►
From YouTube: House Standing Committee on Elections, Const. Amendments & Intergovernmental Affairs (3-3-22)
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
The
sixth
meeting
of
house
elections,
constitutional
amendments
meeting
committee
will
come
to
order.
Madam
secretary,
please
call
the
roll.
B
B
A
Here,
thank
you,
everyone,
please
turn
your
phones
either
off
or
on
mute
or
whatever
we'll
we'll
recognize
guests
right
now
and
I
want
to
say
we
have
some
of
the
brightest
young
ladies
in
kentucky
here
today,
they're
all
on
the
back
row
and
if
they'd,
please
stand
mercy
academy
and
everyone
give
them
a
round
of
applause.
A
A
You
like
to
say
a
few
words
on
your
first
day
in
house
elections.
Yes,.
G
I
am
actually
super
excited
to
be
on
this
committee.
The
last
time
I
was
at
this
committee
was
in
2020
as
a
lobbyist
working
on
restoration
of
voting
rights,
and
so
I
look
forward
to
continuing
that
work
and
working
with
you
all.
Thank
you.
A
And
I
remember
that
well,
and
you
turned
a
few
opinions
that
night.
H
You
so
much
chairman.
I
want
to
recognize
that
we
have
with
us
today
missy
spears
from
covington
and
angela
roll
from
morehead
they're,
both
shattered
me
shadowing
me
today
and
they're
with
emerge
kentucky
which
trains
democratic
women
to
run
for
office.
Please
make
them
feel
welcome.
Thank
you,
chairman.
I
A
K
You
chair
and
members
of
this
committee,
for
allowing
me
to
present
this
bill
here
today.
330
is
what
we
call
as
the
vote
hauling
bill
this
bill.
Actually
in
2020,
passed
out
of
committee
and
passed,
I
believe,
on
the
house
floor
and
then
we
simply
ran
out
of
time
due
to
the
covet
pandemic,
for
it
to
go
any
further.
So
this
is
just
a
exact
reproduction
of
that
bill.
That
was
here
before.
K
Specifically,
it's
just
a
two-page
bill
and,
more
specifically
on
page
two
paragraph,
six
is
really
the
important
part
of
the
bill.
That
basically
says
no
candidate
or
candidate's
campaign
committee
shall
pay
for
any
person,
including
campaign
workers,
for
the
purpose
of
transporting
voters
to
the
polls
on
the
day
of
any
primary,
regular
election
or
special
election.
It
then
goes
on
to
define
pay.
It
doesn't
mean
that
transport
cannot
happen.
It
just
means
that
the
money
from
the
campaign
account
won't
be
used
to
pay
people
to
do
that
which
gives
an
unfair
advantage
potentially
to
some.
K
So
with
that
regards,
that
is
the
gist
of
the
entire
bill.
It's
not
a
problem
in
all
communities.
It
is
a
problem
in
some
communities
and
in
fact
some
of
my
my
colleagues
have
asked
me
to
bring
this
bill
with
regards
to
that.
So
that
is
the
nature
of
the
bill.
I'll,
certainly
answer
any
questions.
Representative
nemes.
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Mr
chairman
massey,
straight
ahead.
There
we
go.
Oh,
I
have
a
comment.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
my
comment
is
accurate
and
then
I
got
a
question.
So
the
comment
is
the
reason
this
is
necessary
is
because
in
some
areas
there
is
a
tradition
of
a
campaign
or
a
candidate
paying
people
to
quote
unquote,
wink
wink,
not
not
drive
people
to
the
polls
when
actually
it's
a
way
to
pay
for
votes.
Oh
that's.
My
comment
is
that
correct.
That
is
correct.
L
Okay,
and
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
are
not
talking
in
any
way,
especially
in
a
time
when
we
are
having
fewer
polling
locations,
we're
not
talking
about
organizations
non-profits
that
are
trying
to
just
get
people
to
the
polls.
Those
people
are
not
covered
by
this
bill.
This
is
candidates
and
their
campaign
apparatus.
Is
that
correct?
That
is
absolutely
correct.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
representative,
wheatley.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
and
thank
you
for
bringing
this
bill.
I
do
remember,
I
do
recall
voting
on
it
a
couple
years
ago,
but
I
I
wasn't
on
the
house
committee
at
the
time,
so
I
I
have
a
couple
questions
and-
and
I
always
appreciate
one
of
my
seat-
mates
or
nearby
seat
mates,
because
I
I
frequently
turn
to
him
on
the
floor
and
say:
what's
this:
what
and
ed
and
representative
master
you
always
do
well
in
explaining.
F
F
And
this
would
no
longer
permit
the
pay
and
for
the
work
of
actually
doing
bringing
people
to
the
polls.
For
instance,
if
somebody
has
an
expense,
they
have
gas
expenses,
their
car
expenses.
That's
fine,
but
you
can't
pay
somebody
fifty
dollars
to
bring
a
group
of
people
to
the
polls,
including
your
own
campaign
staff
and
a
campaign
committee.
Exactly.
K
K
Any
person
who
knowingly
violates
it
goes
on
to
say
it's
a
class
b
misdemeanor,
so
you're
paying
the
campaign
or
the
candidate
would
be
paying
an
individual
to
get
as
many
people
to
the
polls
as
they
could.
It's
not
talking
about
expenses
or
reimbursement
of
expenses.
It's
talking
about.
As
representative
nema
said.
Basically,
the
week
week,
nine
nod
to
get
as
many
people
there
to
give
you
an
unfair
advantage.
