►
From YouTube: House Standing Committee on State Government (3-10-22)
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
To
the
seventh
meeting
of
the
house
state
government
committee,
I'd
like
ryan
everyone,
if
you
want
to
speak
on
a
bill,
use
the
sign
up
sheet
and
let
us
know
that
you
wish
to
remind
everyone
to
mutual
cell
phones,
turn
on
your
microphones
members
and
mute
if
you
are
on
online
when
you
don't
wish
to
be
heard.
B
A
Here
we
have
a
quorum
dually
organized
to
do
business,
we're
going
to
hear
a
bill.
A
G
You
ed
massey
boone
district
66,
and
this
is
a
fairly
a
simple
bill.
I
learned
this
through
a
case
this
year.
It's
a
it's
a
bill,
that's
related
to
the
state
lottery,
but
basically
what
happened
is
last
year
we
passed
a
felony
threshold
bill
and
it
came
out
of
the
senate.
We've
been
signed
into
law
and
it
realigned
the
theft
charges
in
kentucky.
So
if
it's
under
a
thousand
dollars,
it's
a
misdemeanor.
If
it's
ever
a
thousand
dollars,
it's
a
felony
it
can.
It
does
have
enhanceable
provisions
that
build
upon
one
another.
G
A
G
I'm
just
gonna
one
sentence
says
any
person
who,
with
the
intent
to
defraud
falsely,
makes
or
alters
a
a
or
counterfeits
a
state
lottery
ticket.
It's
a
class
c
felony,
so
you
could
steal
a
30
ticket
and
it
could
wind
up
being
a
class
c
felony.
So
that's
why
we
brought
the
bill.
Okay
to
fix.
C
I
I'd
like
to
record
my
attendance,
but
also
yes,.
I
D
A
B
D
D
E
E
J
G
A
Now
I
will
tell
the
members
that,
because
we
there
was
another
senate
bill
that
was
also
a
reorganization.
Leadership
asked
that
these
bills
be
combined
in
committee.
Therefore
they
are
not
a
piggyback.
So,
gentlemen
welcome
and
we
appreciate
it.
I
will
ask
senator
nema,
since
he
is
the
sponsor
of
209,
if
he
would
or
of
158,
if
he
would
kick
us
off.
L
Yes,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
members
of
the
committee
senate.
158
is
a
re-org
of
a
part
of
the
finance
cabinets.
Real
simple:
the
division
of
fleet
management
is
under
the
office
of
administrative
services,
and
it's
going
directly
under
the
secretary
of
of
the
finance
cabinet,
and
the
reason
for
this
is
they
take
care
of
the
fleet
service.
L
A
I
agree
with
it
all
right.
I
have
a
motion
on
the
bill
and
a
second
I'm
going
to
ask
senator
meredith
if
he
would
talk
about
his
contribution
to
this
bill.
M
M
Following
passage
of
that,
I
was
contacted
by
secretary
freelander
that
he's
looking
at
some
reorganizational
efforts
with
the
cabinet
himself
and,
as
you
all
know,
it's
a
huge
cabinet.
A
lot
of
moving
parts,
we've
seen
a
lot
of
change.
The
last
couple
of
years
in
my
senate
concurrent
resolution,
20
asked
the
point
of
task
force
to
work
with
the
cabinet
to
look
how
we
can
increase
efficiencies.
M
M
One
most
notable
is
with
the
office
of
health
data
and
analytics,
which
has
become
very
big
for
us,
but
it's
been
kind
of
a
standalone
operation
and
now
it
brings
it
under
the
cabinet
formally
also,
we
really
haven't
addressed
telehealth
services
and
now
that's
been
moved
on
the
office
of
inspector
general.
So
again
a
lot
of
moving
parts.
We
thought
we
could
use
senate
bill
133,
which
is
the
cadmus
language
for
what
they
would
like
to
accomplish
with
the
organization
as
a
foundation
for
our
task
force.
If
that
bill
also
passes
the
house.
M
So
that's
the
intent
of
this
bill.
A
Thank
you
and
the
person
making
the
bill.
We
could
not
understand
if
you
were
making
the
motion
on
the
sub
or
the
original
bill
representative,
tate
yeah,
that
was
on
the
sub,
so
who
was
the
second
on
the
sub
all
right,
representative
heath?
Thank
you
just
wanted
to
clarify
that.
So
we
have
a
motion
before
us
to
accept
the
sub.
All
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
opposed
like
sign
sub
is
before
us
now.
Are
there
any
questions
at
this
point
on
the
sub?
A
E
A
A
second
and
any
other
questions,
madam
secretary,
please
call
the
roll.
C
I
And
explain
my
vote,
please,
and
you
said
that
the
administration
is
okay.
