►
From YouTube: House Standing Committee on Judiciary
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
Judiciary
committee,
madam
secretary,
please
call
the
roll.
C
C
D
E
E
A
A
And
we
do
have
a
quorum
and
thank
you
for
your
patience
again
state
government
just
wrapped
up
a
few
moments
ago,
and
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
those
committee
members
had
an
opportunity
to
come
here
and
be
with
the
body
today.
As
again,
as
I
mentioned
the
other
day,
be
mindful
of
your
cell
phones
because
of
the
sensitivity
of
our
equipment
here.
If
we
have
interference,
it's
very
sensitive
and
frankly,
if
you
leave
your
mic
on
accidentally,
the
camera
may
deviate
to
you,
because
that's
just
the
natural
tendency.
A
The
way
the
system
is
structured.
We
have
two
bills
on
before
us
today
for
consideration,
we're
going
to
take
them
as
senate
bill
9
and
then
house
bill
10..
We
have
the
sponsor
here
for
senate
bill
9,
which
is
chair
westerfield,
and
with
that
chair
westerfield,
you
can
introduce
yourself
and
proceed.
C
Mr
chairman
and
members,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
it
and
I
appreciate
you
accommodating
the
schedule
letting
me
to
to
go.
First
on
senate
bill,
9.
members,
particularly
members
that
were
on
the
judiciary
committee
last
year
and
the
year
before,
you're
familiar
with
this
bill.
It
is
the
same
bill
that
you
saw
last
spring
just
the
same.
A
All
right,
we
have
a
motion
on
the
bill
in
a
second,
but
we
do
have
somebody
that
I
believe
is
here
to
speak
via
zoom.
If
that's
correct
is
that
here
so
we
may
have,
we
may
have
you
back
up
momentarily
or
you
can
stay
where
you
are,
but
we
may
have
you
address
the
committee
again
momentarily.
Yes,
sir,
dr
meyer,
we
have
a
dr
meyers,
I
believe
is
dr
meyers
with
us.
A
Okay
doctor,
if
you
would
introduce
yourself,
tell
us
who
you're
with
or
where
you're
from
and
then
you
can
proceed
and
just
be
mindful
that
our
committee
meetings
last
one
hour
and
we
have
another
bill
to
call.
So
in
order
to
give
deference
of
time,
I'm
giving
about.
You
know
seven
to
eight
minutes
or
maybe
10
at
the
most
in
order
to
present.
So
if
you
could
go
ahead
and
proceed.
F
Absolutely
thank
you
good
afternoon
and
thank
you
guys
so
much
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
today.
F
The
biggest
takeaway
I
want
you
all
to
have
from
this
is
that
this
bill
does
not
address
any
real
world
problem
in
the
setting
of
abortion
care
in
the
state
of
kentucky,
and
I
want
you
to
understand
the
implications
of
this
bill
in
a
non-abortion
setting.
If
this
were
to
pass
this
bill's
intent,
I
believe,
is
to
shame
patients
and
threaten
providers
and
further
limit
access
to
abortion
care.
F
I
first
would
like
to
address
how
this
bill
is
not
actually
applicable
to
abortion
care
in
the
state
of
kentucky,
and
in
order
to
do
that,
it
does
take
a
little
explanation
of
some
medical
terminology,
so
the
cut
off
gestational
age
and
when
I
say
gestational
age,
I
mean
the
weeks
pregnant,
the
the
months
pregnant
of
a
pregnancy,
the
cutoff
gestational
age
in
which
abortions
can
occur
in
the
state
of
kentucky
is
20
weeks
from
the
time
of
conception
or
21
weeks
and
six
days
from
last
menstrual
period
and
days
are
really
important
for
a
developing
fetus.
F
So
those
very
small
days
and
numbers
matter,
a
lot
viability
is
defined
as
a
gestational
wage
at
in
which,
if
the
born
the
baby
is
born.
Before
that
point,
there
is
certain
or
near
certain
death
or
the
survival,
with
a
high
likelihood
of
serious
morbidities.
So
an
example
of
this,
a
fetus
born
at
23
weeks
and
our
we
always
resuscitate
after
24.,
but
a
fetus
born
at
23,
so
kind
of
in
that
gray
zone
and
far
beyond
the
cutoff
for
abortion
in
our
state.