F
Thank
you
just
one
follow-up,
real,
quick
it
and
just
to
I
don't
mean
to
be
naive
with
this
question,
but
just
to
give
us
an
example
of
of
how
this
wink
wink
nod
nod
works
and
why
would
that
have
been
illegal
previously
or
yes,
previously
and
and
illegal
at
this
time?
But
how
was
it
not
caught
in
the
past
with
the
existing
law?
Well,.
K
The
best
example
I
can
give
you
a
couple
of
examples.
Actually,
you
know,
vote
buying
has
been
going
on
for
a
long
time.
You
know
there
was
a
big
dust
up.
I
think
in
clay
county
a
few
years
back
where
actually
a
local,
a
circuit
judge
and
a
board
superintendent
were
indicted
on
basically
paying
for
votes
because
they
control
the
largest
employer
in
the
county.
Now
that
wasn't
transporting,
but
it
goes
in
the
same
vein
of
things.
K
So
if
you
have
somebody,
that's
there
and
you
say
to
a
guy,
hey,
you
know
I'll
pay,
you
500,
if
you
can
get
pick
up,
20
registered
voters
and
take
them
to
the
polls
to
vote
for
me,
then
that's
what
vote?
Hauling
really
is
indicative
of
it's
not
talking
about
declining
people
that
are
actual
voters
from
voting.
We
want
them
to
go
to
the
polls
and
cast
their
vote
for
their
desired
candidate.
We're
talking
about
people
manipulating
the
system
to
try
to
get
an
unfair
advantage
using
money
to
do
so.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
just
want
to
be
super
clear
about
this.
You
know
like
uber
and
lyft
have
the
sort
of
deals
where
they
give
their
drivers
kind
of
like
a
voucher
to
take
people
to
the
polls
on
election
day.
That's
not
intended
to
be
covered
in
any
of.
I
Correct
and
then
I've
got
one
other
clarification.
So
if
I
personally
am
out
during
the
four
days
that
we
now
have
to
to
vote
and
I
go
to
somebody's
door
and
I
say:
hey,
have
you
voted
yet
and
they
say
no,
I
can't
say:
do
you
want
to
go?
I
can't
I
cannot
personally
take
them.
K
You
can't
pay,
you
can't
be
paid
to
take
them.
Okay,
that's
the
difference.
So
what
this
is
is
using
campaign
financing
using
campaign
funds
or
a
candidate
paying
to
make
sure
that
somebody
that
otherwise
may
not
have
voted
would
get
to
the
poll
to
vote.
It
doesn't
mean
that
you
couldn't
drive
somebody
to
the
poll
to
vote.
Okay.
I
A
Got
a
motion
from
representative
cook
and
second
from
representative
moser.
K
B
K
M
M
A
L
A
M
Mr
chairman,
it
might
be
hard
to
do
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
be
with
you
all
today,
josh
branscomb
state,
representative,
83rd
district
I'll.
Let
my
guests
introduce
themselves.
M
M
We
have
to
follow
up
to
do
some
cleanup
or
some
housekeeping,
and
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
once
again
work
with
representative
decker
representative
tipton
and
this
year,
as
well
with
representative
tate
representative
roberts,
representative
wheatley
always
appreciate
your
feedback
as
well
like
house
bill
574,
we
worked
closely
and
sought
the
input
of
our
county
clerks,
the
state
board
of
elections,
secretary
of
state,
many
of
whom
are
here
today
to
support
the
bill
house
bill
564.
It's
not
an
election
reform
bill
like
what
we've
seen
last
year.
As
mentioned.
This
is
primarily
some
cleanup
language.
M
However,
there
are
some
areas
in
which
we've
included
technical
changes
to
help
increase
the
efficiency
and
security
of
our
elections.
It's
a
pretty
large
bill.
I'm
going
to
give
you
just
a
brief
overview
of
what
the
bill
does.
The
bill
creates
a
new
section
of
krs
117
that
separates
in-person,
absentee
voting
for
mail-in
absentee
voting.
This
will
provide
clarity
for
reference
and
you'll,
see
that
there's
many
sections
where
it
looks
like
we're,
adding
new
language
and
there's
sections
where
we're
striking
existing
language
in
in
a
lot
of
those
situations.
M
M
After
that
there
was
no
mechanism
in
place
to
request
a
ballot
or
vote
excused
absentee
until
the
thursday
of
in-person
voting.
So
we've
got
a
gap
there.
So
if,
on
day
13
you
find
out
the
portal
closes
day
13
you
find
out
that
you're
not
going
to
be
able
to
vote
in
person
whether
that's
on
election
day
or
the
thursday
friday
saturday
of
early
voting.
M
We
have
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
punishing
our
hard,
hard-working
kentuckians,
who
you
know
may
find
out
on
day
13
that
they're
not
going
to
be
able
to
vote.
The
bill
also
prohibits
the
transmittal
of
absentee
ballots
until
six
six
o'clock
prevailing
time
on
election
day.
We've
also
set
up
security
protocol
to
where
two
election
officials
must
check
the
record
and
sign
off
on
the
numbers
on
the
public
counter
of
each
voting
machine
at
the
end
of
each
night
of
voting
and
the
following
morning.
M
We've
heard
from
a
lot
of
folks
that
want
that
want
that
data
and
require
secure
online
connection
for
the
transmittal
of
unofficial
election
results
and
the
bill
also
cleans
up
language
that
if
a
vacancy
occurs
after
the
june
following
filing
deadline
for
unexpired
terms,
political
party
candidates
are
able
to
file
certificates
and
nomination
and
not
be
limited
to
being
a
write-in
candidate.
