►
Description
House Criminal Justice Committee - March 30, 2022 - House Hearing Room 2
B
A
A
A
B
C
Thank
you
very
much,
chairman
committee.
This
bill
creates
an
offense
for
an
employer
to
influence
or
attempt
to
influence
by
means
of
coercion,
a
public
servant,
employee
to
vote
or
not
to
vote
in
a
particular
manner,
or
to
resign
as
a
public
servant
or
to
unnecessarily
recuse
themselves
from
a
public
body
and.
A
The
question
has
been
called
all
those
in
favor
of
sending
house
bill
2677
as
amended
to
finance,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
those
opposed,
sir.
You
had
to
finance.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
sir.
That
brings
us
to
item
number
two
house
bill
1878
by
chairman,
littleton
ma'am.
You
have
a
motion
and
a
second,
I
see
no
amendment.
You
are
recognized.
A
Questions
been
called
without
objection,
we're
ready
to
vote
all
those
in
favor
of
sending
house
bill
1878
to
calendar
and
rules.
Please
signify
by
saying
aye
those
opposed
ma'am.
You
had
the
calendar
and
rules.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
That
brings
us
to
item
number
three
also
by
chairman
littleton
house,
bill
2234..
B
You,
mr
chairman,
this
removes
a
conviction
of
prostitution
as
a
requirement
for
a
person
to
be
eligible
for
expunction,
of
multiple
nonviolent
convictions
for
offenses
that
resulted
from
the
person's
status
as
a
victim
of
human
trafficking
trafficking,
and
I
do
have
a
couple
of
women
that
would
like
to
testify.
Please,
yes,.
A
A
Ladies,
if
you'd
like
to
come
forward,
you
can
stand
at
the
podium
or
you
can
sit
in
the
chairs
wherever
you're
most
comfortable
I'll.
Ask
that
you
speak
one
at
a
time
and
what
you'll
do
is
just
turn
your
microphone
on,
introduce
yourself
for
the
record
and
then
share
with
this
committee,
whatever
you'd
like
and
you'll
have
three
minutes,
but
after
that
there
will
be
unlimited
time
for
questions
and
answers.
If
members
have
questions
for
you
so
you're
recognized,
can
I.
D
D
D
We
only
serve
adult
survivors
of
the
sex
trade,
yet
many
do
not
qualify
for
the
current
human
trafficking,
specific
expungement
law.
The
problem
being
is
that
the
law
hinges
eligibility
for
expungement
on
the
presence
of
a
prostitution
charge.
I
spoke
with
one
woman
today
who
did
not
qualify
for
expungement,
even
though
she
was
a
trafficking
survivor
from
nashville
according
to
tbi
data.
Arrests
for
prostitution
are
down
65
percent
over
the
past
eight
years
and
we
are
seeing
this
shift
at
a
national
level
we're
seeing
this
across
states.
D
A
2016
report
by
the
national
survivor
network
surveyed,
130
survivors
of
human
trafficking
from
32
states,
including
tennessee
90.8
percent
of
the
survivors
surveyed,
expressed
that
they
had
been
arrested.
76.3
percent
said
they
were
arrested
three
or
more
times,
and
only
25
percent
had
even
attempted
to
get
their
records
cleared
at
thistle
farms
and
other
anti-trafficking
nonprofits.
D
Yes,
they
broke
the
law,
but
what
kind
of
choice
is
that
when
you
have
the
choice
of
grabbing
a
wallet
off
of
a
nightstand
or
singing
with
your
20th
john
hp,
2234
would
give
survivors
like
me
the
opportunity
to
move
past
their
exploitation
to
them.
Expungement
means
not
having
to
pay
the
price
for
something
that
was
done
to
you
or
something
that
you
were
forced
to
do,
and
a
criminal
record
is
a
very
heavy
price
to
pay
for
being
exploited.
D
A
E
I'm
regina
mullins
and
I'm
a
1999
graduate
of
thistle
farms,
I'm
also
a
survivor
of
prostitution
and
sex
trafficking,
and
in
97
I
came
out
of
prison.
I
came
out
of
prison
to
what
I
thought
was
going
to
be
a
community
that
welcomed
me
back
into
it,
because
that's
what
I
was
told
you
know
I
went
into
this
program
and
I
felt
the
welcome.
I
felt
the
love.
I
felt
everything
that
I
needed
to
upon
trying
to
obtain
a
job.
E
E
I've
done
my
time,
I'm
still
going
to
try,
because
I
have
three
sons
that
I
was
trying
to
get
back
and
I
wanted
to
show
that
I
could
provide
for
them
and
that
I
never
have
to
look
back
to
that
lifestyle
ever
again
right.
So
I
continued
time
after
time,
after
time
to
go
and
interview
for
jobs
that
I
qualified
for,
but
because
of
my
record,
I
couldn't
get
those
jobs.
E
E
Thank
god
for
this
farms,
you
know
where
we
started
to
learn
how
to
create
an
income,
a
legal
income,
and
so
I'm
coming
to
ask
all
to
invite.
You
really
help
me
help
the
community
that
we're
in
we're
nashville,
strong
yeah.
I'm
with
that.
You
know
help
me
help
women
like
me
to
be
able
to
get
those
records
expunged.
E
A
F
Ma'am,
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
for
your
testimony.
