplight
of
history.
Here's
what
we
know
historically
11
conventions
in
america
before
1787
1787
convention,
which
I've
just
definitively
demonstrated,
was
not
a
runaway
convention.
B
You
trust,
that's
true
with
all
the
states,
so
there's
never
been
a
runaway
convention
in
all
of
american
history
and
as
far
as
the
ratifying
methodology,
you
are
correct.
There
are
two
methods
that
are
specified
in
the
constitution:
one
being
legislative
ratification,
y'all
ratifying
and
the
other
being
the
appointment
of
state
ratifying
conventions,
all
of
them,
except
for
one,
except
for
the
repeal
of
prohibition,
have
been
done
by
legislative
ratification.
B
The
only
one
that
was
punted
so
to
speak
to
state
ratifying
conventions
was
the
repeal
of
prohibitions
due
to
the
controversial
nature
who
controls
what
a
state
ratifying
convention
is
the
state
legislature.
So
the
bottom
line
is
one
way
or
another.
This
comes
back
to
the
state
legislatures
to
decide
what
a
state
ratifying
convention
is.
Those
are
the
only
two
things
that
congress
is
authorized
to
state
either
legislative
ratification
or
ratification
by
state
ratifying
conventions,
and
we
have
a
history
of
that.
B
I
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
It
really
was
very
similar
to
representative
namaste's
question.
Ultimately,
at
the
end
there
for
mr
mariano
it's
effectively,
I
would
assume
all
of
us
think
our
constitution
is
well
written
and
this
is
an
ability,
that's
been
given
to
the
legislators
to
do
this.
So
to
that
same
point,
I
would
wonder
at
what
point
would
this
should
the
legislators
actually
enact
this,
because,
if
it's
out
of
fear
that
something
bad
might
arise,
we
would
never
use
this.
I
So
why
would
our
founders
even
put
this
in
our
constitution
if
they
were
so
fearful
that
somehow
this
would
get
away
from
us?
That's
my
question
is,
I
think,
we're
we're
more
worried
about
what
might
happen.
What
might
go
wrong
than
saying?
We've
got
something:
that's
currently
going
wrong
in
federal
government.
We
have
an
opportunity
to
fix
it.
They
give
us
the
ability
to
do
so.
That's
the
question
that
I
have,
and
I
get
the
sense
more
from
you
that
I'm
scared
of
what
might
might
occur
you
might.
R
Yes,
I
am
very
much
afraid
of
what
might
occur
and
I
think
we
all
should
be.
This
has
never
been
done
before
there.
There
has
never
been
an
article
5
convention
to
to
amend
this
constitution.
We
can
all
agree
on
that.
It
has
been
talked
about
in
the
in
the
past
in
history
and
it
was
rejected
because
people
were
afraid
of
a
runaway
convention
and
the
materials
from
this
group.
R
I
believe
they're
from
this
group
say
you
know,
but
our
people,
you
know
they're
they're,
more
scholarly
than
the
people
prior
to
us
who
were
afraid,
there's
no
reason
to
be
afraid.
Now.
I
think
I
think
that
there
was
good
reason
to
be
afraid.
Throughout
history.
We
have
a
perfectly
good
process
for
amending
the
constitution.
If
that's
what
we
want
to
do
and
it
requires
careful
deliberation
and
it
requires
widespread
agreement
and
that's
what
we
ought
to
have
if
we're
going
to
amend
our
constitution,
why.
R
B
Want
this
madison's
notes
reflect
that
they
discussed
this
throughout
the
entire
convention.
In
fact,
I've
personally
seen
george
mason's
copy
of
the
constitution
that
was
handed
to
him
the
day
the
constitutional
convention
began
it's
in
there.
It
fell
out
during
convention.
It
was
a
mistake
and
that's
what
he
said.
A
mistake
was
made
through
the
process,
but
we
have
the
notes
of
it
being
discussed
through
committees.
The
idea
that
the
founders
did
something
by
accident
because
they
were
lazy
at
the
end
of
convention.
Honestly,
that's
just
a
slander
on
the
founders.