M
Mr
chairman,
those
are
the
highlights
of
the
bill.
I
believe
representative
decker
also
has
a
few
words
to
say.
If
that's
okay
with
you,
yes,.
N
N
We
intend
to
have
elections
that
have
integrity
in
kentucky.
We
know
of
no
reason
for
any
voter
in
this
state
to
feel
that
their
elections
are
not
secure.
We
want
voter
integrity
and
we
want
high
voter
turnout
and
that's
what
every
measure
that
we
put
forward
is
aimed
at.
We
appreciate
all
of
the
election
officials.
Every
election
official
in
kentucky
has
been
involved
in
these
bills.
N
N
There's
no
one
in
that
group
who
is
interested
in
anything
other
than
having
free
and
fair
elections,
not
only
that
we
have
a
hundred
and
twenty
counties
with
a
hundred
and
twenty
county
clerks
who
are
responsible
and
are
elected
by
their
constituents
to
ensure
that
the
elections
are
are
fair
and
have
integrity.
These
county
clerks
are
from
are
bipartisan.
N
They
are
from
various
parties
not
only
that
they
have
boards
of
elections
in
each
county
that
are
bipartisan
with
four
members,
including
the
sheriff
who
is
elected,
and
you
heard
various
things
today
about
the
integrity
of
the
count
and
the
machines
they
have
seals,
they
have
keys,
they
have
certifications,
and
all
of
this
is
done
out
of
a
civic
duty
by
all
of
these
people.
There
is
no
one
in
contact
and
what
a
broad
diverse
set
of
voter
officials
there
are
in
this
state.
N
Our
state
has
a
system
that
is,
that
has
integrity
and
all
of
our
efforts
are
in
to
ensure
that,
because,
if,
if
there
is
doubt
in
the
integrity
of
your
voting
system,
people
simply
will
not
vote,
and
so
I
just
want
the
committee
to
be
assured
that
all
of
these
efforts
are
aimed
at
those
goals.
Thank
you.
G
Thank
you.
We've
all
seen
headlines
about
harassment
and
threats
lobbied
at
or
lobbed,
rather
at
poll
workers
in
recent
elections,
krs-119255
levies,
a
penalty,
a
class
d
felony
for
threat
of
violence
or
intimidation
against
election
officials.
In
the
committee
sub,
we
update
the
definition
to
clarify
the
inclusion
of
precinct
officers
and
poll
workers.
If
we
are
to
truly
protect
the
integrity
of
our
elections,
we
should
start
by
protecting
the
people
who
operate
our
polling
places
on
election
day.
Thank
you.
A
A
We
have
anybody
else
going
to
speak
at
the
table.
Yes,.
J
As
with
any
bill,
we
realized
at
574
once
it
was
implemented
there
needed
to
be
a
few
things
added,
and
we
took
care
of
that
gap
for
those
voters
to
be
sure
that
everybody
had
the
ability
to
come
in
and
vote
and
any
concerns
with
the
county,
clerk's
association
or
taken
care
of
in
this
cleanup
legislation.
But
thank
you
all
for
letting
us
be
a
part
of
this.
We
totally
support
this
bill.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
have
a
question
and,
depending
on
the
answer,
a
potential
follow-up.
Okay.
First
of
all,
let
me
thank
you
all
for
bringing
this
having
secure.
Elections
are,
are
very
important
to
to
all
of
us
not
only
to
those
who
are
putting
themselves
out
there
by
being
on
the
ballot,
but
also
to
our
voters.
Oftentimes
I've
heard
people
say
that
there's
no
need
me
going
to
vote
and
my
vote
don't
count.
Well,
we
want
to
make
sure
every
vote
counts
because
they
do
it's
our
democratic
process.
C
Is
there
expectations
by
the
it
have
an
emergency
clause
that
it
will
be
implemented
and
used
in
the
upcoming
may
primary.
C
Follow
up
that
being
the
case,
my
next
question
is
going
to
be
probably
for
the
clerks.
You
know
taking
worst
case
scenario
of
timelines.
C
This
passes
on
the
14th
day
of
april
the
last
day,
there's
10-day
veto
period
and
it
doesn't
go
into
law,
let's
say
until
or
signed
or
not
signed
until
the
24th
of
april.
C
J
Would
mia,
I
would
be
admits
to
say
that
timing
is
not
of
the
it
is
of
the
essence.
We
have
to
have
absentee
ballots
printed
by
the
28th
day
of
march.
Machines
will
be
ready.
There
is
definitely
a
timing
issue
that
we
we
are
it's
pertinent
that
we
get
this
bill.
This
legislation
put
through
as
quickly
as
possible.
The
the
gap
procedure
definitely
needs
to
be
taken
care
of
that
or
that
six
days
that
was
missed
in
574.
J
That
is
very
important
to
get
taken
care
of.
So
there
could
be
some.
There
are
some
timing
issues
I
think,
with
the
most
part
we
can
get
it
done,
but
the
ballots
have
to
be
in
our
office
by
the
28th
day
of
september.
H
Thank
you
chairman.
Usually,
I
would
ask
for
an
explanation
of
the
difference
between
the
committee
sub
and
the
original,
but
because
it's
58
pages
I'll
refrain
from
that
today.
So
instead
my
question
is
in
section
one.
It
says
an
addition
of
citizen
of
the
united
states.
Can
you
all
explain
to
me
the
need
for
adding
that
particular
phrase.
M
Yes,
we
so
that's
already
in
section
145
of
the
constitution,
which
is,
I
guess
it
might
be
line
eight
that
that
you
see
that's
already
in
there,
but
we
decided
to
add
that,
because
we're
talking
about,
if
you
look
at
line
line
well
it'd
be
line
four
here,
every
person
sits
in
the
united
states.