I
personally
we
don't
know
each
other,
but
I
was
listening
there
and
and
know
a
bit
about
the
program,
especially
there
with
the
farms
and
everything,
and
I
just
want
to
say
that
we're
very
proud
of
you.
I
mean
you.
You've
walked
a
road
that
none
of
the
rest
of
us
can
truly
understand,
and
every
day,
when
you
get
up,
you
you're,
you
know
winning
a
battle,
and
so
it
just.
F
A
Thank
you,
leader,
lamrith,
and
I
would
second
that
my
my
wife
had
the
opportunity
to
tour
thistle
farms
several
years
ago
was
very
familiar
and
came
home
just
talking
about
it,
just
amazingly
and
and
we've
kind
of
followed
thistle
farms
and
its
work
ever
since.
So
so,
thank
you
for
being
here
and
thank
you
for
continuing
the
work
that
you
do
absolutely
all
right.
Members
we'll
go
back
chairman
holzer!
You
recognize
sponsors,
oh
back
in
session,
okay,
representative
hardway
for
the
sponsor
or.
G
E
G
And
I
think
one
of
the
problems
that
we
always
have
with
criminal
justice
is
being
able
to
empathize
put
ourselves
in
this
spot
in
the
place
of
the
victim.
You've
done
an
excellent
job
for
presenting
on
that
especially
paid
attention
to
your
quote:
self-esteem,
buster,
your
dignity,
your
self-esteem,
your
self-worth,
your
value.
E
I
wanted
to
be
a
mom
again.
I
wanted
to
be
a
mother
again.
I
wanted
to
show
the
courts
back
then
that
my
mother
and
my
parents
had
custody
of
my
children.
I
wanted
a
chance
to
be
a
mother
again.
I
wanted
to
show
not
just
my
mom
and
dad,
not
just
y'all,
but
I
wanted
my
sons
to
know
that
I
could
provide
for
them.
I
could
take
care
of
them.
I
made
you
know.
Y'all
excuse
me.
I
made
a
deal
with
god.
E
G
B
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
thank
you
for
the
bill.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
the
removal
of
the
word
as
a
condition
of
expunction
is.
Is
that
because
there's
other
forms
of
human
trafficking
that
goes
on?
That
would
not
require
that
word
or
is
it
because
in
a
lot
of
cases,
human
traffic
sex
traffickers
are
actually
not
arrested
for
prostitution?
H
A
A
What's
happening
is
because
we've
made
a
change
in
the
law.
Folks
who
are
being
trafficked,
thankfully,
are
no
longer
getting
that
prostitution
charge,
but
but
the
code
still
read
that,
in
order
to
be
eligible
for
expunction
prostitution
charge
had
to
be
present,
and
so
thankfully,
because
this
body
saw
fit
to
change
that
these
folks
are
not
getting
a
prostitution
charge
and
we
can
prove
that
they've
been
trafficked
and
so
they're,
but
they're
not
eligible
for
the
expunction,
because
this
section
of
code
wasn't
updated.
Yes,
sir
representative
griffey,
you
reckon.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you
cheerlead
littleton.
I
don't
mean
to
make
light
of
the
we're
considering
today,
but
is
the
thistle
farms
cafe?
Is
that
the
one
on
charlotte,
okay,
I
went
out
there
this
morning
I
was
going
to
eat
breakfast.
I
really
wanted
french
toast.
They
didn't
have
any
french
toast.
You
need
to
get
them
as
a
french
toast.
The
menu
serve.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
chairman
to
the
bill.
I
just
want
to
publicly
state
a
conversation.
We've
been
having
privately,
that
is
on
kind
of
this
bill
and
any
other
expungement
bill
that
we
might
address,
and
this
is
something
probably
for
next
year,
but
it's
something
that
would
have
gone
well
in
this
bill,
but
it'll
cost
a
lot
of
money.
So
there
is
no
central
database
for
folks
to
be
able
to
apply
to
get
an
expungement
there's,
no
staff
that
actually
helps
folks
be
able
to
navigate
the
expungement
process.
F
Our
clerks
throughout
the
state
do
a
really
good
job
of
trying
to
do
that.
I
mean
it's
a
one
page
form
for
most
folks,
but
like
the
young
lady
testified,
I
mean
many
folks
wind
up
with
convictions
in
multiple
different
counties
that
may
be
eligible
for
expungement.
Some
of
those
have
been
dismissed.
Some
of
those
are,
you
know,
divertable,
I
mean
there's
lots
of
different
things,
but
there's
not
like
a
central
place
where
they
can
go
to
a
website
and
say
I'd
like
somebody
to
look
up
my
entire
criminal
history
and
expunge.
Anything,
that's
expungable.
F
If
we
had
that,
I
genuinely
feel
like,
ladies
like
this
and
others
that
will
be
helped
by
your
bill.
It
would
just
make
it
so
much
easier,
so
I
just
put
that
out
there
for
food
for
thought
to
chew
on
for
probably
for
next
year.
It's
just
something
that's
kind
of
been
missed
missing
in
the
process,
because,
even
with
this
bill
I
mean
folks
are
gonna,
have
to
go
to
each
clerk's
office
and
apply,
and
that's
doable
takes
a
lot
of
work.
It's
worth
it.