R
I
would,
I
certainly
don't
want
to
slander
the
founders,
but
I
do
I
do
know
that
there
is
good
reason
to
be
concerned
and
the
fact
that
you
have
this
ability
doesn't
mean
you
should
use
it.
You
need
to
be
prudent,
you
need
to
be
cautious.
If
we're
conservatives
and
many
of
us
call
ourselves
conservatives,
we
need
to
be
very
cautious
before
we
mess
around
with
the
amending
the
constitution
of
the
united
states.
D
Okay,
we've
got
a
whole
other
subject
here.
I'm
gonna
give
representative
duplicity,
you're
gonna
make
a
30-second
I'll
make
it
fast.
C
C
We
should
never
legislate
out
of
fear.
We
should
legislate
out
of
fact
if
george
washington,
if
george
washington,
had
had
done
what
he
did
based
on
fear,
we'd
still
be
british.
We
do
what
we
do,
because
it's
the
right
thing
to
do.
I
don't
know
if
cos
is
right
or
not,
but
I'm
not
going
to
be
dictated
because
I'm
afraid
I
will
do
what's
right.
D
All
right
all
right,
good
debate,
good
debate,
good
debate,
okay,
thank
you
guys
for
participating
and
all
you
guys
for
showing
up
and
showing
your
colors.
That's
that's
great.
Okay,
representative
flannery
was
that
your
phone
going
off
all
the
time
over
there.
D
C
C
About
this
topic,
zuckerbox
and
when
the
conversation
was
over,
we
both
agreed
that
this
is
a
topic
that
we
probably
should
discuss
and
try
to
flesh
out,
and
so
many
of
you
all
may
be
asking
what
are
zuckerbucks
good
question
I'll.
Let
brian
sunderland
go
first
and
he
can
start
the
conversation.
L
L
Here
with
me
today
is
chase
martin,
our
director
of
legal
affairs,
we're
a
501c
non-profit,
focused
on
public
policy
in
the
states
we
focus
on
integrity
in
social
programs
and
elections
and
limited
government
that's
accountable
to
the
people.
We
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
address
a
very
important
issue:
the
integrity
of
our
election
system
and
the
danger
of
outside
financial
influence
on
the
operations
of
our
elections.
L
First,
I
want
to
add
my
voice
to
the
chorus
congratulating
you
all
for
taking
important
steps
to
secure
and
make
our
elections
more
transparent.
Earlier
this
year,
kentucky
passed
a
comprehensive
election
reform
bill
with
several
important
reforms
and
did
it
with
bipartisan
support.
You
worked
together.
You
saw
the
challenges
that
other
states
had
and
you
took
important
steps
to
try
to
ensure
these
didn't
happen
in
the
commonwealth.
L
L
The
threats
happening
right
under
our
noses
and
most
people
know
nothing
about
it.
At
fga,
we've
been
working
to
uncover
what
happened
as
we
detail
the
spending
for
mark
zuckerberg
and
his
foundation.
I
want
you
to
consider
your
thoughts
on
the
activities
we
describe
in
the
following
context
for
my
republican
friends.
S
S
It's
great
I'll
dive
right
in
in
2020
mark
zuckerberg
and
his
wife
spent
nearly
400
million
dollars
to
fund
election
activities
across
the
country,
and
that
means
exactly
what
it
sounds
like
everything
from
voter
registration
drives
before
the
election
to
get
out
the
vote,
efforts
on
election
day
and
they
leveraged
the
obama
network
to
do
it,
but
they
didn't
do
this,
like
we
all
know
through
a
pac
or
a
campaign,
they
did
it
through
government
through
local
election
offices
in
states
across
the
country,
from
zuckerberg
to
his
wife's
non-profit,
to
an
obama
non-profit
to
cities
and
counties
hundreds
of
millions
of
dollars.
S
S
So
you
can
see
here,
zuckerberg
saved
the
election
sounds
very
noble
right
I
mean
what
a
guy
we
truly
couldn't
have
done
it
without
him,
but
really
this
is
pretty
shocking.
Isn't
it
after
months
of
censoring
conservatives
on
facebook
and
trying
to
influence
the
election,
we
find
out
that
zuckerberg
has
been
working
the
system
from
the
inside
by
financing
the
administration
of
elections.