F
F
F
If
we
can't
perform
abortions,
you
know
after
20
weeks
from
conception,
there
is
actually
zero
chance,
there's
no
chance
of
living
outside
of
the
womb
in
general,
and
not
to
mention
that
that
at
no
point
does
an
abortion
procedure
result
in
a
provider
accidentally
delivering
a
live
fetus.
That
is
just
that
is
not.
That
will
never
happen.
F
So
with
this
knowledge,
this
bill
no
longer
even
involves
abortion
care.
To
be
honest,
it
really
is
not
applicable
to
abortion
care
because
of
the
cut-offs
already
in
place
in
the
state
it
now
most
significantly
is
referring
to
the
management
of
incidental,
premature
deliveries
that
occur
under
the
care
of
all
general
ob,
gyns,
neonatologists
and
pediatricians
so
outside
of
abortion.
F
For
you,
the
next
logical
question
and
as
I've
looked
through
other
talks
on
this
bill
is
why
can't
we
just
attempt
resuscitation
on
these
pre-viable
fetuses,
especially
on
in
the
setting
of,
if
they're,
showing
signs
of
life?
Why
don't
we
just
give
it
a
shot,
ultimately
there's
many
medical
reasons,
but
the
main
ones
being
that
the
lungs
are
just
too
underdeveloped.
F
It's
really
one
of
the
last
organs
to
develop,
and
that's
why,
when
we
see
patients
that
are
tired
of
being
pregnant
at
36
weeks
and
say,
can
we
just
deliver
this
baby?
Will
that
baby
likely
be
fine?
Yes,
but
there's
still
lung
development
that
far
along,
so
these
these
babies
are
not
developed,
also
the
tools
of
in
even
to
be
able
to
intubate
a
fetus
at
that
age.
F
F
Sadly,
I've
delivered
and
watched
alongside
the
parents,
as
these
pre-viable
miscarriages
have
occurred,
and
I've
watched
as
this
fetus
heart
stops
beating-
and
I
assure
you
these
are
some
of
my
darkest
days
as
an
ob
gyn,
and
I
never
enjoy
being
a
part
of
that.
F
But
what
this
bill
is
attempting
to
do
is
to
define
life
or
a
live
birth,
as
you
know,
a
muscle,
movement
or
a
low
beating,
a
fluttering
heartbeat,
but
that
fetus
was
not
born
alive
because
the
rest
of
the
organs,
the
lungs,
the
brain,
they
are
not
developed
enough
to
work
outside
of
the
mother.
F
F
A
Thank
you
very
much,
dr
meyer.
With
this
I
don't
know
if
mr
or
chair
westerfield
would
like
to
respond
or
if
we
just
want
to
proceed
with
any
discussion
or
questions
but
chair,
would
you
like
to
respond.
C
C
I'm
puzzled
because
it's
her
testimony
today
is
inconsistent
with
the
doctor
who
testified
in
the
senate
vmap
committee
a
couple
days
ago,
who
said
or
consistent
in
this
regard,
that
it
wouldn't
change
abortion
practice
and
then
goes
on
to
say
all
the
ways
that's
going
to
change
abortion
practice.
So
I'm
not
I'm
not
clear
about
that,
and
I
don't
and
again
I
don't
agree
with
the
premise:
the
idea
that
that
these
aren't
lives
that
need
to
be
guaranteed
an
opportunity
to
live
and
doing
things
based
on
the
odds
that
bothers
me.
C
C
We
we
just
say
you
can't
do
and
and
again-
and
you
all
heard
me
the
members
that
have
been
on
the
committee
have
heard
me
say
this
before
the
reason
this
bill
came
up
was
because
of
the
grotesque
comments
made
by
governor
ralph
northam
in
virginia
now
going
on
two
years
ago
on
a
radio
show
that
today,
to
my
knowledge,
he
has
not
recanted
or
taken
back
talking
about
what
would
happen
if
a
child
was
born
alive
and
he
was
referring
to
a
failed
abortion
attempt
if
memory
serves
correctly
and
this
bill
is
not
limited
just
to
that
not
just
to
that
circumstance,
but
he
was
saying
that
and
said,
and
I'm
paraphrasing
the
child
would
be
set
aside
and
made
comfortable
while
a
decision
was
made,
a
conversation
ensued.
C
Well,
that's
that's
a
terribly
grotesque
thing
that
he's
had
a
chance
to
take
back
and
he
hasn't.
I
found
out
after
that
that
kentucky
was
one
of
the
states
that
didn't
have
a
protection
on
the
books.
