►
From YouTube: House Standing Comm. on Elections, Const. Amendments & Intergovernmental Affairs (2-10-22) UPON ADJ
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
E
G
A
A
Here
all
right,
we
have
a
quorum
and
please
remember,
turn
your
microphones
off
and
when
you,
when
you
make
a
vote,
speak
into
the
microphone
with
the
microphone
on,
so
people
at
home
can
hear
us.
You
know
we
get
a
lot
of
complaints
about
that.
Does
anybody
have
a
special
guest
here,
they'd
like
to
recognize?
A
H
I
do.
I
do
believe
the
bill
is
ready
if
the
committee
should
so
choose
down
the
road,
but
today
I
just
want
to
talk
for
discussion
and
hopefully
hear
some
feedback
from
you.
If
there
is
a
desire
to
move
forward
on
this,
we
can
all
agree,
and-
and
I
guess
I
you
know
when
I
think
about
my
legacy
here.
H
Mr
chairman,
I
I
like
to
think
that
I
try
to
be
nonpartisan
that
I
tried
to
listen
to
both
sides
that
I,
although
I'm
sure
I
vote
one
way
more
than
the
other
I'd
at
least
try
to
give
some
some
listen
to
the
other
side.
So
I
hope
my
legacy
is
one
that
somebody
who
who
used
common
sense
and
reasoning,
not
emotion,
to
make
my
decisions,
which
bore
some
of
the
thought
of
this
bill.
This
bill
is
a
non-partisan
elections
bill
for
certain
offices
in
our
state.
H
If
we
think
about
the
hyper
partisanship
that
we
have
in
our
country
right
now,
it's
it's.
It's
surely
as
bad
as
it's
ever
been
and
it's
something
I
think
everybody
would
agree.
It's
not
healthy
to
have
now
when
we're
talking
policy
policy
makers,
which
all
of
us
are,
I
think
the
people
voting
for
us
need
to
know
where
we
stand
on
policy
and
what
party
we
align
with,
because
that
helps
them
to
make
an
informed
vote.
H
I
think
those
offices,
too,
should
be
nonpartisan
in
an
effort
to
help
reduce
the
hyperpartisanship.
I
think
that
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
I
I
don't
know
of
any
instance,
and
I'm
not
doing
this,
because
my
sheriff
has
gone
against
somebody
because
of
their
party
or
anything
like
that,
but
we
all
know
that
favors
happen
when
they
probably
shouldn't.
Maybe
I
don't
know
if
that's
I
don't.
H
I
can't
tell
you
a
time
that
did,
but
we
know
that
it
can
happen
right,
so
this
bill
simply
says
that
the
person
who
can
arrest
you,
the
person
who
can
jail
you,
the
county
clerk
who
processes
papers
for
for
our
cars
and
everything
else,
she's
not
making
he's
not
making
policy
the
circuit
court
clerk
who's
processing
all
this
stuff
again,
those
are
servants,
not
partisans.
So,
mr
chairman,
that's
what
this
bill
seeks
to
do.
I
Representative,
thank
you
for
bringing
this
to
us
as
most
probably
know
that
we
do
share
a
similar
account
arden
county,
and
this
has
been
actually
a
conversation.
That's
been
brought
up
a
lot
in
grayson,
county
and
hardin
county,
so
I'm
excited
to
look
through
this
bill
and
I
appreciate
you
bringing
up
for
discussion
because
I
do
think
it's
something
to
consider,
especially
when
we're
talking
about
just
dealing
with
the
law
and
how
those
are
really
not.
Those
are.
Those
should
be
nonpartisan
because
they're
nonpartisan
issues,
so
I
do
appreciate.
A
A
D
All
right,
I'm
I
apologize,
I'm
losing
my
voice.
That
may
be
a
good
thing
get
us
out
of
here
earlier
and
I
have
with
me
brian
sunderland,
with
the
foundation
for
governmental,
accountability
and
I'll.
Let
him
do
most
of
the
talking,
but
we
do
have
a
committee
sub.
This
was
presented
in
the
interim,
it's
kind
of
been
labeled
as
the
zuckerbucks
bill,
but
the
committee
sub
does
address
some
concerns
that
were
raised
by
our
secretary
of
state
and
I
hope
that
it
addresses
his
concerns.
D
But
what
we
are
trying
to
do
here
is
there's
been
a.
I
guess,
kind
of
a
realization
after
the
2020
election
that
there
were
untold
millions
of
dollars
spent
not
on
election
advocacy,
saying
vote
for
someone
vote
against
someone
vote
for
an
issue
or
vote
against
an
issue
but
actually
was
being
sent
to
state
boards
of
elections
and-
and
I
think
that's
very
concerning-
and
hopefully
this
bill
will
address-
that
I'd-
be
glad
to
turn
this
over
to
brian
and
let
him
give
his
presentation.