S
I'm
sure
we
can
all
agree,
especially
those
of
us
in
this
room
that
elections
are
a
sacred
part
of
our
democracy.
Public
elections
should
be
financed
by
public
money.
Private
money
should
be
reserved
for
campaigns
and
advocacy
outside
the
system.
We
heard
earlier
today
from
the
executive
director
of
the
state
board
of
elections.
How
important
transparency
was
how
important
accountable
accountability
is
now
it's
the
same
reason.
We
have
rules
about
how
close
campaign,
volunteers
or
candidates
can
send
to
the
polling
location
right.
S
S
S
We
had
a
list
of
jurisdictions
and
a
few
grant
amounts
here
and
there,
but
that
was
about
it.
We
had
a
30,
000
foot
view
really,
but
this
wasn't
enough.
We
wanted
to
know
exactly
how
it
was
spent
where
it
was
targeted
and
ultimately
did
it
make
a
difference
in
the
outcome.
The
american
people
deserve
answers.
S
L
L
L
Instead,
millions
were
spent
registering
democrats
to
vote
and
in
many
cases
I
would
argue
or
frankly
wasted
I'll
have
to
limit
myself,
because
there
are
many
examples
that
we
uncovered,
but
first
I'll
pick
on
pulaski
county
arkansas,
where
election
officials
went
into
a
high
school
to
register
18
year
olds
to
vote
during
a
pandemic,
and
for
those
of
you
who
aren't
familiar
with
pulaski
county
arkansas
or
haven't
met
an
18
year
old.
Recently,
these
kids
weren't
going
to
vote
for
trump.
This
was
a
democratic
voter
registration
drive
using
half
a
million
dollars
in
suckerbox.
L
Incidentally,
there
was
a
state
legislative
race
in
pulaski
county
that
was
decided
by
less
than
30
votes
and
ultimately
cost
an
incumbent
republican,
a
seat
in
wisconsin
democratic
activists
with
direct
ties
to
the
zuckerberg
funded
foundation
were
actually
given
the
keys
to
the
ballot
storage
facilities
in
philadelphia.
Funds
were
requested
to
send
postcards
to
all
registered
voters.
A
promotional,
multilingual
video
and
a
voter
registration
drive
in
ohio
zuckerbucks
were
used
to
pay
staff
thousand
five
hundred
dollars
to
police
facebook
posts
and
pay
off
an
eight
thousand
one
hundred
dollar
verizon
phone
bill.
L
L
L
I
disagree.
Even
if
some
of
the
spending
appears
innocent
on
the
surface,
it
still
matters
and
here's.
Why
relationships
fundamentally
change
when
money
changes
hands?
This
is
human
nature
chase
and
I
are
perfectly
good
friends.
We
have
a
lot
of
trust
between
us
if
I
start
giving
him
a
thousand
dollars
a
week
with
no
strings
attached.
L
L
You
all
understand
how
money
impacts
perception
as
well,
and
you
talked
about
perception
of
elections,
representative
demas.
How
many
times
have
you
been
accused
any
of
you
for
voting
for
a
bill
based
on
a
campaign
contribution
money
matters
in
the
way
it
looks
matters
so
how
it
was
spent,
that's
what
we
found
so
far,
but
where
was
it
targeted
and
was
it
distributed
equally?
S
S
S
S
Take
dauphin
county,
for
example,
which
is
where
the
capital
city
of
harrisburg
is
they
originally
asked
for
just
over
200
000
in
their
grant
application
for
from
zuckerberg,
but
their
final
grant
amount
was
double
that,
even
though
the
county
narrowly
went
for
hillary
clinton
by
less
than
one
percentage
point.
The
democrat
vote
total
skyrocketed
between
2016
and
2020
by
22
percent,
putting
it
comfortably
in
biden's
camp
column.
S
Ironically,
biden
wound
up
taking
the
county
by
just
a
few
hundred
more
votes.
Then
he
carried
the
state
of
georgia
by
just
around
twelve
thousand
and
that's
in
pennsylvania
county
that
clinton
carried
by
less
than
four
thousand
votes
four
years
earlier,
and
I
apologize
for
throwing
so
many
numbers
at
you
again.