F
I
mean
it's
something
that
folks
should
take
the
individual
responsibility
of,
but
if
we
just
had
something
simple
centralized
to
be
good,
we
just
don't.
We
don't
have
a
centralized
court
system,
it's
all
separated
out.
So
I
just
want
to
mention
that
and
just
something
to
think
about,
maybe
for
next
year.
C
You
very
much,
mr
chairman,
and
to
echo
my
colleagues
leader,
lambert's,
sentiments
I'm
fully
in
favor
of
that.
I
would
ask
the
body
in
the
general
assembly
to
consider
that,
because
expungement
is
forever
and
we
do
judge
people
based
upon
their
past
history,
I
would
advocate
a
system
where
we
have
a
system
that
prior
convictions
can
be
sealed
by
a
judge.
However,
many
number
he
feels
the
judge
is
appropriate
and
then
there's
also
a
process
of
expungement
that
the
judge
feels
that
the
commission
should
be
totally
expunged
off
a
person's
record.
C
This
would
and
the
the
burden
for
sealing
somebody's
record
for
employment
purposes,
of
somebody
going
with
a
much
lower
bar
than
expungement,
because
what
we
want
to
try
to
do
the
whole
purpose
of
criminal
justice
is
to
try
to
get
people
not
to
violate
the
law
and
get
back
in
the
workforce
and
be
productive
members
of
the
community,
and
I
think
a
two-tier
system
like
that
might
actually
benefit
that.
So
I'll
leave
that
to
my
fellow
colleagues
and
members
for
maybe
for
next
year
for
further
thought.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
representative
griffin.
I
dude
you're.
Obviously
you
do
this
for
a
living
and
you're
you're
not
wrong,
but
I
want
to.
This
would
not
be
forever.
So
if
you,
if
you
reoffend
it,
of
course
it
could
be
reopened
and
that
could
be
used
to
enhance
your
sentence
later
on,
but
we're
obviously
the
folks
that
we're
trying
to
help
here
are
hopefully
not
in
that
situation,
but
just
to
clarify.
But
your
point
is
well
made
chairman
littleton,
you
recognize
thank.
A
A
A
Yes,
that's
right
all
right
and
looks
like
the
amendment
rewrites
the
bill,
so
members
like
to
go
ahead
and
get
this
amendment
on
the
bill,
all
those
in
favor
of
attaching
amendment
coded
14165
to
house
bill.
2789,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
that
was
opposed.
You
adopt
run
the
bill
as
a
minute,
sir.
I
Thank
you
chairman.
So
in
2016
we
enacted
the
unlawful
exposure
statute
commonly
known
as
revenge,
porn
statutes
or
non-consensual
pornography
statutes,
which
criminalizes
the
distribution
of
nude
images
of
an
identifiable
person
that
the
depicted
individual
did
not
consent
to
being
distributed
by
doing
so.
Tennessee
joined
46
states
in
the
district
of
columbia.
I
Currently
a
person
violates
this
law
if
the
person
distributes
an
image
of
the
infinite
part
or
parts
of
another
identifiable
person
and
the
image
was
taken
or
recorded
under
certain
circumstances
where
the
parties
agreed
or
understood
that
the
image
would
remain
private
and
the
person
depicting
the
image
suffers
emotional
distress.
However,
since
the
inception
there
have
been
some
prosecution.
Prosecutorial
problems
have
emerged
where
certain
images
should
qualify
for
under
the
spirit
of
the
law,
but
do
not
meet
the
letter
of
the
law.
Specifically
here
in
davidson
county,
which
is
where
I
represent.
I
There
was
a
case
where
a
victim
was
subjected
to
non-consensual
pornography
when
a
former
partner
distributed
a
picture
of
one
of
her
private
parts
for
a
family
in
the
workplace.
The
judge
who
initially
ruled
on
the
merits
of
the
case
expressed
doubt
the
picture
met
the
qualified
qualifications
of
a
identifiable
person.
As
the
judge
believed
the
party
had
to
be
identifiable
within
the
four
corners
of
the
photog
photograph.
I
Thus
the
picture
of
an
isolated
body
part
was
believed
by
the
prosecutor
handling
the
matter
to
represent
a
losing
case,
because
the
victim's
face
did
not
appear
as
an
identifiable
factor.
In
another
case,
the
victim
was
identifiable
in
the
distributed
photo
was
engaged
in
the
sexual
act.
However,
she
was
fully
covered
a
covered,
but
unidentified
identifiable
victim
engaged
in
sexual
activity
does
not
meet
the
statutory
language
where
his
or
her
intimate
parts
are
not
strictly
visible.
I
So
this
bill
simply
cleans
up
the
language,
so
it's
clear
that
such
instances
are
covered
under
the
law
by
adding
distributing
an
image
of
an
identifiable
person,
engage
in
sexually
explicit
conduct
to
the
identifiable
to
the
definition
of
of
the
offense
of
unlawful
exposure
and
adding
a
definition,
a
definition
for
identifiable
identifiable
person
and
expanding
the
current
language
that
includes
sexually
explicit
conduct
is
defined
currently
under
code.
And
with
that
I
have
to
answer
any
questions.
A
C
I
F
So
when
former
representative
turner
was
here,
I
actually
was
a
co-sponsor
of
this
bill.