E
E
The
provisions
in
this
legislation
have
given
voters
greater
confidence
in
how
kentucky's
elections
are
conducted.
61
percent
support,
prompt
removal
of
ineligible
voters,
63
percent
support
requiring
ids
for
absentee
ballots
and
74
percent
have
increased
confidence.
Knowing
there
will
be
vote
tabulation
audits
after
every
election
as
good
as
house
bill
574
was
it
did
not
address
a
threat
that
has
been
identified
across
the
country
and
much
has
been
written
about.
E
This
creates
a
situation
where
election
operations
can
unwittingly
favor
one
side
of
the
political
aisle
over
another
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
to
get
out
the
vote
efforts
on
election
day.
Many
of
you
heard
my
presentation
this
summer.
I
won't
go
into
great
depth
about
some
of
the
egregious
examples
that
we
identified,
but
I'd
be
happy
to
ask
answer.
E
Questions
afterward
see
they
didn't
do
this
through
a
pac
or
a
campaign.
They
did
it
through
government
through
local
election
offices
in
states
across
the
country.
After
all,
the
elections
concerns
alleged
misinformation,
censorship
with
facebook,
and
we
now
know
that
the
ceo
was
deploying
hundreds
of
millions
of
dollars
in
cash
from
inside
by
financing
the
administration
of
elections,
no
matter
what
you
think
of
mr
zuckerberg
or
the
two
foundations
that
he
ran
a
lot
of
the
money
through.
I
want
you
to
consider
your
thoughts
on
private
funding
of
the
elections
in
the
following
context.
E
I
would
submit
to
you,
regardless
of
party
elections,
should
be
funded
evenly
and
fairly
by
government
dollars
and
not
bipartisan
billionaires
or
special
interest
groups
and
kentuckians
agree
in
the
same
poll.
The
center
for
excellence
in
polling
found
that
likely
kentucky
voters.
78
percent
oppose
private
funding
of
government
election
offices.
E
That
includes
82
percent
of
democrats
and
79
percent
of
republicans
oppose
allowing
government
offices
that
oversee
elections
to
accept
funding
from
private
individuals
and
special
interest
groups.
Spending
money
to
support
campaigns
and
candidates
is
a
very
american
thing
to
do,
but
infiltrating
local
election
offices
should
offend
us
as
americans.
E
I'm
sure
we
can
all
agree,
especially
those
of
us
in
this
room
that
elections
are
one
of
the
most
sacred
parts
of
our
democracy.
Public
elections
should
be
financed
by
public
money.
Private
money
should
be
reserved
for
campaign
and
advocacy
outside
the
system.
The
good
news
is:
is
the
current
state
budget
recognizes
this
and
has
provided
a
lot
of
increased
funding
to
the
secretary
of
state's
office
for
election
activities
to
ensure
our
elections
are
adequately
funded
by
public
dollars?
E
C
C
C
E
E
We
don't
have
a
full
picture.
Our
organization
doesn't
have
a
full
picture
of
kentucky,
but
what
we
have
uncovered
is
that
certainly
it
created
massive
disparities
in
who
got
money
and
who
didn't
you
know
some
counties
got
less
than
ten
thousand
dollars.
Others
got
a
half
million
dollars
or
more
of
what
we
know
based
on
our
open
records
request
and
we
haven't
gotten
all
of
the
information
back.
E
No
of
of
over
7.1
million
we,
the
number
I
have
heard-
is
43
counties.
I
I
can't
speak
to
exactly
which
one's
got.
What
I
can.
Okay,
I
I
know
some.
I
know
some
of
them
that
we
have
uncovered,
but
we
don't
have
a
full
picture
of
kentucky
yet
because
we
haven't
gotten
enough
information
from
the
four
requests.
A
D
There
were
some
there
were
some
parts
taken
out
that
were
requested.
I
think
the
concern
was
two
part
and
if
I'm
missing
anything,
mr
chairman,
you
can.
You
can
please
add
this,
but
there
was
a
concern
on
part
of
it
that
there
may
be
some
issues
with
hava
funding
that
this
that
the
original
bill
might
affect.
A
B
D
A
J
I'll
give
you
a
thumbs
up
too.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
am
new
to
this
committee,
so
I
did
not
have
the
luxury
of
hearing
the
presentations
during
the
interim,
so
I'm
a
little
lost
here.
So
this
money
from
a
private
entity
comes
through
a
government
office
like
the
kentucky
secretary
of
state's
office.