That
specifically,
are
a
requirement
specific
to
this
issue
requiring
care,
and
dr
meyer
says
that
this
isn't
a
problem.
It
is
a
problem,
I
don't
think
it's
a
widespread
happens,
hundreds
and
thousands
of
times
a
day,
but
I've
heard
from
a
a
gentleman
who's
in
the
central
kentucky
area.
C
C
My
friend
senator
schroeder
has
a
friend
who-
and
I
got
this
wrong
yesterday
on
the
floor,
but
he's
got
a
friend
who's
representing
people
against
health
care
facilities
that
are
facing
and
have
faced
that
same
situation,
and
I
think,
if
you
were
to
ask
right
now
and
poll
the
different
hospitals,
not
every
hospital,
treats
every
every
child.
That's
born
the
same
depending
on
how
old
they
are.
C
They've
got
different
procedures
or
different
rules
about
whether
or
not
it's
viable
according
to
them
or
whether
or
not
they're
they've,
given
their
staff
the
permission
to
go
ahead
and
intubate
and
do
whatever
you
do.
I
don't
know
I've
I've
heard
ralph
alvarado,
say
in
debate.
I've
seen
er,
that's
my
limit
of
medical
knowledge,
but
do
all
the
things
that
doctors
do.
C
But
if
you
go
to
this
facility
or
that
facility,
their
standards
may
be
different.
What
this
is
a
problem
that
has
happened
in
affected
families,
so
I
don't
want
anybody
to
think
that
we're
just
making
this
up
and
the
idea-
even
if
I
didn't
know
about
any
of
these
cases,
because
kentucky
doesn't
have
this
law
on
the
books
and
we've
got
a
sitting
governor
of
a
neighboring
state
who's
willing
to
acknowledge
that.
That's
something
they
could
do.
That's
enough
for
me
to
put
it
on
the
books.
C
That
that
that's
it
it's
I
I
didn't
have
a
chance
to
say
this.
It
is
identical
to
the
bill
you
voted
on
last
year,
but
for
the
language
that
is
now
house
bill,
2
that
you
all
have
debated
at
length
already
this
year
that
ag
specific
language
you
all
added
to
this
bill
last
year.
It
is
not
in
this
bill
this
year,
so
that
language
isn't
in
here.
A
Thank
you,
chair
westerfield.
We
do
have
someone
that
is
asked
to
address
or
comment
or
question
representative
mosher.
G
Yes,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
thank
you
senator
for
bringing
this
this
important
piece
of
legislation
and
dr
meyers.
Thank
you
for
your
testimony.
As
a
former
neonatal
nurse
for
about
18
years,
I
and
I
was
also
a
flight
nurse
for
neonatal
transport,
so
I
participated
in
many
many
resuscitations.
G
You
know,
there's
not
always
perfect
certainty
of
gestational
age,
and
I
think
just
in
in
the
sheer
just
in
the
understanding
that
of
that
and
that
sometimes,
when
infants
are
born,
they
show
signs
of
life
when
you
didn't
expect
them
to,
and
so
all
this
does
is
requires
or
requests
that
reasonable
attempts
are
made
to
to
see.
If
that
infant
has
a
possible.
G
G
F
Yes,
oh
well,
think
it's
awesome
that
you
did
that
for
so
many
years.
Thank
you.
It's
such
a
tough
job
being
a
neonatal
nurse.
We
love
working
with
them
and,
as
you
know,
a
lot
of
times
the
problem
I
have-
and
I
completely
understand
and
agree
and
one
that
we
are
within
question
and
you
you
know
this
when
we're
within
question
of
gestational
age,
we
always
have
a
neonatologist,
evaluate
and
see
if
that
baby
is
farther
along
than
we
believe
and
if
it
could
be
resuscitated.
F
I
have
never
heard
you
know
and
there's
always
rare
situations,
but
I
have
never
seen
that
in
practice
where
they
would
say
we're
pretty
sure
we're
not
going
to
even
try
that
seems
so
barbaric
to
me.
I
can't
even
comprehend
a
world
where
that
would
occur
the
times
where
I
think
it
becomes
difficult
as
you've.
Seen
yourself
is,
you
know,
let's
say,
there's
an
abruption
or
something
a
car
accident
where
we
have
a
21
22
week.
This
definitely
under
the
viability
great
dating
and
this
baby
is
born
and
we
have
a
extensive
and
you've.