With
with
this
particular
piece
of
legislation,
they've
signed
off
on
the
finance.
D
A
O
F
Yes,
even
though
I'm
representative.
N
A
So
at
this
point,
the
bill
passes
with
favorable
expression.
Same
two
shall
pass.
Thank
you
senator
meredith,
for
going
along
with
our
efficiency
move
here.
Thank
you,
sir.
A
And
in
the
interest
of
further
efficiency,
senator
nemes,
we
are
going
to
allow
you
to
present
senate
bill
209,
which-
and
I
will
ask
representative
bratcher
to
join
you
at
the
table
because
in
another
efficiency
move,
this
is
a
bill
that
we
are
going
to
combine.
A
Senator
senator
representative
bratcher's
house
bill
169
in
with
this
measure
to
move
this
forward.
So
senator
nemes.
If
you
would
start
with
your
portion
of
the
bill.
A
A
L
So
well
mine's
real
simple:
it's
with
a
ksp
they're
having
trouble
hiring
so
they've
brought
back
troopers
in
re
from
retirement
to
as
one
year
contract
and
in
so
doing
they
have
have
not
given
them
their
some
of
their
benefits
per
se.
Sick
pay,
vacation
pay,
and
this
bill
takes
care
of
that
and
the
retirement
system.
It
has
little
effect
on
that.
L
These
troopers
can
go
to
any
police
force
and
get
that
so
we're
taking
care
of
that.
So
they
can
have
their
benefits
when
they
come
back
to.
A
Thank
you
and
I
will
say
the
the
purpose
of
combining
these
bills.
Not
only
is
efficiency,
but
representative
bratcher's
bill
also
dealt
with
a
way
to
retain
employees
and
encourage
them
to
work
longer.
So
at
this
point,
I'd
like
representative
bratcher
to
present
his
component
of
the
bill.
O
Well,
mine
deals
with
police
and
I'll
need
some
experts
up
here
if
it
gets
too
deep,
but
I'll
help
and
and
all
the
firefighters
and
hazardous
dude
everybody
state
employees
that
that
started
in
working
after
2003
had
their
insurance
radically
changed
the
formula,
and
I
have
many
police
and
fire
in
my
district,
and
they
came
to
me
asking
if
there
is
something
we
can
do,
because
they
were
looking
down
the
road
to
when
they
retire
and
there's
quite
a
big
bit
of
a
hole
in
their
insurance
benefit.
O
You
know
I
I
started,
I
said
sure
I'll
look
at
it,
but
I
knew
eventually
I'd
have
to
come
in
front
of
this
committee,
which
is
a
a
tough
committee
to
get
anything
pension
related,
passed,
especially
a
benefit,
and
but
we
did
meet
over
the
summer
we
came
up
with
a
good
plan,
actuarily
sound.
O
A
O
Way
in
a
good
way,
first
time
in
years
where
we
can
enhance
a
benefit
without
costing
a
significant
amount
of
money
to
some
of
our
some
of
the
best
that
work
with
us
so
and.
A
And
the
indeed
and
and
jd,
if
I
see
you
back
there
if
you
want
to
come
to
the
table,
you're
welcome
to,
but
you
don't
have
to,
but
I
will
say
that
the
the
increase
in
medical
benefits
for
retirees
should
be
offset.
O
Absolutely-
and
it's
like
I
said
it's
the
the
perfect
sunshine
storm
that
came
together,
and
I
think
that
this
is
going
to
be
a
great
asset
to
all
all
the
employees
of
kentucky,
not
just
hazardous.
This
is
non-hazardous.
Also,
yes,.
O
A
And
in
a
day,
indeed,
when
we
are
struggling
to
keep
people
in
positions
encouraging
them
to
work
longer,
while
it
may
cost
again,
this
measure
may
cost
on
the
health
side,
I
think
we'll
see
the
benefit
on
the
pension
side.
Mr.
I
Mr
mr
chair,
I
I
wanted
to
say
that
or
something
of
that
I'm
not
opposed
to
it.
I
just
we
just
needed
to
see
the
numbers
which
we
should
should
do
before
we
make
a
decision
and.
A
I
L
Are
they
well?
Let
me
explain
that
I
stopped
and-
and
I
get
coffee
and
and
fuel
on
my
way
into
frankfurt
and
there's
a
state
trooper
that
stops
there
all
the
time
and
he
he's,
and
he
pretty
much
said
if
you
don't
want
to
go
to
jail.
You'll
help
me
out
with
this
just
joking.