He
and
I
worked
on
this
issue
together
for
a
couple
of
years
before
we
finally
got
into
the
law,
and
I
actually
saw
him
out
on
the
sidewalk
the
other
day,
so
it's
good
to
see
him,
but
when
we
were
working
on
this,
I
mean
the
one
of
the
cases
that
had
come
up
way
back.
F
When
I
used
to
be
an
assistant
district
attorney,
there
was
a
a
young
man
and
a
young
woman
that
were
married
and
the
gentleman
worked
at
a
specific
place.
You
know
that
had
quite
a
few
employees
and
his
spouse,
his
wife
sent
him
some
pictures
that
were
of
her
without
clothing.
They
were
very
you,
know,
private
in
nature.
A
co-worker
he'd
set
his
phone
down.
F
I
had
no
idea,
you
had
images
out
on
a
website
and
was
embarrassed
that
didn't
find
out
that
this
lady
didn't
know
either,
and
so
she
said,
yeah
your
pictures
on
this
website.
It's
pictures
of
you
without
your
clothing,
it's
it's
very,
obviously
you
and
they
wound
up
in
my
office,
the
husband
and
the
wife
they
figured
out
by.
I
guess,
looking
at
his
phone
that
what
had
happened,
okay,
that
this
third
party
had
literally
stolen
these
images.
These
folks
were
high
school
sweethearts.
No
one
had
ever
seen
this
young
lady
naked.
F
As
an
adult,
I
mean
like
no
one
besides
her
husband
and
she
was
mortified
and
there
was
not
a
thing
I
could
do
so.
I
I
tell
that
story
in
that
very
difficult
circumstance,
because
I
explained
that
they
could
try
to
sue
the
guy.
They
could
do
other
things,
but
unfortunately
that
was
not
illegal
okay,
so
the
original
bill
that
we
put
out
there
we
tried
to
craft
in
a
way
that
would
this
one
seems
to
merely
it
limits
it
to
you
know
sexually
explicit
conduct.
I
So
you're
saying,
if
it's
just
the
the,
if
you
can
restate
the
question
because
I'll
listen
to
your
entire,
I
listen
to
your
entire
scenario,
but
I
guess
the
the
intent-
and,
let
me
just
say
the
intent
of
this-
is
for
two
things:
one.
If
there
is
a
sexual
act
and
the
person
is
clothed,
so
that's
the
first
issue.
You
know.
I
A
F
Lambert
you're
ready
sherman.
If
we
can
go
legal
on
that,
just
to
make
sure
that
sexually
explicit
conduct,
I
think
that's
the
wording
used
here
would
would
catch
that
type
of
situation,
because
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
were
intending
to
catch
that
kind
of
situation
again,
that's
where
we
started
years
and
years
and
years
ago,
because
while
that
might
be
the
wisest
course
of
action
for
two
people
to
exchange
photographs
that
are
private
in
nature,
without
their
clothing
on
but
my
understanding
in
the
world
we
live
in
that
that
happens.
F
You
know
on
a
somewhat
regular
basis
with
folks
out
there,
and
if
it's
intended
to
be
a
private
transmission
of
this
information,
those
two
young
folks
that
were
in
my
office,
it
will
stay
with
me
forever
of
just
how
mortified
and
quite
frankly
harmed
they
were.
I
mean
it
really
really
really
just
hurt
both
of
them
not
physically,
but
it
really
I
mean
both
the
husband
and
wife
are
in
tears
in
my
office
and
over
some
jerk
that
you
know
stole
something
and
and
decided
to
put
it
out
on
the
internet.
F
I
I
didn't
tell
the
entire
story,
but
the
reason
he
did
this
is
he
had
a
falling
out
with
the
husband
or
whatever
they
got
into
some
argument
at
work,
and
so
then
it
is
literally
what
you
have
described
as
revenge
porn.
These
people
had
a
falling
out,
and
so
he
thought
fine
I'll
put
these
pictures
of
your
wife
out
there.
I
mean
he
did
it
out
of
absolute
spite
and
meanness,
and
there
wasn't
a
thing
we
could
do
at
that
time.
F
I
A
And
I've
got
here
in
dashboard,
so
section
1a
and
I'm
happy
to
go
legal
services
as
well,
but
says
a
person
commits
unlawful
exposure
who,
with
the
intent
to
cause
emotional
distress,
distributes
an
image
of
the
intimate
part
or
parts
of
an
another
identifiable
person
or
an
image
of
an
identifiable
person
engaged
in
sexually
explicit
conduct.
So
it
seems
to
encompass
both
a
a
nude
photograph
and
then
also
a
photograph
that
shows
people
engaged
in
sexual
conduct.
F
Sir,
mr
chairman,
it
is-
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
this
amendment
does
not
rewrite
inadvertently.
Anything
was
in
there
because
again,
the
sponsor
has
clearly
said
it
is
to
be
an
expansion
for
that
bill,
and
I
just
in
respect
to
those
two
young
people
that
sat
in
my
office.
I
promised
them,
then
if
there
was
ever
an
opportunity
to
do
something
about
this
type
of
behavior
that
we
would,
and
so
I
really
appreciate
you
bringing
this.