We've
got
just
a
sampling,
but
there
are
two
very
strong
examples
from
both
pennsylvania,
georgia
and
the
same
realities
of
zuckerbox
interference
played
out
in
arizona
florida
and
more.
S
So
this
is
a
big
problem
and
if
we
don't
address
it,
we're
going
to
hand
our
country
over
to
mark
zuckerberg
or
any
other
techno
tyrant,
billionaire
that
comes
in
and
starts
trying
to
literally
buy
your
elections.
Remember
would
you
approve
of
these
activities
if
they
were
funded
by
soros,
coke
or
trump.
L
L
L
J
Thank
you.
Thank
you
all
for
coming
today.
I
have
lots
of
thoughts
I
feel
like
this
is
a
very
partisan
conversation.
I
am
a
republican,
but
you
know.
As
a
representative,
I
am
the
voice
for
my
republicans
and
democrats
in
the
district
and
the
fear
tactics
I
feel
like
are
a
little
much
whenever
presenting
this
information,
something
that
I
try
to
remind
myself.
J
I
actually
have
two
questions
that
we
do
serve
the
kentucky
state
legislature
and
while
we
see
you
know,
a
lot
of
our
information
will
come
that
things
or
other
states
are
doing,
but
you
fail
to
provide
any
information
on
kentucky
and
how
the
zuckerbucks
affected
our
commonwealth,
and
I
was
looking
back
through
some
information
and
it
said
that
this
was
grant
funding.
Is
that
correct,
correct?
So?
J
L
I
do
think
that's
very
important
information
for
you
all
to
have.
We
have
not
done
research
and
uncovering
exactly
what
I
know
that
the
clerks
association
has
provided
several
legislators
with
some
information
that
43
counties
applied
and
got
money.
I'm
not
here
to
say
that
anything
was
done
wrong
in
those
counties.
Necessarily
what
we're
looking
at
is
across
the
country-
and
I
do
agree
with
you
that
this
should
be
a
bipartisan
issue,
because
I
do
think
that
we
should
look
at
this
and
say
what
happened
if
it
was
on
the
other
side,
what
hap?
L
What
would
happen
if
it
was
trump
funding?
This
would
people
on
both
sides
and
that's
why
we
worked
on
a
bill
in
tennessee
this
year
that
passed
with
bipartisan
support
to
keep
this
from
happening
in
tennessee,
even
though
I
think
they
only
had
one
county
with
an
instance
of
this
spending,
because
money,
fundamentally
changes
and
public
elections
should
be
funded
with
public
dollars.
That's
the
position
we
take.
J
J
I
know
I
trust
my
county
clerk
and
the
team
they
put
together,
and
I
think
that
most
of
us
here
in
this
room
really
trust
our
county
clerks
to
make
sure
that
elections
are
done
right,
and
so,
if
they
were
able
to
receive,
grant
funding,
I
think
kind
of
the
rhetoric
just
made
me.
I
had
to
go
back
and
look,
but
it
made
me
feel
like
this.
J
Money
was
just
pushed
out
to
specific
places
rather
than
an
application
process
for
grants,
and
so
you
know
just
I
want
to
make
sure
if
you
hadn't
read
the
email
yet
to
look
at
that,
but
we
really
do
need
to
hear
about
kentucky.
Of
course
you
know
things
can
creep
into
kentucky,
no
matter
where
they're
at
in
the
united
states,
but
really
to
have
this
irrelevant
conversation.
J
I
do
feel
like
it's
important
that
we
hear
about
what
kentucky
is
and
that
we're
listening
to
our
county
attorney
or
sorry,
our
county
clerks,
to
see
how
they
use
the
funding.
Before
we
just
say.
This
is
terrible,
so
just
some
food
for
thought
and
I
would
greatly
appreciate
a
follow-up
on
that.
K
L
Yeah,
I
don't
have
the
information
with
this,
but
we,
this
hearing
came
up
pretty
quickly.
We
sent
out
some
information
and
we're
invited
to
come
talk,
so
we
have
done
a
lot
of
extensive
research
on
some
of
the
key
states
that
you've
seen
highlighted
in
the
media
and
that's
where
our
initial
research
has
been
focused,
and
I
do
believe
that
the
clerks
association
has
sent
an
offer
to
come
and
discuss
how
it
was
spent
from
their
perspective
as
well.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
I
have
a
question
and
a
comment.