F
Surely
had
these
extensive
conversations
with
parents
before
this-
and
we
say,
do
you
want
to
hold
your
baby
and
have
this
be
a
palliative
moment
because
of
the
out
because
of
how
dismal
these
chances
of
this
baby
surviving
are?
Or
would
you
like
us
to
attempt
all
resuscitative
measures
and,
as
you
know,
if
that
were
to
come
out
and
look
like
a
you
know
a
25-weeker
and
we
say
yes,
we
can
do
it.
Absolutely
there's
always
people
there
for
the
delivery.
F
But
what
I
don't
want
is
this
to
become
us
attempting
to
resuscitate
non-viable
fetuses
and
losing
that
moment
and
that
taking
that
decision
making
that
shared
decision-making
from
the
providers
and
the
and
the
families
that
will
give
them
that
peace
when
they're
already
dealing
with
this
trauma,
as
you
know,
or
as
you
know,
if
we
make
the
decision
to
deliver
a
pre-viable
fetus
based
on
like
fetal
distress,
that
might
even
be
considered
doing
a
cesarean
section
on
a
mother
and
so
putting
the
mother
at
more
risk
on
a
baby
that
will
not
survive
or
likely
won't
survive.
F
A
Dr
meyers,
thank
you
for
your
comments.
We
do
have
a
few
more
questions
and
I
have
to
be
mindful.
We
have
another
matter
to
call
so
I
had
on
my
list
and
we
weren't
sure
which
one
gave
the
signal,
but
either
representative
petrie
or
blanton
did
either.
One
of
you
have.
A
Okay,
we
also
have
representative
call
carney
is,
is
it?
D
Looking
for
you,
thank
you
chairman,
I
I
had
a
couple
of
questions
for
dr
myers.
Can
you
elaborate
a
little
bit
you
had
you
touched
on
it
in
response
to
representative
moser's
question
that
you
already
have
a
duty
of
care.
You
have
an
obligation
to
provide
appropriate
medical
care
in
these
situations,
and
you
are
talking
about
a
situation
where
it's
not
possible.
You
are
already
obligated
to
provide
a
certain
level.
Can
you
elaborate
on
that?
A
little
bit.
F
As
as
was
just
brought
up,
this
is
in
the
ideal
scenario
that
we
know
for
sure
how
far
along
this
baby
is.
If
there
ever
becomes
a
time
when
we
are
unsure
every
measure
to
evaluate
for
that,
baby's
viability
and
ability
to
live
outside
of
the
mother
at
the
time
of
delivery
will
occur
by
neonatologists
by
doctors.
F
F
If
we
thought
there
was
a
chance,
we
obviously
would
transfer
that
patient
and
that
fetus.
If
there
was
a
chance
when
we
have
patients
that
we
have
very
good
dating
on,
we
know
for
sure
that
they're
in
this
pre-viable
stage,
so
you
know
definitely
less
than
23
weeks,
there's
a
counseling
that
occurs,
and
we
say
you
know
this
baby
will
not
survive.
We
would
not
do
measures
to
like
prevent
you
from
this
delivery
from
happening,
even
if
we
could,
because
this
baby
is
not
viable.
F
Its
lungs
are
not
developed
enough,
even
if
it
were
to
move.
It's
have
a
heartbeat.
It's
lungs
do
not
work.
So,
even
though
there
are
signs
of
life,
it
is
will
not
be
able
to
continue
life
because
of
the
lung
development,
if
that
makes
sense,
it's
a
very
like
medically
complex
situation,
this
periviability
level,
but
we
do
know
that
below
this
cut
off,
it's
just
not
compatible
with
life,
but
if
there
is
any
question
we
always
always
always
attempt
to
resuscitate.
F
D
Thank
you
and
a
quick
follow-up
chairman.
If
that's
okay,
so
this
is,
I
guess,
directed
born
towards
senator
westerfield,
if,
if
that
is
the
case
and
we're
placing
this
statute
squarely
in
between
a
physician
and
a
family
in
an
end-of-life
palliative
care
situation,
what
is
the
impact
of
creating
this
new
class
d
felony,
which
this
bill
would
do
for
the
family
for
the
physicians,
for
anybody
involved
in
in
anything
that
might
be
considered
affiliated
with
a
statute
or
might
be
considered
to
fall
under
the
statute?
D
What
impact
would
that
have
on
the
actual
decisions
between
the
physician
and
the
family
itself?
Who
decides
not
to
resuscitate
decides
that
they
do
want
to
hold
their
infant?
Whatever
their
decision
is
because
it
is
their
decision.