F
C
C
But
I
kind
of
wonder
you
know
the
provision
that
says
an
image
was
photographic,
sexually
explicit
conduct
or
whatever,
and
the
person
depicted
in
the
image
suffers
emotional
distress
to
me,
I'm
trying
to
put
on
my
prosecutor's
cap
now
you
know
assistant
d.a,
looking
at
this
case
and
seeing
what's
going
on,
you
know
the
victim
in
this,
whether
it's
a
female
or
whoever
you
know
they
can
have
the
defense
attorneys
come
out
and
attack
them
and
argue
with
this.
I
kind
of
wonder
whether
maybe
we
might
be
smarter.
C
C
A
F
Sherman
and
and
to
remember
griffey's
point
I
if
there
were
to
be
any
change
there,
just
in
my
humble
opinion
this
is
a
question
better
for
legal
or
for
the
sponsor.
It
would
probably
what
I
would
say
either
that
the
the
person
depicted
an
image
suffers
emotional,
emotional
distress
or
a
reasonable
person
in
that
circumstance
would
have.
I
mean
like
so
that
I
think
we
have
some
other
sections
in
the
statute
to
deal
with
and
and
I
hate
to
be.
F
You
know
eight
or
ten
shots
at
him
and
he
came
to
court
and
testified,
and
I
asked
the
question
that
you
should
never
ask
you
know.
Well,
sir,
did
this
frighten
you
and
he's
looking
right
at
the
defendant?
He
said
absolutely
not
didn't
bother
me
a
bit.
He
didn't
scare
me
and
I
I
backed
up-
and
I
said
no
look
you
got
shot
at.
I
mean
you
know
eight
or
ten
times.
F
Surely,
sir
nope,
it
didn't
frighten
me
a
bit,
I'm
perfectly
fine,
he
don't
bother
me
and
I
I
backed
up
and
realized
that
was
not
going
anywhere
and
the
judge
kind
of
took
into
account
that
a
reasonable
person
would
have
been
frightening
that
circumstance
and
and
we
moved
on,
but
I
just
to
that
point
though
it
really
is.
I
mean
having
to
prove
that
it
it
suffered
emotion,
you
suffered
emotional
distress,
it
does
it's
a
high
bar,
but
I
don't
know
if
that's
somewhere
the
sponsor
wants
to
go
with
this
particular
bill.
I
I
You
know
I've
kind
of
run
this
through
the
traps
and
everybody's
okay
with
it
I'd
hate
to
throw
something
here.
Last
minute
that
jeopardizes
it.
You
know
it
seems
like
we
have
a
common
interest
in
this.
I'm
happy
to
keep
working
on
this
future
years,
but
I'd
prefer
just
to
keep
this
narrow
in
focus
to
these
two
issues.
A
Very
good
members
seeing
nobody
else
on
our
list:
we're
ready
to
vote
all
those
in
favor
of
sending
house
bill
2789
as
amended
to
calendar
rules.
Please
signify,
saying
aye,
those
opposed,
sir.
You
had
the
calendar
and
rules
thanks
for
chairman
members.
Thank
you,
sir.
That
brings
us
to
item
number
five
house
bill
1248
by
representative
thompson.
A
So
I
want
to
remind
everybody
of
our
posture
here.
We
adopted
amendment
coded
16270
last
week.
It's
already
on
the
bill.
Mr
sponsor,
you
have
filed
two
amendments
that
are
substantively
different.
One
is
coded
one
six,
five,
two
seven
and
one
is
coded
one,
six,
five,
two
eight,
which
one
would
you
like
to
move
forward
with?
Mr
two,
seven?
A
Members
you've
heard
the
explanation
he's
referring
to
b3,
which
is
the
property,
was
obtained
from
a
marked
law
enforcement
vehicle,
as
defined
in
5510
308
memory
serves
last
week.
We
had
this
debate.
We
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
didn't
draw
in
off-duty
officers
and
their
private
vehicles
or
other
search
things.
We
wanted
to
be
clear
about
exactly
what
we're
talking
about.
So
any
any
questions
for
the
sponsor.
Seeing
now
we're
ready
to
vote
all
those
in
favor
of
attaching
amendment
coded
16527
to
house
bill
1248,
please
signify
saying
aye.
A
Those
opposed
you
adopt
members
you've
heard
a
description
of
the
bill
has
amended
any
further
questions
for
the
sponsor,
seeing
none
we're
ready
to
vote
all
those
in
favor
of
sending
house
bill
1248
as
amended
to
finance,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
those
opposed,
sir.
You
had
to
finance.
Thank
you
cheering.
Thank
you.
That
brings
us
to
item
number
six
house
bill
2754
by
representative
harris.
K
Thank
you,
chairman
into
the
committee,
so
this
bill
came
before
our
transportation
committee
and
our
subcommittee
as
well
and
made
it
to
the
floor
and
we
had
to
bring
it
back
to
this
committee
to
make
a
technical
change
in
the
on
the
language,
and
so
the
change
was
made
in
the
amendment
that
was
made.
I
don't
know
if
that
amendment
has
already
been
placed
on
there,
but
it's
zero
one.
Six
two,
eight
six.
A
K
Amendment
so
the
amendment
makes
the
change
from
listing
the
words
class
e
felony
to
re-referring
it
back
to
tca
55511,
and
so
that
is
the
only
change
is
just
it's
already
in
code
that
that
criminal
charge
is
already
in
code,
and
so
all
it
does
is
refer
it
back
there.