J
E
Across
the
country
it
was
spent
in
many
many
different
ways.
One
of
the
more
interesting
things
is
how
the
money
was
targeted,
where
certain
counties
would
get
more
money
than
others
for
certain
things
most
of
it
was
sold
under
the
guise
of
we
were
in
the
midst
of
covet.
We
needed
county
clerks
needed
local
election
officials,
whether
they're
a
clerk
in
this
particular
state
or
not
needed
money
for
ppe.
E
We
need
plexiglas.
We
need
to
find
ways
to
make
it
safe
for
people
to
come
and
vote,
but
very
very
little
of
that
money
was
spent
on
that
most
of
the
money
was
spent
on
registration
drives,
get
out
the
vote
efforts
and
in
many
cases
it
was
targeted
in
a
pretty
political
way.
In
fact,
one
member
of
the
committee
who's
here
today
commented
that
it
really
seemed
like
a
partisan
presentation,
as
we
described
how
the
money
was
deployed.
Some
of
the
money
was
used
to
produce
a
rap
video.
E
Some
of
the
money
was,
and
it
was
used
in
very
different
ways
and
the
strings
that
were
attached.
I
mean
obviously
with
any
grant
proposal.
They
had
some
grant
forms.
We've
gotten
a
lot
of
that
information
from
our
foia
requests
to
where
we've
seen
what
the
local
entities
are
reporting
back
on
the
money,
in
some
cases,
the
money
that
they
used
and
spent
doesn't
even
match.
What's
on
the
foundation's
990
forms,
so
it's
it!
E
It
really
is
it's
hard
for
me
to
give
you
a
clear
answer
on
exactly
what
their
process
was,
because
it
seemed
very
disparate
from
state
to
state
county
to
county
and
there's
no
clear
reasoning.
Why
neighboring
counties
with
similar
populations,
one
would
get
a
half
million
dollar
grant
and
one
would
get
three
or
four
million
dollars.
E
So
that's
my
best
ability
I
mean
we
can
I'd,
be
more
than
happy
to
produce
some
of
the
slides
that
we
had
over
the
summer
at
the
state
fair
for
the
state
government
committee.
I'm
sure
they
exist
here
at
lrc
already
in
some
way,
but
I
can.
I
can
dig
those
up
for
you
if
you'd
like
to
see
it
or
talk
about
it.
A
J
K
J
And
the
reason
I'm
asking
this
question
is,
I
know
in
jefferson
county
very
often
we
have
seen
seniors
who
sign
up
to
be
poll
workers
they
get.
I
don't
know
100
a
day
now
it
might
be
a
little
bit
more
if
somebody
comes
in
and
offers
them
water
or
a
sandwich
or
something
else,
and
it's
not
paid
for
by
the
government.
It's
it's.
It's
a
private
entity
that
with
no
strings
attached,
but
just
you
know
I
want
to
make
I
like
democracy.
I
want
to
make
the
the
day
go
by
better
for
these
poll
workers.
J
D
J
D
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
I'm
going
to
follow
up
on
representative
jenkins,
because
that
drafting
of
sections
one
and
two
seem
to
imply
that
we're
prohibiting
only
employees
of
the
governmental
entity
from
taking
private
contributions.
I
think
what
you're
trying
to
do
here
is
to
prohibit
the
governmental
entity
itself
from
accepting
these
types
of
private
donations.
L
So
I
I
would
propose,
if
you
want
to
keep
employees
in
there
as
well,
I
would
propose
a
change
in
the
drafting
to
say
no
governmental
body
or
any
employee
thereof
shall
solicit.
Take
or
accept,
isn't,
isn't
that
the
intent
of
the
bill
to
prohibit
these
governmental
entities
from
taking
private
donations
to
administer
elections.
L
G
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
just
want
to
note
that
I've
heard
from
one
of
my
clerks
and
the
things
that
she
mentioned
have
been
corrected
to
my
knowledge
and
so
I'll
reach
out
again
to
her,
or
at
least
my
at
least
the
one
that
contacted
me
to
see.
If
this
has
addressed
their
concerns,
I
think
it
has
with
removing
those
two
provisions.
I
would
note
that,
just
for
people
watching,
why
does
this
have
the
potential
to
be
so
pernicious?
And
the
reason
is
it's
not
that
the
the
activity
itself
is
wrong.
G
I
mean
get
out
the
vote,
the
rap
video
to
get
out
the
vote.
Those
things
are
good
things.
We
we
want
more
of
more
get
out
the
vote,
more
machines
to
be
bought
more
paper.
You
know
ballots
all.