What
is
the
impact
of
creating
this
new
class
d
felony
on
the
physician,
the
nurses
or
the
family
itself.
C
In
this
case,
the
the
language
of
the
bill
is
clear
in
that
regard,
language
is
also
clear
that
the
penalties
only
apply
to
the
healthcare
providers
that,
when
faced
with
a
child
that
is
born
alive
and
the
definition
of
born
alive
by
the
way
we
pulled
from
an
existing
statute.
Now,
how
long
that's
been
on
the
books,
but
we
didn't
come
up
with
that
that
that
was
already
there
and
it's
consistent
with.
C
C
That's
also
the
reason
why
this
penalty
is
in
there.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
there
is
compliance
with
this.
Otherwise,
what's
the
point?
What's
the
point
of
of
having
a
requirement,
if
there's
no
punishment
or
penalty
for
a
physician
that
decides
to
do
what
ralph
northam
says,
some
doctors
can
do
and
what
I
suspect
and
what
people
in
kentucky
have
said
their
doctors
have
done,
despite
being
faced
with
a
child
that
had
an
opportunity
to
live.
C
They
just
decided
not
to
yesterday,
as
we
were
talking
about
senate
bill
9
on
the
floor,
I
got
a
text
message
from
a
friend
of
mine
from
louisville
who
talks
about,
and
I
don't
know
I
don't
live
in
louisville,
but
talks
about
how,
depending
on
which
hospital
you
go
to
in
louisville
or
jefferson
county
or
that
area,
you
may
get
a
hospital,
that's
more
okay
with
trying
it
at
an
earlier
gestational
age.
For
a
baby.
That's
born
premature
versus
a
later
stage.
C
We
just
want
to
make
sure
that
the
child
has
a
chance
to
live
and
we're
not
we're
not.
As
representative
moser
clarified,
we're
not
asking
for
extraordinary
measures,
we're
asking
for
medically
appropriate
and
reasonable
measures.
That's
all!
And
again,
I'm
not
the
physician.
So
I
we
we're
not
putting
in
here,
because
this
bill
can't
speak
to
every
single
set
of
circumstances
that
a
physician
and
a
mother
might
face
or
a
family
might
face.
C
A
C
A
A
B
A
A
Westerfield,
we
will
now
move
on
to
the
next
bill
for
consideration
representative
sheldon.
If
you
will
approach,
we
appreciate
you
being
here
today
for
consideration
of
house
bill
10.
A
A
Okay,
all
in
favor,
aye,
okay,
that's
approved.
We
also
were
presented
this
morning
with
another
committee
sub
that
deals
with
it's
just
two
lines
that
and
the
other
the
other
side
by
the
way
have
been
distributed
to
the
committee
prior
to
today's
meeting.
This
substitute
has
that
been
distributed.
Yet
you
said
it
has
been
distributed,
has
been
distributed.
Just
indicates
that
nothing
in
this
section
shall
affect
the
right
of
any
employee
to
receive
benefits
to
which
he
or
she
would
otherwise
be
entitled
under
krs-342
or
workers.
A
Comp,
I
believe,
that's
already
actually
included
or
is
from
the
language
not
verbatim,
but
from
the
language.
That's
in
the
bill.
I
don't
think
there
is
ever.
This
is
related
to
covid,
only
not
necessarily
any
other
matter
that
might
proceed
from
that.
A
With
with
that,
though,
we
do
have
a
a
committee
sub
with
respect
to
that.
Okay,
all
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
aye.
Okay,
no
in
the
opposed.
Okay,
then
we'll
proceed
representative
sheldon
welcome!
Please
introduce
yourself
and
then
proceed
with
your
discussion.
H
I
come
today
to
discuss
the
limitation
of
liability
concerning
the
kobe
19
pandemic,
and
this
is
specific
towards
the
covet
19
before
anybody
takes
it
any
broader
than
that
also
declaring
an
emergency.
H
It's
an
honor
to
be
here
to
represent
the
business
communities,
schools,
local
governments
and
various
other
entities.
Today,
this
bill
addresses
a
real
concern.
I
hear
amongst
my
peers
in
the
business
community
as
well
as
local
leaders,
of
having
some
additional
civil
liability
protections
in
place.
H
This
is
usually
important
as
they
are
beginning
to
this
falls.
You
know
they
are.
They
are
beginning
to
to
move
forward
with
opening
our
economy
and
they
don't
need
another
barrier
to
have
to
to
to
fight
themselves
through
there's
a
lot
of
pain
out
there
already.