Instead
of
listing
it
out
as
a
class
e
felony.
A
Thank
you,
miss
jared.
I
do
have
our
research
notes
here.
I
think
just
to
be
clear
for
the
record.
I
think
it
does
two
additional
things.
It
clarifies
that
the
temporary
tag
must
be
counterfeit
or
forge
to
qualify
for
the
felony
offense,
and
it
removes
the
felony
offense
for
temporary
plates
with
a
color
scheme
other
than
black
and
white.
Does
that
sound
familiar
so
it.
K
Took
so
that
was
a
separate
amendment
from
previously
so
this
original,
so
the
original
bill
was
to
create
a
new
design
with
the
department
of
revenue.
However,
department
of
revenue
has
already
issued
out
a
brand
new
design
in
recent
months,
and
so
that
has
a
water
marking
on
there.
So
it
has
all
the
features
this
bill.
Simply
all
it's
saying
is
to
that
counterfeiting
copying,
duplicating
a
temporary
tag,
is
committing
a
crime
and
that
crime
is
under
55.516.
A
F
Knowing
the
document
or
plate
to
have
been
altered,
faults
are
fought
or
forged
or
excuse
me
plate
two
have
been
altered,
forged
or
falsified.
You
cannot
alter
a
tag.
You
cannot
possess
an
altered
tag.
It
is
an
e
felony
to
do
so.
The
wording
of
your
bill
says
if
you
counterfeit
copy,
duplicate,
manufacture
or
assist
in
the
counterfeiting
copy
and
duplicate
a
manufacturing
temporary
plate
with
intended
or
fraud.
F
K
Representative
harris
okay,
so
I
definitely
have
to
go
out
and
ask
legal,
because
we
worked
on
this
together
on
that
part,
but
the
wording
for
this
one
was
simply
to
affect
temporary
tags.
The
current
language
right
now,
as
it
sits,
doesn't,
is
not
being
changed.
Nothing
is
being
altered
here,
except
for
temporary
tags
related
to
counterfeiting,
copying,
duplicating
manufacturing
or
assisting
in
the
counterfeiting,
copying
duplicating
or
manufacturing
a
temporary
tag,
so
that
is,
that
is
not
changing.
All
of
that
is
still
in
place.
Nothing
is
being
removed
or
altered.
K
F
Leader
lambreth,
if
that's
your
intention
with
all
the
respect,
I
still
don't
think
you've
gotten
there,
because
it
the
current
statute
that
makes
this
a
felony.
If
you
alter
that
temporary
tag,
if
you
take
a
black
magic
marker
and
alter
the
date
on
that
tag,
you
might
as
well
have
stamped
out
a
brand
new
metal
tag.
Okay,
because
you
have
altered
the
tag,
I
mean
that
that
may
sound
harsh,
but
you
cannot
do
that.
I
mean
that
is
something
that
is,
I
mean
now,
look
that
gets
handled
in
the
court
system
all
times
many
times.
F
If
that's
all
someone
did
you
know
a
lot
of
times.
It's
played
down
to
misdemeanor
dismissed,
I
mean
stuff
happens,
but
when
you
see
repetitive
behavior
like
that,
that's
a
very
serious
violation
of
the
law,
it's
the
exact
same
thing
as
counterfeiting,
a
tag
but
again
the
two
definitions,
for
whatever
reason
don't
match.
K
Representative
harris
chair
chairman
and
leader,
so
this
so
this
bill,
I
I'm
may
have
gotten
confused
too
by
what
you're
saying,
because
what
I
am
trying
to
do
is
simply
add
temporary
tags
to
this
process
of
being
counterfeited
and
for
counterfeit
falsified
forged,
and
so
that
is
being
added
to
this
process.
That
is
not
altering.
What
our
current
law
is
saying.
Already,
it
is
class
e
is
going
to
stay
a
class
e.
Nothing
in
that
part
is
changing
so.
F
K
K
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
A
We
will
now
go
back
into
session
members.
I
appreciate
your
indulgence
now
that
we
are
back
into
session.
I
I
think
we
we
were
starting
to
ask
some
very
pertinent
questions.
I
want
to
ask
them
on
the
record,
which
was,
namely
representative
harris.
Can
you
describe
to
us
what
problem
it
is
we're
trying
to
solve
you're
recognized.
K
Great
so
the
initial
bill,
the
very
first
a
piece
of
legislation
that
this
started
off,
as
was
to
create
to
have
the
department
of
revenue,
create
a
brand
new
tag
because
our
current
tags
were
being
duplicated,
copied
and
forged.
I
got
an
opportunity
to
meet
with
chairman
hal
as
well
and
discuss
this
as
well,
but
we
had
tags
if
you
currently
drive
around
you'll,
see
some
tags
that
have
that
are
in
black
and
white
you'll
see
some
tags
that
have
a
green
line,
a
grain
stripe
going
across
the
top
of
them.
K
We
don't
use
those
anymore,
but
a
lot
of
people
don't
know
that,
and
so
we
have
some
that
you
can
use
a
marker
with
and
all
that
we
don't
use
those
anymore.
The
only
tags
that
we
use
at
this
very
second
from
the
department
of
revenue
when
it
comes
to
temporary
tags,
is
a
printed
form
that
gets
printed
through
a
system.