J
I
think
representative
pratcher
got
it
pretty
well,
so
I
don't
want
to
muddy
the
waters
at
all,
just
appreciative
that
it's
happening,
we
are
taking
care
of
what
we
kind
of
saw
as
a
doughnut
hole
where
potentially
we
had
retirees
and
at
first
about
a
five
year
span,
was
going
to
pay
700
800
a
thousand
dollars
more
a
month
than
other
retirees
who
were
either
come
before
them
or
right
after
them
and
we're
correcting
it,
and
it
was
a
complicated
and
sophisticated
thing
to
do.
O
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
representative
brancher
is
your
portion
of
the
bill.
Does
it
only
deal
with
employees
in
the
system
or
the
kers
system?
Employees
impacted
as
well
state.
O
E
Too
and
state
policing,
if
I
have
a
follow-up
reading
in
your
bills,
my
understanding
that
the
benefit
would
only
be
affected
if
that
system's
health
plan
is
funded
at
90
percent.
Exactly.
E
P
O
There
is,
do
you
wanna
it's
in
the
analysis,
but
they're,
very
close,
they're,
very
close
and
by
the
time
they
start
retiring
in
23
24.
Then
it
will
be
here.
We
go.
P
My
name
is
brian
o'neill,
I'm
the
legislative
chair
for
the
kentucky
professional
firefighters
and,
to
your
point,
sir.
One
of
the
reasons
that
the
fop
and
the
the
firefighters
brought
this
first
of
all
is
that
our
hazardous
duty
members
to
include
the
state
troopers
as
well
as
ems
or
any
state
hazardous,
will
be
the
first
impacted
as
the
first
become
eligible
in
2023,
the
non-has
folks.
P
The
first
group
of
them
won't
become
eligible
until
they
reach
27
years,
which
will
be
2030.,
but
analysis
of
all
those
different
plans
are
very
close
to
90,
and
it's
in
that
information
as
well.
For
you
to
look
at
that,
even
with
this
change
in
benefit,
which
again
to
be
clear,
this
is
not
an
enhanced
benefit.
It's
an
opportunity
for
an
individual
to
earn
that
increase,
so
they
have
to
work
to
get
it.
The
plans
are
keeping
up
according
to
the
aaa
that's
in
there.
Yes,
sir.
A
We
have
any
other
questions
on
this
bill.
Representative
duplessy.
F
Thank
you
sponsor
for
bringing
this
bill.
This
is
a
needed
bill.
Could
you
just
explain
a
little
bit
for
those
who
might
be
watching
in
how
somebody
would
earn
that
benefit
and
what
what
it
looks
like
now,
what
they
get
now
what
it
would
look
like
to
earn
that
benefit.
O
Okay,
so
right
now
for
every
year
that
they
work,
they
get
a
certain
dollar
amount
and
at
the
end
of
20
years
for
hazardous
for
every
year,
they
work
that
dollar
amount
would
be
the
the
the
money
they
would
have
to
apply
to
a
premium.
Just
a
dollar
amount,
not
a
percentage
of
premium
paid
and
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong
there
and
or
all
the
premium
paid
it's
just
a
dollar
amount.
O
This
will,
after
20
years
as
they're,
setting
forth
now
nothing
changes
at
20,
but
if
they
decide
to
go
another
year,
they'll
be
five
dollars
added
to
that
amount.
So
five
dollars
on
top
of
what
they
were
already
getting
at
20
right
right.
A
And
brian,
I
think
if
you
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
but
as
I
recall
the
that
dollar
amount
converts
to
about
58
of
the
premium
for.
P
And
that's
we've.
Actually,
we
can
drag
out
some
of
the
guys
that
were
back
here
back
then
I've
got
one
in
the
back,
but
it
was.
It
was
designed
to
keep
up
with
the
cost
right,
but
unfortunately
it
has
not
but
yeah
representing
duplicity,
it's
so
whatever
that
number
is.
That
does
have
a
small
cola
attached
to
it.
It's
1.5
right
now,
that's
sitting
at
like
21
dollars.
J
P
So
you
times
that
by
the
years
of
service,
so
for
every
year
they
stay
beyond,
and
it's
true
for
the
tier
two
people
that
would
stay
beyond
25
years
or
non-hazardous
people
staying
beyond
27
every
year
would
add
an
additional
five
dollars
so
say
somebody
that
reaches
20
years
in
2023
works
three
extra
years.
Their
figure,
instead
of
being
about
21
22,
would
be
about
37
times
their
23
years
of
service.
P
So
they'd
have
the
opportunity
to
to
get
a
a
better
plan,
and
this
also
includes
the
opportunity,
a
feather
out
of
your
hat
sir,
to
take
this
on
to
the
open
market
to
utilize
that
money
if
they
can
find
a
better
plan
or
a
different
plan,
that's
more
suited
to
them
great.
Thank
you.
Yes,
sir.
Thank
you
any.