We
want
all
those
things
and
those
are
good
things,
but
it
becomes
problematic
when,
when
a
company
has
someone
they
support,
let's
say,
and
they
want
to
give
to
particular
areas.
G
You
could,
you
could
say,
a
congressman
that
might
represent
10
counties,
for
example,
just
to
use
it
just
a
hypothetical
that
doesn't
apply
to
kentucky,
but
it
could
apply
with
small
changes
to
my
hypothetical
and
let's
say
that
five
of
those
counties
are
republican
and
five
of
those
counties
are
democratic.
You
wouldn't
democrat,
you
wouldn't
want
a
company
to
give
to
the
five
counties
that
are
democrat.
You
wouldn't
want
a
company
to
give
the
five
counties
that
are
republican,
and
so
I
think
that's
where
it
can
be
pernicious.
G
If
we're
ever
going
to
allow
private
dollars
in
it
has
to
come
through
a
you
know
through
a
non-partisan
thing,
but
I
think
I
think
this
is
a
good
bill.
For
example,
republicans
have
the
legislature
and
democrats
have
the
governor,
the
governor
could
say:
hey
company
or
or
the
republican
legislature
can
say
the
same
thing
opposite.
So
I'm
not
trying
it's
not
partisan
at
all,
but
the
governor
could
say:
hey
company,
you've
already
maxed
out
to
me
you've
maxed
out
to
the
kentucky
democratic
party,
but
man
it'd
be
great.
G
It's
just
bad
that
that
that
has
a
that
has
a
a
smell
to
it,
that
we
don't
we
don't
want,
and
this
general
assembly
has
tried,
especially
with
the
bill
that
we
passed
last
year
with
representative
decker,
was
the
lead
on
to
try
to
clamp
down
on
on
elections,
potential
elections.
Misconduct-
and
I
think
this
is
this-
is
a
step
in
that
direction.
G
So
I
want
to
thank
you
guys
for
bringing
it,
but
I
did
want
to
explain
to
those
who
watch
who
are
watching
it's,
not
the
individual
action
that
is
problematic.
It's
the
impact
of
that
when
you,
when
you
use
a
good
action
in
a
way
that
that
will
is
intended
to
have
a
partisan
effect
and
and
when
we
run
our
elections,
you
know
in
in
kentucky
it'd
be
great,
because
I
think
we
get
my
side
gets
more
contributions
and
we
can
really
squeeze
it,
but
that's
not
right.
G
M
D
I
think
it
was
a
mixed
bag
across
the
country
while
we're
what
we're
finding,
but
most
of
the
some
of
this
to
my
understanding,
was
given
directly
to
the
local
boards
of
elections
and-
and
I
believe
it
may
have
been
different
in
other
states,
but
there
are
kind
of
different.
You
know,
there's
not
really
any
oversight
currently
right
and
that's
kind
of
part
of
the
problem
that
we're
dealing
with.
I
know
several
of
our
sister
states
are
trying
to
tackle
this
issue
and
deal
with
it
and
you
know
they're
different
models
of
legislation.
D
Some
of
those
models
do
do
allow
a
organization
like
the
state
board
of
elections,
or
maybe
the
secretary
of
state
to
have
some
oversight
of
those,
and
then
there
are
types
of
legislation
like
this
one
as
it
exists
now
that
just
prohibited
you
know
flat
out.
So
I
hope
that
addresses
your
comments
or
your
question,
but
in
this
there's
really
not
any
oversight,
if
you
will,
because
it
would
be
a
prohibition
on
on
those
private
funds.
D
E
The
language
you
you're,
referring
to
representative
mosher,
is
to
allow
the
local
election
officials
to
enter
into
contracts
with
vendors.
Not
to
you
know
to.
There
was
some
question
in
some
other
states
how
the
language
was
drafted,
whether
it
would
prevent
them
from
having
vendors
come
in
and
help
do
certain
things.
You
know
I
had
a
conversation
with
the
secretary
of
state
in
tennessee
and
they
use
five
different
voting
machine
vendors
down
in
tennessee.
M
E
There
is
no
way
of
knowing
unless
people
voluntarily
disclosed
what
it
was
or
if
somebody
were
to
go,
find
the
990
form
for
the
nonprofit
that
sent
the
money
somewhere
in
order
to
be
able
to
find
out
how
the
money
got
where
it
got.
Unlike
campaign
donations,
where
there's
lots
of
ways
of
finding
out
and
there's
instant
disclosure
laws
and
things
like
that,
we
don't
know
the
full
extent
of
how
the
money
has
gone
across
this
country.
E
So
most
of
the
states
some
have.