We
talk
about
state
and
resident,
so
we're
breaking
it
breaks
down
on
the
state
level
and
then
the
the
resident
of
the
precinct.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
My
question
is
about
some
of
the
language,
some
of
the
language
on
page
50
and
some
of
just
the
process
that's
outlined
on
page
41,
it's
about
the
online
connections
for
voting
machines.
I
I
Well,
then,
I
think
we
found
out
later
that
all
machines
all
voting
machines
that
are
made
now
are
capable
of
being
put
online
and
and
that
I
guess
that
bill
never
actually
became
law
after
it
was
vetoed,
and
then
so
I
guess
my
question
is:
if
we're
making
it
a
felony
to
connect
a
voting
machine
to
a
voting
system,
I
guess
it's.
The
difference
between
a
public
network
and
a
secured
network
is
that
is
that
right?
I
Can
you
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
the
process
because
I
think
it
becomes
an
issue
of
when
you
allow
someone
to
put
those
voting
machines
on
the
network
and
how
you
allow
them
to
put
those
voting
machines
on
the
network?
And
I
think
it
becomes
important
for
the
public,
because,
when
those
how
long
it
takes
for
those
connections
to
take
place
and
those
results
to
be
tabulated.
I
M
Yes,
I
will
try
to
answer
that.
The
best
that
I
can
the
so
last
year
from
what
we
understand
with
that
bill
there
there
would
have
been
no
election
equipment
that
we
would
have
been
able
to
use
would
not
have
passed
that
what
was
in
that
language.
M
I
Just
didn't
want,
you
know:
people
messing
around
with
our
networks.
M
Right
and
and
furthermore,
from
from
what
I
understand
as
well
and
state
board
of
elections,
could
probably
confirm
this
as
well
kentucky
voting
equipment
is,
doesn't
even
have
a
modem
in
it
like
it's
not
capable
of
being
connected
to
a
network.
What
we
wanted
to
put
in
this
language
was
that,
if
you
so
there
probably
is-
I
believe
there
are
some
after-market
upgrades
to
equipment
that
you
can
do.
That
would
allow
it
to
be
connected
to
a
network
and
some
states
from
what
we
hear
actually
do,
allow
that
in
kentucky.
I
And
that's:
okay,
I'm
just
wondering
how
it's
going
to
affect
election
results
being
reported
on
election
night,
because
I
think
in
2018
we
had
some
problems
with
election
results
being
reported
in
jefferson
county.
They
were
a
little
bit
slow
and
I
think
it
was
when
the
I
think
it
was
because
when
the
clerk
decided
to
put
those
machines
online
and
tabulate
the
results.
N
N
Mr
chairman,
you
you
had
representative
branscom,
repeat
a
section
12
on
page
34
line
25
about
the
voting
equipment
that
tabulates
and
or
aggregates
votes
used
in
official
results
from
connecting
to
the
internet.
I
understand
there
now
is
a
question
about
that,
because
the
allegation
is,
we
don't
use
voting
machines
to
tabulate
official
results.
But
if
you
read
that
sentence,
it
says
prohibits
voting
equipment
that
tabulates
or
aggregates
vote
used
in
official
results.
M
M
Yeah
and
in
the
language
that
language
was
a
work
group
with
the
state
board
of
elections
to
come
up
to
come
up
with
that
language,
it
took
them
probably
two
or
three
hours
to
work
through.
I
think
some
of
the
links
that
you
were
talking
about
and
what
what
they
didn't
want
to
do
is
put
out
put
out
language
that
would
keep
us
from
really
purchasing
any
type
of
election
equipment.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
covering
all
the
bases.
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
I
have
a
question.
Something's
been
asked
to
me
of
an
official
with
the
league
of
women
voters,
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
my
understanding
is
correct.
L
J
It
also
is
accompanied
by
a
tape
off
of
that
machine
signed
by
all
election
officers,
so
that
tape
is
brought
along
with
that
that
memory
device
is
inserted
into
a
computer
in
a
room
without
internet
capability.
First
of
all,
and
nor
does
the
computer
have
internet
capability
that
we
would
run
if
we
say,
for
instance,
we
have
14
precincts,
we
had
14
cards
to
read,
we
read
all
14
cards,
we
would
read
the
absentee
card.
Knowing
we
had
15
precincts
per
se,
we
would
know
we
had
all
our
cards
read.
J
It
would
add
all
those
totals
by
each
race
each
con
constitutional
amendment,
exit
question,
etc,
and
then
we
would
get
a
a
report
at
the
end
that
would
be
broken
down
by
precinct.
Now,
of
course,
then
we
would
take
a
usb
any
usb
and
download
that
information
off
of
that
machine.
That
is
not
connected
to
the
internet
that
computer.
J
Now
we
have
to
take
that
unofficial
result
and
took
it
into
a
computer
that
will
upload
the
unofficial
result
to
the
state
for
everybody
to
view
like
everybody
wants
to
know
the
results.
Now.
Okay,
you
can
view
it
that
night,
it's
still
unofficial,
then,
once
we
certify
the
vote,
county
board
of
election
in
each
county
sends
in
a
paper
handwritten
filled
out
signed
off
on
official
result.
J
J
A
Okay,
any
other
questions.
Oh
nemus.
L
Thank
you.
I
wanted
to
let
him
answer
that
question
before
so
I
have
I'm
submitting
this
question
to
you
from
a
friend
in
the
league,
women
voters
to
make
sure
my
interpretation
is
correct.