O
A
H
F
A
K
A
E
E
A
Yes
matter
passes
with
favorable
expression.
Is
there
a
motion
on
the
title
amendment?
Second,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
title
amendment,
all
in
favor
accepting
the
title
amendment
signified
by
saying
aye
aye
opposed,
like
sign
title
amendment
has
passed.
A
Senator
nemes
thank
you
for
allowing
your
bill
to
be
a
a
mule
there.
Thank
you
at
this
time
we're
going
to
have
a
first-time
presenter
to
our
committee.
Q
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
good
afternoon,
mr
chairman
and
good
afternoon,
to
to
this
committee.
I
am
senator
donald
douglas
district
22.
I
represent
jesuit
county
garrett,
county
and
part
of
fayette
county
and
unfortunately,
redistricting
took
two
other
counties
away
from
me
made
me
want
to
cry.
Q
Q
This
is
approximately
two
years
from
the
original
installation
of
the
emergency,
which
was
march
6
2020..
I
remember
that,
mr
chairman,
because
that
was
in
fact
my
birth
date.
Q
When
when
the
virus
was
first
found
and
first
announced,
there
really
were
a
lot
of
unknowns,
the
medical
community,
the
scientific
community
and-
and
yes,
even
our
political
leaders,
were
kind
of
caught
off
guard,
but
instead
of
proceeding
down
a
purely
medical
path,
which
I
am
extremely
familiar
with,
having
been
in
medicine
for
40
years,
it
seemed
that
other
things
took
a
took
the
lead,
an
approach
of
cover-up,
isolate
and
limit
limit.
The
information
seem
to
be
part
of
the
problem.
Q
Well,
we've
gotten
past
that
we've
gotten
past
that
some
of
the
treatments
were
ignored,
but
we've
gotten
past
that
I'm
here
today
simply
to
say
that
that,
unfortunately,
on
a
regular
basis,
some
of
our
citizens
were
treated
to
numbers
each
day
that
they
didn't
understand
and
they
didn't
have
any
baseline
to
compare
them
to
those
numbers
really
had
nothing
to
do
with
infections.
They
had
to
do
with
inoculations.
Q
Q
The
emergency
declaration
has
caused
widespread
suspension
of
elected
procedures
in
the
hospital,
either
directly
or
indirectly.
It
caused
some
state
right,
statewide,
mass
mandates,
travel
restrictions
and
even
schools
and
businesses
to
shut
down
and
members
of
the
committee.
At
one
point,
even
state
police
were
sent
out
to
churches
to
look
at
some
of
the
church.
Goers.
Q
Q
Q
My
research
into
the
legal
area
shows
that
tells
me
that
that
funding
would
not
be
affected,
and
that
has
been
a
question.
Q
There
are
those
who
are
looking
for
100
percent
assurance
that
this
virus
is
not
going
to
cause
any
other
problems.
Again.
I've
been
in
healthcare
for
40
years,
I'm
looking
for
that
too,
with
all
of
our
viruses,
not
just
this
virus.
Q
I
really
want
this
emergency
order
to
be
canceled
so
that
people
can
start
sleeping
at
night,
so
they
can
start
going
to
the
malls,
so
they
can
start
being
with
their
friends,
especially
when
we
look
at
our
young
folks.
So
what
I'm
asking
today
is
for
your
committee
to
work
with
me
so
that
we
can
bring
the
people
of
the
great
commonwealth
forward.
A
Q
I
am,
and-
and
not
only
am
I
an
anesthesiologist,
but
I
have
practiced
what
I
what
we
call
non-narcotic
pain
management
for
for
for
about
24
years.
So
when
I
talk
about
the
rise
in
opiate
overdoses,
I'm
extremely
serious
I've
seen
it.
I've
seen
the
tragedy
that
it
has
caused
to
families
over
the
years
and
I've.
I've
spent
all
this
time
trying
to
trying
to
tell
my
colleagues
that
we
can
do
pain
management
without
habituating
people
on
opiates.
I
Welcome
senator
douglas,
I
want
to
ask
the
question:
if
I
can:
what
happens
if
the
delta
crone
variant
begins
to
spread?
Will
this
resolution
impact
us
from
receiving
federal
dollars?
If
this
becomes
a
you
know
the
pandemic
comes
to
where
it
was,
but
I
also
want
to
just
say
this
in
commentary.
I
I
Up
until
now,
we
would
have
more
people
who
had
died
from
this
pandemic
that
we
just
went
through
over
the
last
two
years,
but
I
want
you
to
follow
up
on
the
question
that
I
ask.
If
we,
if
this
resolution,
will
it
impact
if
we
have
a
a
variant
that
spreads
and
just
like,
we
had
the
last
two
years,
would
this
impact
any
federal
funding
that
we
would
may
need
to
receive
to
address
that
that
particular
issue.