I
know
that
the
georgia
model
has
been
used
where
georgia
left
in
the
possibility
of
money
going
through
their
version
of
the
state
board
of
elections
to
then
be
distributed.
So
they
could
prevent,
hopefully,
this
sort
of
like
targeting
and
that
sort
of
thing
I
would
submit
to
you
that
most
states
when
they
get
into
this
and
they
start
thinking
about
it.
E
They
fall
in
the
category
of
elections,
should
be
funded
by
government
operation
by
government
dollars.
It
shouldn't
be
clouded
with
money
from
a
certain
group
came
in
whether
it
was
distributed
by
population
by
voters
by
whatever
formula-
and
it
wasn't
that
long
ago
that
this
general
assembly
had
to
intervene
in
our
own
state
board
of
elections
because
of
some
of
the
things
going
on
and
make
some
changes
there.
So
I
would
submit
to
you
that
the
georgia
model
would
help
clean
up
some
of
it.
K
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
thanks
for
bringing
this
in
brian
nice
to
see
you
again,
we
chatted
a
little
bit
after
the
presentation
this
summer
and
from
the
20
000
foot
view.
I
think
everybody
does
agree
that
we
don't
want
private
dollars
just
rolling
into
local
election
offices
for
for
whatever
reason,
but
then,
when
you
get
into
the
details,
it
does
get
a
little
bit
as
representative
moser
just
referred
to.
K
We
need
to
have
the
controls
and
know
you
know
where
outflows,
and
I
actually
do
like
the
the
georgia
model,
where
there
is
an
opportunity
for
non-profits,
as
I
believe
used
to
happen
in
in
this
state,
we
would
have
non-profits,
contribute
to
a
central
office
and
then
distribute
it
fairly.
I
I
believe,
I'm
not
sure
if
my
history
is
completely
correct
on
that.
No.
E
I
think
I
I
think
you're
spot
on,
and
I
do
believe
that
we've
heard
from
the
state
board
of
elections
that
money
did
come
in
to
the
state
board
of
elections
in
2020
in
kentucky
and
they
did
distribute
it
and
frankly,
the
state
board
of
elections
as
it's
being
run
right
now
is
very
transparent
and
they
can,
and
you
can
figure
that
out.
That's
not
always
the.
K
K
I
just
hope
we
would
be
more
readily
acceptable
that
that
kind
of
opportunity,
because
there
could
be
dollars
from
very
reputable
nonprofits
who
who
really
want
to
do
those
things
like
voter
registration
and
get
out
the
vote,
but
do
it
in
a
completely
statewide
nonpartisan
way
that
can
be
done.
You
know
with
the
controls
there
just
my
opinion.
E
Well,
I
think
a
lot
of
people
would
categorize
the
two
non-profits
that
distributed
this
money.
A
lot
of
people
would
categorize
them
as
good
aboveboard
nonpartisan,
but
the
effect
of
how
the
money
was
deployed
really
cast
the
cloud
on
that
and
the
money
this
400
million
dollars
that
came
in
in
2020
across
the
states
that
you
heard
a
lot
about,
and
you
can
read
a
lot
about.
There's
been
newspaper
articles,
npr
articles,
washington
or
new
york
post
articles.
There's
a
lot
about
it.
They
were
non-profits
too.
K
And
that
does
bring
up
my
question
if
I
can
finish
that,
so
is
there
any
ways
that
is
there
any
other
loopholes
that
we
should
be
concerned
about
where
these
dollars
that
were
wherever
they
come
from,
whether
we
consider
them
troublesome
or
not?
That
could
become
public
dollars
and
still
be
used
for
this
purpose
either
any
other
ways
that
the
donations
could
happen
that
even
the
zuckerbucks
you
know
is
there
some
other
way
that
we're
we're
not
finding
all
the
loopholes
to
get
around.
E
Every
time
you
write
any
kind
of
bill
to
close
a
loophole,
there
are
always
people
looking
for
loopholes,
no
matter
whether
it
is
a
tax
code,
whether
it's
anything.
So
that's
a
very
hard
question,
a
very
hard
question
for
me
to
answer
what
I
would
suggest
is
just
kind
of
going
back
to
the
you
know.
One
person's
legitimate
nonprofit
is
another
person's
partisan
advocacy
organization
and
to
to
the
extent
that
that
casts
a
shadow.
I
would
argue.
No,
there
there's
really
two
ways
you
can
get
at
this.
A
N
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
thank
you
all
for
bringing
the
committee
sub.
I
think
the
committee
sub
does
help
make
this
a
better
bill.
I
know
our
clerks
are
happier
about
it
waiting
to
hear
that.