L
This
lady
is
going
to
be
out
of
kentucky
for
two
weeks
right
before
the
election
and
so
and
she
wants
to
make
sure
she
can
vote
absentee.
It's
her
understanding
that
you
can
only
vote
absentee
in
those
14
days.
That's
not
my
understanding
to
make
sure
this
is
right,
so
you
start
voting
absentee.
J
L
A
Okay,
we
have
house
bill
564,
as
amended
by
the
committee
substitute
before
us.
Discussions
are
complete.
I
need
a
motion.
A
O
P
F
Yes,
briefly,
explain:
yes,
thank
you
for
bringing
it
again
this
year
that
the
that
hole
that
we
had
the
gap
we
had
to
correct
is
really
important.
There
are
a
few
concerns
here
and
there,
but
overall-
and
I
really
appreciate
the
county
clerks
being
involved
in
correcting
their
issues
as
far
as
representative
robert's
work
on
it.
I'm
sure
it
really
made
everything
much
much
better
so
that
we're
all
proud
of
that.
G
Yes,
I'd
like
to
explain
my
vote,
I'm
going
to
pass
on
this
today.
Obviously,
I'm
still
new
and
haven't
had
a
chance
to
look
through
the
bill,
but
I
do
look
forward
to
connecting
with
you
all
if
I
have
any
questions
or
concerns.
Thank
you.
A
B
A
E
E
A
E
Today,
to
talk
about
everybody's
favorite
topic
campaign,
finance
bill
does
three
things.
First,
first
thing
we
do
on
moving
for
electronic
versions
the
hard
copy
in
the
past.
I
think
we
all
remember
when
you
filed
you
had
to
you
know
hard
copy
back
and
forth
now
the
place
where
you
file
is
in
charge
of
sending
that
over
to
the
k-ref
and
taking
care
of
that
part
where
your
points
are
still
pointing
your
treasure.
E
You're
still
doing
all
that
we're
just
moving
that
to
electronic
for
three
thousand
and
under
foulers
that
have
always
head
to
exemption
now
we're
saying
that
they
still
have
to
file
for
their
exemption,
so
they
have
to
do
four
things
they
have
to
file
for
their
exemption
before
the
primary
they
go
to
the
primary
after
the
primary
30
days
after
they're
gonna
have
to
file
a
financial
report.
E
If
they
won
the
primary,
they
will
have
to
file
a
new
exemption
going
into
the
general
after
the
general
election
they'll
have
to
file
their
post
general
report
at
any
point
in
that
process.
If
they're
going
to
go
over
the
three
thousand
dollars,
they
need
to
notify
kref
immediately.
They're
doing
that
and
then
the
final
part
of
it.
E
We
had
a
problem
with
interpretation
and
we
want
to
move
our
annual
filing
report
if
you're
in
a
non-election
year
to
back
to
december
1st,
which
is
the
way
it'd
been
for
many
years
until
the
interpretation
on
that
and
I
believe,
k
ref
wants
to
speak
on
it
as
well.
O
Right
all
right,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
today
to
speak
on
this
and
and
kind
of
taking
two
approaches
here.
I
I
saw
this
bill
being
drafted
and
helped
with
some
of
it
and
was
all
for
it
thanks.
I
think
it's
a
great
bill
up
until
this
language
it
was
put
in
yesterday
before,
regarding
that,
what
I
see
is
a
reduction
in
the
filing
requirements.
O
I
like
that
it
it
adds
back.
It
kind
of
is
adding
back
in
a
30-day
post
election
requirement
for
those
less
smaller
candidates
that,
in
the
past,
had
been
there
but
kind
of
got
dropped
out
when
we
dropped
that
thousand
dollar
and
under
threshold
that
some
of
you
may
remember
the
really
small
campaigns,
but
what
this
does,
what
there
is
a
and
part
of
this
bill.
What
this
bill
does
is
clean
up
that
kind
of
oddly
written
paragraph
that
resulted
in
the
change
in
interpretation
that
you
all
have
noticed
right
now.
O
We
have
candidates
who
have
completed
their
election
may
still
have
their
campaign
account
open
for
whatever
reason
those
candidates
are
on
an
annual
filing
requirement,
so
they
file
that
report
december
1st
every
year,
candidates
who
have
already
expressed
their
intent
to
run
in
a
future
year
election.
We
have
based
on
my
interpretation
of
statute.
Our
current
interpretation
of
statute
file
quarterly
reports
up
until
the
year
of
the
election,
and
that's
what
is
being
changed
here.
O
We
reviewed
the
statute
realized
that
was
probably
a
misinterpretation
of
the
statute
and
that's
why
we
went
to
the
quarterly
filing
for
future
year.
Elections
for
all
candidates,
not
just
incumbents,
and
we
still
have
the
annual
filing
requirement
for
past
elections
and
that's
what
I
really
think
that
is
the
best
approach
it
makes
sure
candidates
are
reporting
as
they
go.
O
What
they're
raising
what
they're
spending,
if
they're,
making
mistakes
if
they're
taking
money,
maybe
they
shouldn't
be
that
allows
us
to
catch
that
on
a
quarterly
basis,
rather
than
waiting
until
the
whole
year
has
passed
before
we
point
out
their
their
errors,
it's
better
for
transparency
to
be
on
a
quarterly
filing
requirement
for
future
year.
Elections.
O
Public
can
see.
What's
going
on
it,
and
I
I
I
mean
never
disrespect
it's
a
it's
a
good
bill,
otherwise,
but
I
think
we're
taking
a
step
backwards
by
taking
away
that
quarterly
filing
requirement
for
future
year
elections.