Q
Q
Q
One
of
the
reasons
we
need
to
move
on
this
quickly
is
that
if
the
governor
discovers
that
this
is
going
to
affect
federal
funding,
he
can
change
the
things
that
need
to
be
changed,
and
then
we
can
address
how
he
changes
it.
Q
My
my
legal
people
that
I
that
I've
spoken
with
tell
me
that
this
will
not
affect
the
federal
funding,
but
should
it
do
so
we
have
the
we
have
the
ability
to
come
back
and
it
should
do
so,
and
some
regulations
are
changed
that
will
give
us,
as
a
general
assembly,
an
opportunity
to
come
back
and
re
re-address
those
particular
issues
in
a
way
that
we
can
restore
the
federal
funding
all.
I
Right
are
you:
are
you
certain
that
that
is
the
case,
because
if
we
do
this-
and
we
go
on
record
to
say
that
we
have
this
is
no
longer
in
place,
then
we
could
really
lose
that
federal
funding.
I
I
believe
that
I
you
know
it's
just
for
us
to
take
this
measure
right
now.
I
think
it's
irresponsible
on
our
part.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
A
I
C
Thank
you
chairman.
Thank
you.
Senator
senator
douglas
once
senate
joint
resolution,
150
is
passed
and
signed
into
law.
Will
the
technological
tools
that
have
been
available
to
me
as
the
state
representative,
primarily
the
ability
to
speak
with
you
today
this
way
via
zoom
and
also
voting
access
remotely
from
my
office
to
the
floor?
Will
those
be
effectively
cut
off
as
soon
as
this
becomes
law
or
will
they
still
extend
to
the
end
of
the
2020
regular
session.
Q
Well,
representative,
as
you
know,
those
have
already
been
available
that
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
amount
or
the
emergency
clause.
We
have
representatives
and
we
have
senators
who
sometimes
cannot
be
present
in
the
chamber,
and
so
there
are
things
that
that
we
sometimes
are
are
concerned
about.
C
Sir,
I'm
sorry
to
interrupt
you
if
I
may
so
you're
saying,
because
it's
really
just
that
if
we
passed
this
my
ability
to
still
work
from
my
office
and
chairman.
If
you
know
this
as
well
and
also
you
know
the
other
thing
zooming
like
I'm
doing
right
now
that.
A
C
That
is
helpful
for
me
to
hear
I
I
want
to
say,
and
may
I
just
now
comment
briefly
on
this
legislation.
Thank
you,
sir.
The
reason
I
bring
that
up
is
because
I
know
this
has
been
difficult
for
all
of
us
and
it
is
at
times
been
a
very
fraught
political
process
as
well,
because
it's
been
so
hard
to
live
through
as
people
from
different
viewpoints.
C
What
I
would
want
this
committee
to
understand
is
one
of
the
reasons
I've
utilized
these
tools
and
I've
greatly
appreciated
them
and
believe
every
chairman
I've
worked
with
yourself
included,
sir,
have
provided
this
with
a
spirit
of
yes.
Let's
do.
This
has
helped
me
also
take
care
of
my
90
year
old
in-laws,
where
I'm
very
intimately
involved
in
their
care
while
we
move
them
and
get
them
situated.
C
It's
been
a
very
difficult
six
months
and
this
ability
of
working
this
way
has
made
me
feel
comfortable
going
back
and
forth
to
see
them
as
often
as
I
have,
and
it
would
mean
a
lot
to
me
if
I
knew
that
in
this
passage
it
would
not
be
undermining
that
ability
until
the
session
is
over.
It
would
really,
it
would
mean
a
lot
to
me
to
know
that
so.
A
D
Hevern,
thank
you
chairman
senator,
thank
you
for
coming
today
to
our
committee.
Welcome
to
the
house.
One
question
I
have
is
during
the
special
session
last
year
we
extended
the
emergency
orders
due
to
like
licensure
and
telehealth,
and
things
like
that.
Would
this
resolution
affect
that
in
any
way.
Q
That
that
is
the
question,
because
others
have
asked
about
the
the
interstate
telehealth
there
has
already
that
has
already
been
addressed,
and
that
was
addressed
at
the
special
session
before
I
came
so
so
that
would
not
be
affected.
That
would
still
that
would
still
be
in
order.
D
Okay,
just
like
the
questions
like
the
licensure
and
the
certifications,
those
were
extended
as
well
for
just
some
of
professional
services.
Is
that
included
in
this
bill
or
in
this
resolution.
Q
Well,
as
you
know,
depending
upon
which,
which
licensing
board
that
you're
talking
about,
if
someone
wants
to
have
a
license
in
the
state
of
kentucky,
they
can
pursue
a
license
in
the
state
of
kentucky,
and
there
are
ways
to
get
licensed
in
the
state
of
kentucky.