K
You
can
print
it
off
from
carvana
from
car
lots
from
anywhere
in
a
person
selling
their
own
car
from
home
can
print
this
tag,
but
it's
a
tag
that
has
a
watermarking
on
the
back
of
it.
I
was
look.
I
sent
someone
a
picture
the
other
day
where
the
water
marking
was
not
in
the
photo,
and
so
we
were
working
on
the
design.
K
Well,
the
department
just
created
that
design,
so
we
want
to
allow
them
the
opportunity
to
go
ahead
and
let
that
design
work
through
its
process
for
just
a
little
bit,
but
while
doing
so
the
current
language,
we
also
have
tags
that
say
that
people
will
put
on
their
on
the
back
of
their
vehicle.
That
says
tag
applied
for
I
know
you
all
seen
them
that
just
say
the
words
tag
applied
for
as
if
they
applied
for
tags,
those
are
being
copied
and
duplicated.
K
And
if
you
go
onto
facebook
at
this
very
second,
while
I'm
talking
to
you
and
just
type
in
tags,
25,
they
will
pull
up
and
they're
on
sale
for
25
and
you
can
drive
to
brentwood
tennessee
and
pick
up
three
or
four
of
them.
If
you
would
like
to
so,
that's
what
are
trying
to
fix
in
this
language
is
making
sure
that
it
is
correctly
illegal
for
you
to
use
those
parts
of
the
tag.
K
The
current
language,
as
it
was
explained
to
me
by
the
attorney
the
first
time
when
I
did
this,
was
that
it
did
not
have
temporary
tags
listed,
although
we
would
assume
and
think
that
license
plates
cover
all
types
of
license
plates,
it
didn't
have
temporary
tags.
So
I
also
added
that
part
in
there.
I
didn't
change
any
of
the
criminal
charges
on
there.
K
A
J
This
bill
did
come
through
sub
and
it
had
some
issues
and
we
worked
with
the
sponsor
worked
with
legal
to
try
to
craft
it
into
a
position
where
we
could
get
it
out
of
committee
there.
Once
the
committee
passed
it,
we
discovered
and
working
with
legal
again
that
the
department
and
talking
to
the
department
they
had
been
working
on
a
redesign
of
the
tags
for
several
months,
and
so
that
issue
with
the
bill
was
taken
care
of
they're
already
redesigning
it.
J
J
A
C
K
Harris
you
recognize
if
this
one
passes
and
once
it's
signed
by
the
governor,
it
would
allow
that
person
to
go
down
and
arrest
that
person.
Yes,
it
currently
allows
them
to
for
license
plate
again.
The
definition
that
was
given
to
me
from
legal
was
that
our
current
license
plates
don't
cover
temporary
tax.
The
wording
wasn't
in
there,
and
so
it
is
of
course
being
said
now
that
it
is
in
there.
A
J
I
just
recalled
I
have
a
letter
on
my
desk.
A
lengthy
letter
came
in
yesterday
from
a
constituent
who
is
very
upset
because
he
now
has
a
felony
on
his
record
because
he
took
a
magic
marker
and
marked
out
the
date
on
a
temporary
tag
changed
the
date
he
got
caught
got
arrested,
got
charged
with
a
felony
and
he
now
has
a
felony
on
him.
So
I
think
the
answer
to
that
question
is
there's
some
law
enforcement
somewhere
in
tennessee.
That
believes
that's
already
illegal
to
do
that,
but
I
will
defer
to
legal.
B
C
H
I
thank
you
chairman.
If,
if
we
don't
need
excuse
me
any
law
written
on
what
we
already
have
with
forgery,
but
the
sponsor
of
the
bill
was
trying
to
get
revenue
to
come
up
with
another
temporary
tag
that
would
make
it
harder
for
somebody
to
forge
or
more
difficult.
That
was
the
intent
I
believe
at
the
very
beginning.
H
B
Michelle
fogerty
legal
services,
forgery,
a
person
commits
an
offense
who
forges
a
writing
with
intent
to
defraud
or
harm
another
forge
means
to
alter,
make
complete,
execute
or
authenticate
any
writing
so
that
it
purports
to
be
the
act
of
another
who
did
not
authorize.
The
act
have
been
executed
at
a
time
or
place
or
in
a
numbered
sequence
other
than
what
was
in
fact
the
case
or
be
a
copy
of
an
original
when
no
such
original
existed.
A
So
55516
says
it
is
a
class
e
felony
for
any
person,
two
one
alter
with
fraudulent
intent,
any
certificate
of
title
certificate
of
registration,
registration
plate
or
permit
issued
by
the
department
or
any
county
clerk
of
this
state
by
virtue
of
chapters
one
through
six
of
this
title,
then
we
have
two
alter
or
falsify
with
fraudulent
intent
or
forge
any
assignment
upon
a
certificate
of
title.
So
the
word
forge.
There
is
only
referring
to
the
assignment
upon
a
certificate
of
title.
F
All
right
outstanding,
I
I
want
to
commend
the
sponsor
one
for
standing
there
respectfully,
while
we
all
did
what
we
do
best
in
the
criminal
justice
committee,
which
is,
is
debate
this
stuff
and
genuinely
try
to
figure
out.
Look
you
want
to
make
sure
this
stuff's
illegal.