I
just
hate
to
see
us
take
a
step
backwards
and
reduce
transparency
in
elections
when
this
bill
is
actually
increasing
transparency.
A
You're
saying
it's
an
official
opinion
from
the
agency.
A
A
O
Interpretation
has
been
going
on
for
the
quarterly
requirements
been
going
on
for
two
at
least
two
years
now,
since
we,
since,
since
we
switched
over
to
electronic
filings,
it's
not
a
new,
it's
not
a
new
concept.
I
came
up
with
this
year.
It's
been
how
we've
been
applying
the
law,
since
the
electronic
filing
requirements
came
into
effect,.
E
So
I'm
sorry,
I
don't
feel
like
you're
losing
anything
on
the
transparency.
This
is
we're
talking
about
non-election
years
and,
let's
just
use
all
of
us
here
in
the
state
house.
Okay
last
year,
2021
would
have
been
a
non-election
year
for
us.
We're
just
saying
file
one
report
in
december
because
you're
not
out
there.
We
all.
This
is
not
a
full-time
position
for
us
right.
I'm
a
farmer
I'm
out
there,
I'm
farming
we're
not
doing
this
full-time.
E
We're
asking
you
to
do
you're,
making
all
your
reports
you're
getting
them
in
there
before
december,
1st,
so
everything's
available
30
days
before
the
session
start,
it's
all
out
there.
It's
all
open
we're,
not
reducing
any
of
that
we're
just
saying
in
a
non-election
year,
when
you're
not
actively
holding
your
fundraisers
when
you're
not
out
there
asking
for
money
and
working
it
as
hard
as
you
can,
let's
reduce
it
to
one
time
for
everybody.
This
isn't
just
for
us.
E
Q
Thank
you.
I
just
like
to
comment
on
the
bill
first
off.
Thank
you,
representative
cook,
for
bringing
this.
I
greatly
appreciate
it.
I
think
it's
got
some
great
stuff,
especially
in
regards
to
candidates
who
opt
to
raise
less
than
three
thousand
dollars.
I'm
going
to
say
I
agree
with
you
on
only
filing
once
a
year.
I
think
that's
very
important.
Q
I
agree
with
representative
cook
of
only
having
to
file
annually
during
non-election
years,
because,
generally
most
of
us
aren't
fundraising
and
that's
just
that's
a
lot
of
extra
to
put
on,
and
I
love
the
december
one
date,
especially
because
that
shows
the
transparency
right
before
session
goes
in,
and
there's
no
question
about
that.
So
I
fully
support
this,
but
I
look
forward
to
voting
yes
on
it
in
just
a
few
minutes.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
john.
Why
is
it
important
if,
if
I'm
in
the
odd
year
and
and
a
candidate
in
the
odd
year,
receives
a
donation
in
april
and
he
reports
it
or
she
reports
it
in
no
dece
end
of
november?
Why
is
it
so
important
to
see
it
before
that
november?
If
the
election
is
the
next
year.
O
Well,
that's
what
I
was
oh
wow.
Maybe
I
shouldn't
answer
that.
That's
what
I
was
trying
to
say.
I
I
think
the
sooner
it's
out
there,
the
better
for
the
public
and
keep
in
mind.
We
have
a
lot
of
candidates
who
are
not
experienced
they're
doing
this
for
the
first
time,
if
they're,
if
they're
taking
their
money,
we
don't
see
it
either.
We
won't
see
it
until
that
annual.
O
We,
the
staff,
won't
see
it
until
the
annual
reports
filed
either,
so
they
may
have
spent
a
whole
year
bringing
in
money
from
sources
they
shouldn't
have
been
doing.
I
just
think
really
that
quarterly,
where
you
we
can
see
it,
the
public
can
see
it
and
it's
not
in
an
effort
to
try
to
catch
things.
It's
not
enough
to
make
things
harder
for
people.
It's
just
it's
just
that
spot
check
along
the
way
versus
a
whole
year
having
passed
of
campaign
fundraising
and
spending.
O
O
O
There
was
fundraising
occurring
that
should
have
been
going
on
on
quarterly
reports
that
you
all
were
expecting
to
go
on
annuals,
because
that's
what
you
were
used
to
so
that
the
system
wasn't
set
up
to
allow
you.
I
know
we
talked
about
that
yesterday
by
email
that
to
allow
you
to
to
add
those
in
on
that.
First
quarterly
report
you
file
because
you
weren't
used
to
filing
cordless
yet
so
I
just
think
it's
a
better
approach.
O
It's
not
to
make
things
harder
on
you
all!
I
guess
I
could
say
the
opposite.
You
have
to
report
it
one
way
or
the
other.
You
can
be
entering
it
as
you
go,
hitting
the
submit
button
four
times
a
year
versus
entering
at
the
end
of
the
year
and
hitting
it
once
the
system
was
meant
to
make
it
something
that
you
can
use
as
you
go
through
the
year
and
not
wait
to
the
last
minute
to
put
your
information
in.
O
So
if
you're
doing
that,
I
don't
think
the
the
the
burden
is
that
much
more
for
you
to
hit
submit
four
times
a
year
versus
one
time
a
year
and
we're
not,
and
I'm
talking
to
you
as
representatives,
we're
talking
about
all
the
candidates
across
the
state.
D
Miller,
thank
you,
mr
chair
and
representative
cook.
Thanks
for
bringing
the
bill,
I
do
support
the
annual
filing.
In
off
years
I
mean
it's
still
december.