We
don't
need
any
frivolous
lawsuits
that
may
pop
up
due
to
cov19,
so
this
gives
them
very
similar
if
you
will
liability
protections
to
what
we
put
in
senate
bill
150.
when
we
did
senate
bill
150.
H
If
you
remember,
we
addressed
medical
personnel
and
then
businesses
that
might
retool
themselves
to
make
sanitizer
and
and
ppe
equipment,
and
we
allowed
them
to
have
these
same
protections.
So
all
I'm
doing
is
taking
it
and
expanding
those
protections
to
the
rest
of
the
entities
in
kentucky
who
deserve
that.
H
H
I
talked
about
and
it's
it
includes
a
lot
of
entities
and
you'll
find
that
in
the
first
paragraph
I
mentioned
business
owners,
schools,
local
governments,
individuals-
and
this
is
in
the
event
that
a
coven,
19,
related
negligence
litigation
occurs.
The
first
layers
of
defense
for
these
entities
to
use
if
a
person
alleges
that
they
have
contracted
covet
19
as
a
result
of
the
entities
negligent
conduct
and
want
to
sue
for
damages.
H
The
second
layer
of
protection
applies
a
presumption
of
a
reasonableness
to
whatever
safety
measures
that
entity
had
in
place
to
protect
the
people
on
the
premises
or
in
their
normal
operation
of
business.
So
as
long
as
those
measures
conform
to
whatever
the
cd
got,
cdc
guidelines
are,
and
then
finally
really
the
second
section,
it
protects
public
school
officials
from
liability
for
coba,
19
related
decisions.
It
provides
that
a
public
school
official's
decision
to
open
or
close
a
school
is
discretionary
for
purposes
of
deter
of
determining
qualified
immunity.
They
have
qualified
immunity.
H
And
would
the
qualified
immunity
would
kick
in
then
so
that
that
gives
them
protection
so
when
a
school
official
makes
that
discretionary
decision
just
to
be
clear,
he
or
she
maybe
receive
qualified
immunity
in
a
lawsuit
based
on
the
negligence
of
that
decision,
if
he
or
she
can
show
that
it
was
performed
in
good
faith
and
within
the
scope
of
his
or
her
authority.
So
so
that
kind
of
you
know
doesn't
stop
lawsuits,
but
it
just
creates
a
barrier.
H
D
E
To
explain
my
vote
briefly,
representative
sheldon,
we
might
disagree
a
little
bit
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
lawsuits
filed
over
covet
and
the
reasons
for
such,
but
I
really
appreciated
the
the
chair
and
you
for
taking
a
look
at
the
committee
amendment
and
for
that
getting
on
so
in
the
spirit
of
cooperation
today,
and
because
this
is
basically
a
restatement
of
the
the
law
on
negligence
and
and
discretionary
matters
made
by
people
who
work
for
our
schools.
E
E
My
vote
I
never
like
to
see
litigation
banned.
I
think
litigation
is
a,
is
a
means
of
redress
and
I
like
to
keep
courts
open,
but
this
is
providing
a
defense
and
a
rebuttable
presumption
and
I
think
that's
a
fair
thing
to
do
in
this
in
this
pandemic.
Thank
you
for
the
legislation.
E
B
H
H
A
Yes-
and
I
want
to
clarify
that
the
the
second
committee
I
referred
to
as
a
committee
sub,
but
it
was
actually
an
amendment
to
the
committee
sub
that
we
had
approved
so
just
so.
Everyone
is
clear
on
that
particular
piece
and
thank
you
and
part
of
that
was
simply
that
in
this
shortened
time,
at
the
beginning
of
session,
we've
somewhat
waived
the
rules
for
everybody
else's
notification
in
the
future.
A
E
A
Yvonne
was
it
18
one
two,
three,
four:
okay,
with
18.?
Okay,
with
there
being
18,
yes
votes
and
no
no
votes
house
bill,
10
is
amended
by
commit
phs1
will
be
adopted
and
be
reported,
and
and
as
amended
by
the
committee,
the
the
amendment
that
was
brought.
Sorry,
the
language
and
lingo
is
a
little
different
than
I'm
used
to
will
be
reported
with
favorable
expression
that
the
same
should
pass.
Thank
you,
everyone
for
participating,
it's
been
a
full
day
already
and
we
have
more
to
do
so.
This
meeting
is
adjourned.