But
so
my
question
is:
could
the
money
go
to
the
state
board
of
elections
it's
bipartisan
and
they
could
have
to
fill
out
any
you
know
we
have
k-ref
when
we're
all
running
and
we
fill
out
our
financial
reports
and
everything
on
there.
N
They
could
have
that
all
down
and
the
money
be
mandated
that
it's
distributed
evenly
by
population
among
the
counties
so
that
every
county
that
would
eliminate
what
we
talked
about
earlier
with
only
43
counties
gets
it.
So
you
know
a
million
dollars
comes
in
has
to
be
split
evenly.
You
know
per
county
per
population,
something
like
that
with
all
their
county,
knowing
that
all
the
county
board
of
elections
are
also
bipartisan,
because
what
what
I'm
worried
about
here,
I
don't
want
to
throw
the
baby
out
with
the
bathwater.
N
We
have
p3s
in
government
everywhere,
okay
and
there's
a
lot
of
times
it
works.
I
know
we
were
working
on
getting
a
road
grant,
build
grant
there
in
bourbon
county,
and
one
of
the
big
things
we
had
to
do
was
get
the
private
industries
to
buy
into
it
that
helped
bump
the
points
up
and
that
helps
you
get
you
in,
and
I
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
that.
N
I
don't
know
that
that's
a
bad
thing,
I
know-
and
I
don't
know
if
you,
gentlemen,
know
anything
about
this,
but
I
think
like
in
2009
2010,
there
was
an
effort
to
increase
and
there
was
money
donated
to
make
overseas
military
make
it
make
the
voting
better
for
them,
and
that
was
some
outside
money
that
would
come
in
and
that's
just
you
know
there
are
some
good
things
to
do.
It's
like
my
good
friend,
representative
nima,
said:
that's
your
line.
N
You
know
there
are
some
good
things
that
can
come
out
of
this
too.
So
I
would
like
to
look
at
this.
How
do
we
control
the
bad
to
make
sure
you
know
you
don't
have
a
runaway
where
you
know
all
one
county
gets
it
or
anything
like
that?
If
we
did
it
evenly,
maybe
we'd
keep
some
of
this
and
it
would
help
everyone.
I
Thank
you
chairman.
Thank
you
all
for
coming
to
present
today.
I
guess
I've
never
been
subtweeted
out
loud
in
committee,
but
I
was
the
one
that
claimed
the
partisan
presentation.
So
thanks
for
that
shout
out
mr
sutherland,
I
do
appreciate
you
all
didn't
bring
that
partisan
presentation
today.
Hopefully
you
all
learned
that
lesson
during
the
interim
meeting
at
the
kentucky
state
fair.
I
think
my
question
is:
you
might
have
already
answered
this,
but
I
missed
it
along
the
way.
I
It's
kind
of
been
a
long
day
as
we're
here
approaching
6
30
this
evening,
you
know,
have
you
all
taught?
I
think
that
was
my
big
question
or
actually
push
was
to
talk
to
the
county
clerks
during
you
know,
after
y'all
presented
the
bill
during
the
interim.
Have
you
all
had
that
conversation
with
the
kentucky
county
clerks
to
see
how
they
actually
use
the
money
that
came
into
the
state
during
the
2020
election.
A
I
A
G
I
wanted
to
say
that
I
said
I
was
going
to
reach
out
to
my
county
clerk.
I've
done
that
she's
responded
in
support
of
the
committee
sub,
so
that's
that's
one
of
120,
but
the
county
clerk
that
reached
out
to
me
yesterday
now
supports
the
bill
was
against
it
yesterday,
because
the
revisions
hadn't
been
made.
Yet.
Thank
you.
F
Sure
I'm
going
to
go
first,
I'm
trey
grayson,
the
legislative
agent
for
the
clerks
and
former
kentucky
secretary
of
state.
I'm
gonna
talk
a
little
bit
about
some
of
the
big
picture
stuff
about
how
the
money
was
used
in
kentucky
and
then
jason
we'll
talk
about
how
he
specifically
used
the
money
in
the
last
election.
But
first
we
want
to
say:
is
the
committee?
Saab
definitely
improves
the
bill
from
the
clerk's
standpoint,
so
we
appreciate
the
committee
sub.
The
two
sections
that
were
moved
were
the
most
onerous
pieces
of
this
bill.
F
F
Counties
use
this
to
mail
postcards,
for
example,
in
kenton
county
to
every
registered
voter
about
all
the
new
ways
to
vote
new
places
to
vote
because
of
the
temporary
rules.
Some
bought
no
voting
equipment.