1
is
still
five
weeks
before
filing
deadline.
If
there's
a
problem,
that's
that
bad,
maybe
it'll
convince
them
to
get
out
of
the
race
as
long
as
it
applies
to
everybody.
Equally,
I
think
it's
fine
with
me.
My
question
to
you,
mr
stefan,
is
in
on
page
17
of
the
bill.
The
last
well
on
page
27
of
page
17,
a
sentence
starts
candidate
slate
of
candidates.
D
D
Did
what
was
intended
to
do
because
I
appreciate
your
work,
john,
you
thank
you
great,
I'm
not
running
again,
thank
god,
but
I
had
a
great
volunteer
treasurer
and
but
I
think,
as
confidence
in
the
electronic
system
grows,
as
you
say,
people
will
just
enter
information
periodically
and
hit
enter
and
be
done
with
it.
So
thank
you.
O
It's
a
daily
task
for
me,
but
one
thing
I
do
appreciate
about
this
language
is
that
it
applies
equally
to
all
candidates.
That's
that
was
my
big
concern
with
how
we
were
applying
it
before
was.
Why
should
an
incumbent
get
away
with
following
it
once
a
year
versus
new
new
candidates
had
to
file
quarterly?
That
didn't
make
any
sense
to
me
and
seemed
unfair
and
therefore
the
wrong
way
to
interpret
the
language
that
wasn't
there.
O
P
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
very
much
for
bringing
this
bill.
I
think
it
does
simplify
the
reporting
process.
We
I
I
know
that
my
treasurer
is
on
a
first
name
basis
with
christy
king
at
kraft,
so
there
have
been
a
lot
of
challenges
with
moving
from
paper
to
the
electronic
reporting.
P
O
Why
should
we?
Why
do
we
report
more
in
the
election
year
than
we
do
in
an
off
election
year?
It's
just
I'm
equating
more
reporting
to
better.
For
example,
we
added,
we
being
you
all
the
legislature,
added
a
60-day
pre-election,
pre-general
election
following
requirement
a
couple
years
ago
that
hadn't
been
there.
So
it
was
just
that's
additional
additional
reporting
additional.
P
Just
quick
follow
up.
I
would
agree,
representative
cook
that
you
know
I
mean
during
an
off
year.
We
we
don't
have
these
contributions
coming
in.
We,
you
know
we
it's
not
the
same
number
of
contributions.
Certainly
I
think
if
somebody
wants
to
know
when
a
contribution
came
in,
you
know
probably
for
clarification
purposes
for
kraft
to
make
sure
that
it's
within
the
period
of
time
that
we're
allowed
to
fundraise,
but
that
really
doesn't
affect
us
in
an
off
year.
So
I
I
mean,
I
think
this
really
simplifies.
P
If
we
have
a
date
on
the
contribution,
I
I
don't
see
that
it's
any
less
transparent.
Thank
you.
L
I
think,
mr
chairman,
I
want
to
say
I
agree
that
more
is
better
the
problem
we
have
and
we
have
the
executive
director
of
the
agency
saying
he
lacks
confidence
in
the
system.
I
I
want
the
citizens
to
know
this
system
is
not
good
the
the
last
year.
I
I
don't
think
it
can
be
overemphasized
how
difficult
this
system
is
for
the
in
at
the
input
level,
your
staff
is
incredibly
helpful,
they're
incredibly
responsive
and
you
guys
are
being
commended
for
that.
L
What
I'd
like
to
see
is
I'd
like
to
see
the
system
be
perfected,
and
I
would
like
immediate
reporting
30
days
after
every
contribution.
I
don't
care
what
time
of
the
year,
but
the
system
has
to
improve.
It
is
very
bad,
and
so
I
also
want
to
highlight
it's
been
said
a
couple
times,
but
I
want
to
say
as
clearly
as
I
possibly
can
for
people
walking
watching
on
ket
the
election
years.
There
are
multiple
reportings,
that's
not
touched
here.
L
What's
what
the
only
thing
that's
changed
in
this
bill
with
respect
to
the
reporting
timelines
is
during
a
non-election
year.
We
report
on
december,
the
first
and
and
that's
important
because
we
have
session
on
january,
the
first
and
also
filing
deadlines
for
the
next
year
for
the
re
for
the
for
the
election,
and
so
our
citizens
can
hold
us
accountable
if
they
don't
like
who's
contributing
to
us,
if
we're
raising
too
much
too
little
from
whatever.
So
all
that
accountability
is
still
in
place.
L
But
what
I
would
like
to
ask
you,
mr
stefan
to
do,
is
let's
get
this
system
really
good
and
then
I'll
support
an
immediate
reporting,
because
I
don't
see
any
reason
why,
if
it's
going
to
be
simple,
you
can't
just
go
in
after
a
fundraiser
and
punch.
All
the
numbers
in
actually
makes
it
much
simpler,
but
as
it
exists
today,
this
system
is
terribly
bad,
and
so
I
don't
know
if
you
have
any
comment
on
that.
But
I
wanted
to
just
clarify
that
for
the
for
the
record.
O
A
O
It's
not
that
it's
just.
Can
I
sit
here
and
say,
representative
nevis,
you
will
have
no
trouble
with
that
system.
You
know
with
putting
your
information,
I
can't
I
can't
say
that
I
can't
I
can't
tell
you
you
won't,
have
trouble
because
we
keep
having
bugs
turn
up.
That
makes
it
difficult
for
an
individual.
Sometimes
sometimes
it's
fine.
It's
that's
it's
that
kind
of
confidence
like.
Is
it
going
to
be
every
user
going
to
have
100
ease
of
use
with
this
system?