It's
up
to
us
as
as
professionals
to
know
which
states
we
wish
to
practice
in
whether
or
not
that
be
in
medicine
or
as
a
nurse
or
or
anything
like
that.
Q
A
Thank
you,
representative
medics.
R
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
senator
douglas
for
bringing
this
resolution
to
kind
of
go
back
to
what
representative
hevron
was
saying.
I
think
she
was
referring
to
some
of
the
occupational
licenses
that
had
been
extended
in
terms
of
deadlines
and
things
like
that
there
were
some
executive
orders
that
were
extended
and
if
we
are
ending
all
of
them,
you
know
I
for
one
think
that
it's
well
past
time
to
do
that.
I
take
no
issue
with
that
aspect
of
this
resolution,
but
also
in
terms
of
the
federal
funding.
R
How
we're
talking
about
you
know.
Is
it
something
that's
going
to
be
able
to
be
retained
and
in
terms
of
the
governor's
ability
to
issue
I'm
assuming
administrative
regulations?
I'm
not
really
clear
what
you
mean
there
in
terms
of
it
looks
like
this
was
filed
on
february
18th,
and
it
was
supposed
to
take
effect
march
7th.
So
you
had
indicated
that
you
chose
that
date
to
give
them
time.
Have
they
done
anything
or
signaled
that
they're
in
the
process
of
doing
anything,
to
make
sure
that
we're
in
a
position
to
retain
federal
funding.
Q
R
Okay,
I
just
mean
in
terms
of
if,
if
their
attorneys
or
anyone
has
weighed
in
because
again
I'm
of
the
mindset
that
we
need
to
wean
kentucky
off
federal
dollars
and
frankly,
you
know
you
cited
the
john
hopkins
study
and
there
are
a
myriad
of
other
research
studies
that
suggest
that
no
aspect
of
anything
that
state
government
has
done
in
terms
of
the
lockdowns
mandates.
Restrictions
has
done
anything
to
curtail
the
severity
or
spread
of
the
coronavirus.
So
I
think
that
this
is
way
overdue.
R
F
I
do
have
a
concern
about
it,
sir,
and
I'd
like
your
your
thoughts
on
it,
I'm
ready
to
move
on
past
corona.
I
think
most
of
us
in
this
room
are
last
year
in
session.
We
we
passed
a
bill,
a
law
to
where
the
it
might
have
been
two
years
ago.
F
I
can't
remember
now
where
the
governor,
his
executive
order,
couldn't
extend
past
30
days
unless
this
legislative
body
approved
it
and
that's
why
we
got
called
into
a
special
session
and
and
what
have
you
if
we
end
this,
my
concern
is:
is
once
we're
out
of
session.
F
Q
Well,
there
certainly
is
a
possibility,
but
we
we
have
also
introduced
something
from
the
senate.
Trying
to
allow
us
to
call
ourselves
that
is
the
general
assembly
into
a
special
session
should
something
like
that
occur
now
that
will
be
on
the
ballot
in
the
fall,
and
we
would
have
to
wait
for
that
to
see
if
the
citizens
of
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky
would
approve
that,
but
but
we
all
have
to
face
it
right
now,
we're
under
the
guidance
of
our
kentucky
constitution,
and
there
may
be
some
things
we
don't
like
about
it.
A
J
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
senator
for
being
here.
I
could
say
many
things
about
trying
to
get
past.
Get
us
moving
through
the
rest
of
this
committee
hearing
and
appreciate
your
work
and
you're
getting
to
your
seat
and
know
the
pain
of
some
redistricting
issues.
But
I
have
you
stating
that
johns
hopkins
study
is
only
0.2
percent
effective.
J
When
for
lockdowns
is-
and
you
know,
I
calculate
the
population
of
the
u.s,
as
that
would
have
mean
that
660
000,
I
guess
more
cases
would
have
happened
without
those
lockdowns
you
calculated
into
kentucky's
population,
it's
a
lot
less
than
that.
But
then
you
get
into
how
many
of
those
infections
would
have
been
resulted
in
serious
attraction
of
the
the
virus
and
then
death.
Q
Thank
you,
representative,
wheatley,
all
deaths
matter.
Q
The
positivity
rate
is
going
down
so
the
rate
of
inoculation,
which
is
what
the
positivity
rate
tells
us.
It
doesn't
tell
us
the
rate
of
infection
in
order
to
have
an
infection.
You
have
to
have
an
organism
that
produces
enough
particles
that
adversely
affects
a
body's
system,
that
is,
an
infection
simply
having
an
inoculation,
doesn't
produce
infection
and
simply
having
an
inoculation
doesn't
produce
symptoms.