As
representative
haverin
noted,
others
bought
ppe
from
mask
to
just
buying
a
whole
bunch
of
pens,
because
we
needed
to
have
a
lot
of
pins
because
we
didn't
think
we
could
reuse
them
now.
We
know
a
little
bit
more
about
the
disease,
but
at
the
time
there
was
concern
about
that.
F
So
we're
running
an
election
in
the
middle
of
a
pandemic
after
a
budget
had
been
passed
and
there
were
just
a
lot
of
unplanned
expenses,
and
so
that's
where
this
money
was
used
in
kentucky
counties,
every
kentucky
county
had
the
opportunity
to
request,
and
my
understanding
is
that
every
kentucky
county
got
what
they
wanted
and
the
state
board
had
an
open
meeting
and
debated
it.
Wasn't
a
slam
dunk.
I
remember
talking
to
jared
during
the
then
executive
director
of
the
state
board,
because
he
had
a
lot
of
the
concerns
I
mean.
F
I
think
we
all
share.
Everybody
agrees
the
concerns
of
what
private
dollars
could
do,
and
so
the
board,
which
is
bipartisan,
voted
to
accept
the
money
and
use
it
to
help
defray
the
costs
representative
cook
referenced.
It
was
2009
or
10,
remember
the
exact
year,
but
we
received
the
state
board
of
elections
received
at
the
time.
I
think
it
was
like
a
ten
thousand
dollar
grant
from
a
foundation
to
help
us
upgrade
and
build
a
new
website
so
that
we
could
make
it
do
a
better
job
of
communicating
to
overseas
and
military
voters.
F
F
It
was
really
hard
to
to
be
able
to
get
a
ballot
to
them
and
back,
and
so
those
websites
were
designed
to
be
able
to
show
them
all
the
different
options,
and
so
we
got
a
grant.
We
built
a
new
website
to
make
it
easier
for
those
folks
to
vote,
and
I
think
for
the
association
standpoint
recognizing
the
challenges
with
the
private
dollars.
F
We
do
like
the
georgia
model
better,
because
it
would
preserve
the
ability
to
receive
money
at
the
state
level
to
then
make
sure
it's
distributed
equally,
because
I
think
brian
suddenly,
my
friend's
right.
It
wasn't
done
pro
rata
at
the
local
level
in
kentucky
or
nationally
there
were
some.
It
was
bigger.
Counties
got
more
money,
but
they
got
proportionately
more
money.
It
wasn't
a
formula,
and
that
was
a
little
troubling
for
that
reason.
Now
this
does
cost
more
to
run
more.
F
You
know,
elections
in
big
counties
and
it
costs
more
than
pro
rata,
more
to
run
elections
in
big
counties.
But
you
know
somebody
those
were
some.
You
know
those
are
some
of
those
issues,
and
so,
if
you
were
to
run
it
through
the
state,
I
think
the
throwing
the
baby
out
with
the
bathwater
reference
is
a
good
one.
F
So
the
clerks
would
appreciate
more
of
a
georgia
style
if
you're
going
to
do
some
tightening
of
the
language
as
well
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
criminalize
anybody
who's
inadvertently,
doing
something
in
kentucky
in
elections,
but
appreciate
the
spirit
of
trying
to
tighten
this
up
because
we
know
lord
knows
we
don't
want
to
put
push
the
scales
in
any
particular
counties,
so
jason
denney
is
the
and
I'll.
Let
him
introduce
himself.
O
In
a
perfect
world,
elections
would
be
fully
funded,
they
have
not
been
during
2020.
We
saw
a
different
style
of
an
election,
an
election
process
that
the
secretary
of
state
and
the
governor
came
up
with
nonpartisan
and
with
that
working
relationship,
we,
as
county
clerk,
were
able
to
work
through
this
and
pull
off
a
nearly
perfect
election.
O
O
O
I
was
very
leery
when
I
applied
for
that
grant.
But
there
was
never
a
question
on
what
I
had
to
do
with
that
money.
I
told
them
what
I
wanted
to
buy.
I
wanted
to
advertise.
I
wanted
to
send
mailers.
I
told
them
how
much
it
was
going
to
cost
to
do
this
and
that
they
never
said
you
can
or
cannot
do
this
with
that
money
it
was
applied
for.
If
I
had
known
today,
I
could
applied
for
voting
equipment.
O
O
Some
dollars
is
what
my
and
I
was
thankful
to
say,
and
I
spent
every
last
dime
of
it
without
our
fiscal
court
having
to
fund
elections,
because
you
know
if
it
was
not
for
motor
vehicles
in
a
county,
clerk's
office
and
now
land
records,
we
would
not
be
able
to
fund
voting.