I
cannot
tell
you
that
yet,
but
I
know
what
it's
putting
out.
O
Is
we're
heading
in
the
right
direction?
It's
just
been
a
struggle,
I'm
frustrated
with
the
system.
I
have
you,
don't
y'all
aren't
dealing
with
it.
Every
day
like
I
am
so
yeah,
I'm
very
frustrated
with
the
development
of
the
system
and
how
slow
it's
gone
and
how
poorly
it's
been
done.
Be
honest
with
you,
but
I
do
think
we
we
are
making
progress
with
it.
I.
L
A
We
have
a
motion
by
representative
blanton
in
a
second
by
scott
lewis,
representative
representative
herron,.
G
Yes,
thank
you.
I
just
have
a
a
little.
I
just
want
a
little
bit
more
clarity
on
the
reporting
piece.
Obviously
I
just
got
finished
doing
the
special
election
and
I
think
the
finance
reporting
was
probably
like
my
biggest
headache
and
and
so
I'm
glad
that
I
had
a
a
great
treasurer
so
currently
the
way
it
it
it
works.
Now
is
current
elected
officials.
G
O
Let
me
let
me
try
to
clarify
that
now
now
that
your
election
is
passed
for
you
I'll
use
you
as
an
example
the
special
election.
You
have
a
30-day
post-election
report
required
because
that's
part
of
your
election
year
for
you
and
then,
if
you
keep
your
account
open
you'll
have
to
file
a
60-day
post
and
if
you
stay,
if
it
stays
open
past
there,
then
you'll
report
annually
on
that
old
election.
O
So
if
you
already
know
you're
going
to
run
for
re-election
well
I'll
be
in
november
we're
in
the
election
year
now.
But
if
somebody
say
we
have,
candidates
have
already
expressed
their
intent
to
run
for
governor
next
year,
they're
on
a
quarterly
filing
requirement.
Schedule
right
now
this
bill
would
we
would
reduce
that
so
they
wanted
they
would
have
filed
one
in
december
and
then
start
filing
all
the
normal
reports
next
year.
So
it's
just
on
those
future
year
elections.
O
The
information
will
still
be
captured,
as,
as
everybody
said,
it
will
be
captured
on
the
annual
report
versus
broken
down
over
four
reports.
So
there
is
no
there's,
not
less
information
being
provided.
It's
just
being
provided
with
this
bill
being
provided
less
times
than
it
would
have
been
under
the
current
application
of
the
law.
G
It
does
help,
I
think
that
it
just
kind
of
it
just
makes
me
concerned.
I
know
that
we've
talked
about
the
transparency
piece
of
just
like
where's
money
coming
from
who's
folks,
getting
money
from
just
as
a
new
person
that
is
elected.
I
think
that
I
would
like
to
see
it
stay
quarterly
instead
of
that
at
the
end
of
the
year.
A
Thank
you
any
other
discussion
questions
you
know,
mr
stefan,
just
like
representative
nima
said
every
one
of
your
group
over
there
has
always
been
excellent
to
work
with
very
helpful.
You
have
been
helpful
to
work
with,
but
I
really
don't
know
why
you're
here
bringing
objections
to
this.
It's
it's
you,
your
your
comments
are
interesting,
but
they
certainly
don't
persuade
that's
for
sure,
and
I
just
think
that
there
would
be
better
things
you
could
be
doing.
A
O
Well,
I
don't
know
if
they
would
know
to
complain
because
we
went
from
annuals
for
incumbents
to
quarterly,
so
they
wouldn't
have
complained
about
more
reports.
I
don't
think
other
than
those
having
to
file
the
reports
and.
E
A
A
Okay,
we
have
a
motion
on
house
bill,
740
secretary
call,
the
rule.
C
M
Q
Yes
and
quickly
explain
my
vote
sure
I
am
voting
yesterday
and
I
do
want
to
echo
the
comments.
My
colleagues,
you
have
a
great
stepha,
you
have
a
great
staff
at
kref
and
we
greatly
appreciate
all
your
help.
I
know
whether
it's
us
calling
or
a
treasurer's
calling
y'all
are
always
quick
to
find
an
answer,
and
I
do
appreciate
that.
So
thank
you
for
that.
G
O
P
A
H
Thank
you
so
much.
I
just
want
to
say
that
I
lack
confidence
in
every
system
and
actually
I
appreciate
your
staff
and
you
and
you
actually
did
persuade
me
so
I'm
voting
no.
A
F
Briefly
explained:
yes,
I
am
going
to
vote
no,
and
this
kind
of
reminds
me
of
other
things
that
we
have
done
as
a
general
assembly
to
reduce
the
transparency
level
so
anytime,
that
we
change
a
rule,
change
the
law
and
it
drops
the
level
of
transparency
we
have
for
the
public.
Then
I
don't
see
that
as
a
good
thing.
I
see
that
as
something
we
shouldn't
be
doing,
and
for
that
reason
I
am
voting.
No.
F
I
also
want
to
I'm
sorry
real
quickly
that
we
we're
we're
also
looking
at
this
from
the
viewpoint
of
house
of
representatives
every
two-year
candidates
and
there
are
four-year
candidates
and
four-year
incumbents
and
they
will
be
reporting
on
a
quarterly
basis
under
the
current
interpretation
and
that's
best
and
that's
best
for
all
of
us.
We
we
need
to
know
who
are
making
those
contributions
all
year
round
in
every
year,
and
that
goes
for
statewide
offices
and
county
offices
in
the
four-year
terms.
So
that's
my
vote.