We
want
to
make
sure
this
stuff's
illegal.
Nobody
needs
to
like
copy
it
or
false,
remind
I
I
would
either
back
in
session
or
not.
Mr
chairman,
I
would
make
a
humble
recommendation
potentially
roll
this
a
week.
F
I
know
you've
been
through
the
ringer
on
this
bill,
but
both
off
mike
and
own
mike,
I
mean
you've,
said
what
you
want
is
for
this
stuff
to
be
illegal,
that
you
can't
copy.
You
can't
forge
you
can't.
You
know,
do
any
of
this
stuff
that
I
think
there's
a
way
to
get
there.
That's
just
my
opinion.
There's
a
part
of
me
that
thinks
we
probably
don't
need
this
bill
at
all.
I
mean
you
started
out,
saying:
hey
y'all
need
to
make
a
new
temporary
tag.
That's
accomplished!
F
Well
done
by
the
way
I
mean,
I
think,
that's
great,
working
with
the
department
working
with
the
chairman
of
transportation.
You
seem
to
have
accomplished
that
goal.
The
rest
of
this
seems
like
it's
more
a
conversation
on
to
just
make
sure
the
wording's
there
to
ensure
no
one
could
be
copying
off
tag
applied
for
which,
by
the
way,
maybe
next
week
we
can
hear
from
somebody
from
safety
or
revenue
or
somewhere
else.
F
I'm
not
even
sure,
and
this
may
be
an
office,
a
question
for
a
patrol
officer,
I'm
not
even
sure
the
tag
applied
for
gets
you
off
the
hook.
I
think
you
actually
have
to
have
a
tag
on
the
back.
You
can
have
tag
applied
for
all
day
long
and
maybe
get
you
a
little
grace
from
some
officers,
but
I
think
the
law
says
that
you
have
to
actually
have
either
that
drive-out
tag
or
a
plate.
Just
saying
hey,
you
know
I'm
trying
to
get
a
tag,
I'm
not
sure
get
you
off
the
hook
criminally.
F
A
G
I
would
suggest
that
the
evidence
that
we
need
some
clarity
in
the
law
is
this,
what
we're
doing
now.
So
I
would
certainly
hope
that
the
members
would
support
the
bill
merely
if
not
on
substance,
changing
substance.
The
fact
that
the
way
the
law
is
styled,
there's
not
the
clarity
to
where
jane
or
john
doe
can
pick
up
a
book
open
it
to
this
and
understand
what
they
can
and
cannot
do.
G
A
C
Temporary
tags
are
state
governmental
issue,
tags,
39,
16,
504
destruction
and
or
of
tampering
with
government
records.
You
just
pulled
it
up.
Okay,
that
was
going
to
be
my
my
question.
I
think
that
the
false
the
forging
or
falsification
of
temporary
tags
would
fall.
I
would
think,
underneath
this
statute
right
here.
A
C
B
Michelle
fogerty
legal
services,
39
16
504,
is
destruction
of
and
tampering
with,
government
records.
It
is
unlawful
for
any
person
to
knowingly
make
a
false
entry
in
or
false
alteration
of
a
government
record
make
present
or
use
any
record
document
or
thing
with
knowledge
of
its
falsity
and
with
intent
that
it
will
be
taken
as
a
genuine
government
record
or
intentionally
and
unlawfully
destroy,
conceal,
remove
or
otherwise
impair
the
verity
legibility
or
availability
of
a
government
record
class
e
felony.
A
A
L
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
committee
for
those
that
weren't
in
sub
we
in
the
on
the
human
trafficking
task
force.
We
there's
a
an
international
group
called
shared
hope
and
they
monitor
what
states
are
doing
with
their
human
trafficking
laws.
So
it's
kind
of
like
if
you
get
to
be
number
one
with
shared,
hope,
that's
the
gold
standard,
so
we
have
been
number
one
several
years
in
the
past
and
so
shared
hope
has
changed
their
rubric
for
how
you
get
to
be
number
one.
L
So
this
is
a
very
comprehensive
bill.
It
covers
several
sections,
but
we
are
updating,
correcting
and
making
clear
a
lot
of
our
human
trafficking
laws
that
apply
to
victims
that
are
18
or
younger,
and
so
let
me
see
if
I
can
do
a
little
bit
better
bureau,
it
standardizes
assessment
and
screening
processes
for
youth
serving
agencies.
L
It
creates
a
more
victim-centered
response
to
these
instances.
It's
similar
to
what
we
have
done
in
the
past
for
minor
victims
of
prostitution
and
strengthens
the
law.
With
regard
to
prosecution
of
these
offenses,
I
can
certainly
take
a
deeper
dive
if
you
want,
but
that
was
the
goal
is
to
get
these
things
in
line,
so
we
can
be
number
one
in
the
country
again.
A
Charlie
lady
movie,
thank
you
so
much
very
worthwhile
effort
appreciate
your
your
work
on
that
and
I'm.
I
think
I
speak
to
the
rest
of
committee
when
I
thank
you
for
for
your
work
on
that.
If
there's
no
questions
for
the
sponsor
we're
ready
to
vote
all
those
in
favor
of
sending
house
bill
2147
as
amended
to
finance,
please
signify
by
saying
aye
those
opposed
ma'am.
You
had
to
finance.