Q
So
I
think
we
have
to
be
very,
very
careful
when
we
look
at
some
of
the
numbers
what
johns
hopkins
did
is
they
didn't
perform
this
study?
What
they
did
is
they
looked
at
24
different
studies
across
the
country
data
collected
by
other
institutions,
and
then
they
used
three
different
criteria
to
standardize
those
studies,
which
is
extremely
important,
and
these
are
the
conclusions
that
that
they
came
to.
J
Thank
you
for
that,
and
with
some
of
the
work,
I'm
very
familiar
with
these
type
of
studies
in
integrative
reviews
in.
J
Is
what
what
they
they
did
at
johns
hopkins
and
just
looking
at
the
risk
value
values
related
to
there
being
that
many
potentially
saved
infections?
You
know
that
does
have
an
effect.
In
my
opinion,
it
does
have
an
effect
and
I
have
additional
questions,
but
that's
it
for
now.
Thank
you,
sir
bless.
H
H
Q
It
is
currently
scheduled
to
en
to
end
on
april
14th.
N
So,
between
march,
the
10th
and
april
14th
we're
willing
to
risk
all
the
unknowns
just
for
a
30
day,
because
when
I
go
outside,
I
don't
see
lockdown,
I
see
people
having
parties
in
the
parks.
I
see
people
living
their
lives.
I
took
someone
from
the
elective
surgery
last
week,
so
I'm
trying
to
understand
why
we're
willing
to
risk
our
ability
to
not
respond
quickly
if,
if
there
is
some
loss
of
federal
funds,
because
we
can't
respond
quickly
rather
than
just
wait,
the
30
days
out,
it
seems
to
me
like
people
are
moving
forward
now.
Q
Thank
you,
representative
stevens.
What
we
get
is
the
ability
of
our
general
assembly
to
serve
the
people
who
elected
us.
If
we
wait
until
april
the
14th,
we
will
be
moving
shortly
out
of
session.
The
general
assembly
will
have
absolutely
no
ability,
no
ability
to
affect
anything
that
the
governor
does.
So
what
we
get
by
doing
it
now
and
not
waiting
until
april
14th
is
that
we
have,
as
a
general
assembly,
an
opportunity
to
be
representatives
for
the
people
who
have
elected
us
in
the
commonwealth.
N
Exactly
and
like
the
people
that
elected
the
governor
to
be
the
chief
executive
officer,
we
put,
the
general
assembly
has
capped
his
ability
by
saying
you
can
no
longer
do
emergency
orders
on
covet
19
unless
you
come
to
us.
So
isn't
that
a
precaution
that
he
won't
do
it
because
we
told
him
he
couldn't
do
it.
N
Q
A
Q
N
I've
I've
said
it,
I've
stated
it
twice
and
I've
asked
the
senator
to
just
answer
the
question.
Sir,
are
you
willing
to
jeopardize
the
funding
coming
into
this
state
for
want
of
30
days,
even
though
we've
already
told
the
governor
what
he
can
do
that
will
prohibit
him
from
doing
another
emergency
order
on
covet
19.
A
Thank
you,
representative
mentor.
You
have
the
last
word.
K
Okay,
I'll
try
to
make
it
worth
it.
You
had
mentioned
that
you
did
not
know
if
we
were
risking
federal
funding
or
not,
but
have
you
seen
the
numbers
that
were
sent
to
all
of
us
by
dustin
pugel
from
ksep
this
morning
about
snap
about
snap
benefits
and
emergency
allotments.
K
Okay,
it
has
a
county
by
county
breakdown.
It
actually
will
if,
if
this
body
moves
this
forward
to
the
house
today
and
this
passes,
then
this
will
impact
federal
funds.
K
As
far
as
snap
funds
for
food
insecurity
and
in
particular
the
emergency
allotments,
would
continue
through
april,
but
we
would
not
be
eligible
for
allotments
from
may
to
november
and
for
war
excuse
me
may
to
september
and
for
warren
county,
which
is
always
already
struggling
with
food
insecurity
issues
because
of
the
tornado,
we
would
lose
7.7
million
dollars
in
snap
benefits,
and
that
also
goes
directly
to
grocery
stores.
So
that's
something
that
goes
directly
to
your
local
businesses
and
that's
just
one
example.
K
There
may
be
others,
but
I'm
not
sure
why
we
need
to
do
something
to
make
a
larger
point,
to
tell
the
governor
that
he
can
or
can't
do
something
when
there
can
be
really
tangible
damage
to
people
in
my
district
are
not
asking
me
to
limit
the
power
of
the
governor.
In
fact,
they
want
as
much
money
as
they
can
get
for
tornado
relief
right
now
for
food
insecurity
and
help
to
build
back.