That's
what
funds
your
voting,
the
other
aspects
of
our
offices
in
the
county,
fiscal
courts.
O
A
O
I
I
my
gut
is:
if
it
there
could
be,
that
that
there
will
be,
and
there
may
not
be
as
much
money
because
of
the
pandemic,
lessening.
I
think
it
was
a
big
push
to
help.
I
really
believe
this
money
in
in
most
areas
was
designed
to
just
help
the
administrators
get
this
money.
There
may
not
be
as
much
money
in
the
future.
O
There
may
much
money
if
they
know
they
have
to
go
to
a
certain
entity,
but
at
least
if
it
does
come
to
the
state,
we
know
that
it's
distributed
equally
and
the
state
can
set
guidelines
on
what
it's
spent.
Maybe
you
can
set
guidelines
on
what
the
state
board
can
allow
to
be
spent
on
you
know,
but
to
say
we
just
totally
say
no
more.
A
An
opportunity
away,
can
I
ask
you
so
this
is
this
is
what
I've
been
in
a
discussion
with,
and
these
might
sound
like
silly
stories,
but
I'm
going
to
ask
them
if
somebody
running
for
governor
that
was
wealthy
or
had
a
fam,
a
brother
or
somebody
just
this
is
purely
hypothetical
came
to
your
anderson,
county
court,
set
courthouse
and
said:
I'm
going
to
give
anderson
county
5
million
dollars
to
do
what
it
wants
on
an
election
and
then
leaves
that
day,
and
you
accept
that
money.
What
do
you
do?
O
A
O
O
I
know
we've
got
money
now
from
the
federal
government,
but
that
money
is
not
always
going
to
be.
There
will
or
be
funding
year
after
year
after
year
for
county
boards
of
elections
and
counties
to
keep
up
the
cost
of
elections.
There's
not
there's
the
money's,
not
there
we're
almost
desperate
to
fund
elections
in
our
counties.
O
So
if
we're
not,
if
it's
not
this
where's
the
funding
coming
from
because
machine
voting
machines
get
so
expensive.
My
county
just
borrowed
money,
250
some
thousand
dollars
that
we're
going
to
be
paying
on
over
a
10-year
note,
to
pay
for
equipment
and
by
10
years
that
equipment's
wore
out
and
it's
going
to
cost
probably
four
to
five
hundred
thousand
in
ten
years
and
then
we're
never
overcoming
that
boundary
equipment
costs,
vendor
costs,
e-poll
books
that
we
testified
on
earlier
today,
there's
always
a
cost
with
elections,
and
we
want
integrity
with
elections.
O
C
Miller,
mr
chairman,
it's
just
not
not
a
question,
but
just
kind
of
a
general
statement
is,
I
think
personally,
I
would
be
comfortable
with
the
georgia
model
here,
but
there
is
just
so
much
distrust.
As
someone
said
earlier
right
now
in
elections
I
get
emails
just
about.
It
seems
like
every
day
questioning
the
integrity
of
our
elections,
which
I
think
is
there's.
C
A
L
A
I
Explain
my
vote
sure
thank
you
chairman.
I'm
voting
yesterday
in
order
to
get
this
process
started
with
the
floor
amendment.
I
trust
that
my
colleague,
representative
fisher
will
help
get
this
cleaned
up.
I
do
still
have
concerns
just
with
my
with
concerns
shared
with
my
county
clerk,
but
I
do
trust
my
colleagues
to
get
it
cleaned
up
as
promised,
and
I
trust
the
sponsor
of
the
bill
on
this.
So
thank
you,
representative.
A
J
A
N
G
M
I'm
gonna
go,
I'm
gonna
vote
yes
to
get
this
moving,
and
I
do
think
that
we
need
to
be
really
intentional
with
policy.
I
I
think
that
it's
really
easy
to
just
outright
ban
things,
but
good
policy
is
really
nuanced
and
you
know
I
think
that
there
are
some
possibilities
for
a
better
bill.
I,
too
think
that
I
could
be
really
comfortable
with
the
georgia
model.
If
we
were
very
you
know,
there
are
ways
to
restrict
equitable
distribution
and
and
limit
the
expenditures
and
just
maintain
some
strict
oversight.
M
So
I
think
there
are
ways
to
to
be
really
intentional
about
what
we
do
and
not
and
not
just
look
a
gift
horse
in
the
mouth.
I
think
that
you
know
kentucky
has
funding
problems,
and
I
I
think
that
you
know,
despite
the
the
distrust
of
the
system,
I
think
there
are
really
good
ways
to
to
tighten
this
up.
So,
yes,.