I'll
start
with
the
question
related
to
private
funding,
what
counties
in
kentucky
or
anywhere
in
kentucky
is
there
private
funding
of
our
elections,
and
this
might
be-
I
see
the
the
president
of
the
county
clerk's
association
here.
Are
there?
Is
there
private
funding
of
elections
in
kentucky
right
now.
L
My
understanding
is
43
counties
applied
for
grants
and
were
given
that
money,
so
does
that
mean
that
those
43
countries
use
private
funding
in
some
way?
I
do
not.
I
don't
have
an
accounting
for
how
they
spent
it.
That
was
information
volunteered
by
the
clerk's
association.
I
spoke
to
their
representative
earlier
today
and
I
I
was
told
I'm
not
going
to
speak
on
behalf
of
anyone
else
that
they
had
not
taken
a
position
on
how
this
money
should
either
be
banned
or
regulated
I'll
leave
it
up
to
them
to
speak
for
themselves.
On
that.
C
And
this
is
a
question:
if
the
county
clerk
president-
I'm
sorry
I
lost
your
name,
are:
is
it
already
illegal
to
for
private
funds
to
fund
elections
in
kentucky?
Just
I
don't
know
who
you
addressing.
D
D
You
want
to
come
up
chris
chris
cross
right.
S
P
This
came
in
the
form
the
zuckerbergs
came
in
the
ford
of
a
grant,
so
we
we
did
apply
our
county,
my
myself
applied
and
we
received
fifteen
thousand
dollars
which
we
used
towards
precinct
worker
pay
for
our
precinct
workers.
I
don't
know
the
other
counties.
I
know
some
have
bought
election
equipment,
so
it
came
in
a
form
of
a
grant,
but
as
far
as
the
the
krs
statute,
as
far
as
private
funds,
do
you
have
a
comment
on
that.
N
As
far
as
I
know,
it's
legal
to
accept
them.
When
I
was
secretary,
we
got
a
grant
a
private
grant,
for
I
don't
remember.
The
dollar
amount
to
build
a
website
to
make
it
easier
for
military
and
overseas
voters
to
vote
and
at
the
time
nobody
nobody
raised
a
question
about
it.
So,
as
far
as
we
know,
I
think
it
is.
N
I
think
it
is
legal
to
accept
private
grants
for
elections
and
to
run
it,
and
these
were
all
run
through
the
clerks
of
the
fiscal
courts
depending
on
how
they
were
set
up
and
or
the
state
board
of
elections.
C
Thanks
trey
and
that
that
doesn't
answer
that
question,
I
think
you
would
get
bipartisan
support
for
for
something
that
would
make
it
illegal
to
for
private
funding.
But
I
also
sorry
and
I'll
say
chase,
but
I
don't
have
your
last
name
just
to
go
to
back
to.
You
said
that
the
data
that
you
have
all
collected
is
far
and
away
the
most
stringent
data,
and
that
so
are
there
other
people
who
have
collected
data
on
this
and
what
are
their
outcomes,
and,
and
why
do
you
say
that
yours
is
that
much
better.
S
Not
that
we've
found
it
it's
more
of
a
you
know.
We
actually
dug
into
the
issue
rather
than
just
patting
zuckerberg
on
the
back
and
saying
great
job
like
npr,
we
started
obtaining
the
data
through
all
these
foia
requests.
Otherwise
we
wouldn't
have
the
data
at
all,
so
we
had
to
submit
in
the
thousands
of
foia
requests
to
start
getting
informations
a
lot
of
it
is
sending
it
counting
by
county
clerk
by
clerk
to
get
the
information
and
do
an
analysis.
C
L
I'm
not
aware
of
that,
because
it's
not
money,
that's
being
given
to
a
candidate
or
a
cause
or
a
you
know,
an
organization
or
a
pac,
where
the,
where
laws
are
already
in
place,
that
kind
of
regulate
that.
That's.
Why,
as
we've
been
talking
to
lawmakers
across
the
country,
when
we
uncover
some
of
this
information,
we
show
it
to
them.