K
D
D
My
friend,
the
lady
from
warren,
said
that
we
all
receive
this
information.
I've
checked
with
people
over
here.
I
have
no
idea
what
she's
referring
to.
I
find
it
interesting
that
the
last
question
of
the
day
that
it's
already
passed
the
senate
and
it
comes
to
the
house.
Then
we
have
new
information
that
all
of
a
sudden
we're
going
to
lose
all
this
federal
funding.
When
we've
asked
this,
I
remember
asking
this
question
over
the
interim
of
the
governor's
administration
and
we
didn't
receive
the
information.
I
find
it
curious.
D
K
Representative
it
my
apologies,
it
is
addressed
to
members
of
the
house
of
representatives.
I
am
not
sure
how
to
get
that
to
everyone,
but
I'd
be
delighted
to
do
so
and.
O
A
A
Folks,
go
through
the
go
through
the
chair
representative
mentor
if
you
would
be
so
kind
as
to
send
that
to
everyone.
I'm
sure
this
won't
be
taken
up
on
the
floor
today,
so
we'll
all
get
to
see
it
and
read
it
before
it
moves
further.
So
with
that,
madam
secretary,
please
call
the
roll.
O
Yes
and
quickly
explain
you
know
when
this
first
started.
I
was
scared,
like
many
americans
two
years
ago
I
have
loved
ones
that
are,
you
know,
elderly,
and
I
have
had
two
people
that
I
know
die
of
of
colvin,
but
man
we've
had
a
two-year
crash
course
on
how
to
deal
with
this.
O
This
thing
we
know
about
social
distancing,
we
know
about
masking.
You
can
wear
a
mask
if
you
want
to
you
can
social
distance?
If
you
want
to,
I
have
loved
ones
that
are
still
in
in
the
house,
sealed
up
and
that's
what
they
want
to
do,
and
god
bless
them.
They
can
do
that.
But
it's
time
to
move
on-
and
I
thank
you
senator
for
bringing
this
and
I
vote.
Yes,.
D
I
I'm
going
to
vote
no.
I've
expressed
my
concerns
about
the
federal
funding
and
the
possibility,
and
it
is
my
understanding
that
the
john
hopkins
study
was
not
actually
a
john
hopkins
study.
It
was
a
professor
who
did
his
own
research
and
I
I'm
going
to
look
at
this
to
see.
If
that
is
the
case.
If
that
is
the
case,
then
we
have
not
been
provided
the
correct
information,
I'm
voting.
No
thank
you.
I
A
R
I'm
voting
yesterday,
but
I've
heard
a
lot
of
commentary
about
the
federal
funding
and
in
reality
I
think
that
it's
important
to
look
at
the
vicious
cycle
that
has
been
created
by
shutdowns
mandates
and
then
the
subsequent
federal
funding
that
was
needed
to
fill
that
giant
economic
hole
that
was
created
by
the
shutdown.
So,
even
if
it's
a
function
of
ending
the
federal
funding,
we
absolutely
need
to
do
this.
We
should
have
done
it
a
year
ago
or
even
prior
to
then.
I
appreciate
your
remarks
and
I
vote.
Yes,
thank
you,
representative
mentor.
K
I
briefly
explain
my
vote
briefly.
Please
I'm
voting
no,
because
I'm
very
worried
that
it
will
affect
federal
funding,
that's
extremely
vital
to
our
commonwealth,
and
I
have
asked
mr
pugel
to
send
the
information
that
was
shared
with
me
to
the
entire
house
of
representatives,
so
hopefully
you'll
be
getting
that
soon,
but
my
folks
need
food.
Thank
you.
N
E
A
A
A
We
have
one
final
item
before
us.
Mr
chair,
could
I
record
a
yes
vote
on
senate
bill
209?
Yes,
representative
bowling,
thank
you
and
representative
pratt.
You
are
the
cleanup
hitter
here
we
have
a
motion
on
the
sub
in
a
second
all
in
favor
of
accepting
the
sub.
Please
signify
by
saying
aye
matters
before.
S
Us
thank
you,
mr
chair
and
member
of
committees.
Thank
you
for
saving
the
best
for
last
house.
Bill
594,
as
as
adopted
by
the
committee
sub
house
bill.
95
594
is
a
piece
of
legislation
that
will
help
bring
transparency
and
accountability
to
the
development
of
administrative
regulations
while
enduring
the
financial
concerns
of
small
businesses
are
heard
by
executive
and
legislative
branches
for
too
long.
No
matter.
A
D
Q
D
J
A
Yes
matter
passes
with
favorable
expression.
Same
two
shall
pass
on
the
floor.
Congratulations
and
mr.