L
Generally
speaking,
they
start
to
think
about.
Well,
should
we
regulate
it
like
we
do
election
finance,
or
should
we
ban
it
all
together
and
at
least
11
states,
I
believe,
have
already
have
banned
it
all
together
in
some
form
or
fashion,
the
laws
are
written
a
little
bit
differently
in
each
state,
depending
on
the
circumstances
and
the
nuances.
But
the
overwhelming
conclusion
that
lawmakers
are
coming
to
is.
L
Elections
should
be
funded
by
public
dollars
and
not
allow
billionaires
whether
they
fund
it
themselves
or
they
give
it
as
a
grant
whether
they
give
it
to
allow
the
actual
election
operations
to
be
influenced
by
those
dollars.
The
states
are
coming
to
the
conclusion
that
they
should
ban
the
practice
altogether.
D
I
Alvarado,
thank
you
and
I
know
probably
the
members
have
gotten
an
email
prior
to
this
meeting.
I'm
not
sure
how
many
of
you
received
it,
but
it
has
some
information
regarding
the
counties
that
receive
some
funding
and
I
guess
the
total
amount
that
kentucky
received
was
1.6
million.
That's
accurate
is
that
correct.
N
N
I
And
just
I
mean
there's
a
list
of
the
counties
in
the
email
we
received
that
had
received
it.
So
anderson
ballard,
bell,
boone,
bourbon,
callaway,
campbell,
christian
clark,
clay
clinton,
crittenden
davies,
franklin
grant
graves
green
up,
hart,
henderson,
henry
hopkins
jackson,
jefferson,
kenton,
madison,
mcgoffin,
marion
mason,
mccracken,
menifee,
monroe,
montgomery,
muhlenberg,
ohio,
oldham,
pendleton,
rowan,
scott
spencer,
trigg,
union
warren
and
webster
were
the
counties
that
received
funds.
So
just
for
the
sake
of
how
it
impacted
kentucky.
I
think
it
would
be
nice
if
we
could
get
an
idea
of
how
much
each
county
received.
I
Obviously,
when
you
in
I
know,
there's
a
reference
to
another
site
there,
where
you
can
see
how
many
other
states
received
some
states
like
pennsylvania,
got
16
million
dollars,
florida
got
not
even
200
000,
I
mean
so.
There
was
kind
of
an
interesting
breakdown
of
why
some
states
got
a
lot
more,
but
still
it's
an
amount
that
does
come
to
kentucky.
It
impacted
43
of
our
of
our
counties.
I
So
that
would
be
interesting
to
have
that
breakdown,
to
see
how
much
of
that
private
money's
coming
in
and
what
they
could,
how
that
could
impact
a
lot
of
those
counties
as
well.
But
thank
you
all
for
the
information.
I
think
something
needs
to
be
on
our
radar
and
we
have
to
be
aware
of.
D
N
I
think
this
was
pretty
unique.
I
mean
there
have
been.
You
know
I
referenced
the
grant
that
I
received
we,
the
commonwealth,
received
when
I
was
secretary.
That
was
a
small
initiative
that
was
given
to
states
for
that
military
overseas.
Push
I
think
in
general.
This
is
an
unusual
thing
now.
N
Obviously,
last
year
was
an
unusual
election
with
the
pandemic
voting
and
a
lot
of
rules
changing,
and
there
was
there
were
other
donors
other
than
zuckerberg
that
gave
to
the
the
two
entities
that
so
the
local
funding
center
for
tech
and
civic,
like
definitely
had
other,
definitely
hit
other
donors
for
this
program.
But
I
think
there
was
nothing
like
this
scope
with
governments.
N
S
We've
had
to
uncover
and
dig
all
this
up
to
the
senator's
question
earlier.
You
know.
We
think
that
you
should
be
able
to
have
this
information
at
your
fingertips.
This
amount
of
money
spent
in
your
state.
You
should
know
exactly
how
it
was
spent
and
it's
difficult
for
any
of
us
to
get
an
answer.
That's
a
problem!
So
that's
something!
That's
why
we're
flagging
it
in
a
lot
of
states.
That
sounds
reasonable.
N
You
guys
one
more
one,
so,
what's
on
the
website,
that's
disclosed,
so
the
43
counties
for
kentucky
you
can
find
out
the
counties
as
the
dollar
amounts,
obviously
were
not
there
and
then
the
state
table
with
the
state
dollar
amounts
and
there
were
some
reports,
but
it
is
vague
on
what
they
were
doing
and
there
was
a
lot
of
publicity
during
the
election
leading
up
when
this
gift
was
announced.
N
It
was
very
public
and
it
was
a
really
big
news
that
there
was
this
much
money
going
in,
but
I
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
there,
when
you
get
it
down
to
the
weeds
about
where
the
money
was
actually
went,
where
the
money
actually
went.
That's
where
you
know
the
reporting
of
some
of
these
groups
has
helped
to
probably
bring
that
more
into
the
public
eye,
but
in
the
election
administration
space
we
all
knew
about
it.
We
all
talked
about
it
and
it
was
much
appreciated.
P
And
I
was,
I
would
be
remiss
not
to
say,
but
the
election
expense
by
and
large
falls
on
the
local
level
on
your
physical
courts
and
any
funding
from
the
state
would
be
greatly
appreciated
and
greatly
accepted,
and
it
eliminates
this
argument,
so
we
I
don't
want
to.
I
don't
want
to
set
it
up.
Sure
nice
ask.
F
C
D
C
M
Actually,
an
opportunity,
the
question
was.
C
Raised
about
what
the
board
of
elections
would
have
to
say
about
this
jared
deering
from
the
board
of
elections
is
still
on
this
call
and
I'd
love
for
them
to
have
the
opportunity
to
ask
mr
dearing
directly
since
he's
right
here.
O
You
know
thank
you
for
the
question
representative,
so
the
state
board
of
elections
in
a
very
public
meeting.
All
our
meetings
were
on
zoom.
We
discussed
this
as
an
organization
as
a
board
of
whether
or
not
we
could
utilize
this
money.
We
requested,
I
believe,
somewhere
in
the
neighborhood
of
a
million
dollars.
We
received
1.6
million
dollars.
O
We
utilized
that
money
primarily
for
advertising
about
what
the
changes
were
in
the
election
and
how
voters
could
vote
safely.
Ironically,
the
poster
that
is
behind
me
over
my
shoulder
was
one
of
those
efforts.
We
had
a
bipartisan
group
of
board
members
and
stakeholders
that
came
together
that
dictated
how
those
funds
were
spent.
So
it
was
not
a
myself
or
staff
or
one
individual
that
got
to
dictate
how
that
money
was
spent
out
and
who
or
what
demographic
it
was.
It
was
centered
on.
O
We
tried
to
spread
it
out
across
the
entirety
of
the
state
and
we
used
newspapers,
radio
ads
tv
ads
billboards,
anything
that
we
can
do
to
to
get
out
how
voters
could
vote
safely
during
a
pandemic,
and-
and
I
will
quite
frankly,
I
will
say
that
one
of
the
more
proud
moments
of
my
career
would
be
the
fact
that
kentucky
had
no
reports
of
community
spread
of
covet
19
during
the
election
cycle
due
to
elections,
and
so
you
know,
I
think,
to
to
clerk
cockrell's
point
if,
if
elections
were
funded
at
a
rate
where
we
could
do
these
things
on
a
regular
basis
from
election
cycle
to
election
cycle-
and
you
know
when
you're
talking
about
the
size
and
scope
of
a
budget
for
the
entirety
of
the
state,
we're
talking
about
a
very,
very,
very
small
sliver
of
funding.
O
That
would
be
needed
to
do
this.
We
wouldn't
have
to
take
this
funds.
The
counties
wouldn't
have
to
take
funding
to
replace
election
equipment,
that's
20
years
old.
That
desperately
needs
to
be
replaced,
and
yet
those
county
fiscal
courts
are
talking
about
whether
or
not
you
fund
water
bills
for
the
local
hospital
and
road
paving
and
elections,
which
is
critical
infrastructure
kind
of
becomes
this
side
thing
that
no
one
really
wants
to
talk
about,
and
that's
unfortunate.