►
From YouTube: House Elections & Campaign Finance Subcommittee - April 7, 2021 - House Hearing Room 2
Description
House Elections & Campaign Finance Subcommittee - April 7, 2021 - House Hearing Room 2
A
C
A
A
Item
number
three
by.
I
think
his
he's
he's
a
famous
attorney
from
the
middle
tennessee
area.
There
he
has
the
representative
garrett
11
93.
If
you
let's
see
we
have,
I
believe
there
are
two
amendments.
Are
you
just
running
one,
I'm
running
ending
in
five?
Three,
three?
Three,
I
believe:
that's
what
we
have.
We
have
a
motion
and
second
on
the
amendment
is
there
any
discussion
on
the
amendment
going
on
the
bill.
Question
receive
no
objections.
A
B
Mr
chairman
committee,
this
bill
is
brought
to
you
by
the
registry
of
board
and
ethics
commission
right
now.
They
assess
fines.
Those
fines
can
only
be
collected
by
the
attorney
general's
office.
Some
of
these
fines
date
back
from
2008
what
this
does
and
allows
the
bureau
to
hire
outside
counsel
to
collect
those
fines
against
those
that
have
been
properly
and
duly
fined.
So
with
that,
mr
chairman
I'll
be
happy
to
take
any
questions.
A
A
A
Next
on
the
agenda
is
item
number
four
hb
1157
by
representative
stewart
and
that
has
been
taken
off
notice
next
on
the
next
on.
The
agenda
is
item
number
five
hb
1158
by
also
representative
stewart
that
has
been
requested
to
roll
one
week
with
no
objections,
wrote
one
week,
item
number
six
by
representative
powers,
which
is
hb
1527.
A
C
C
However,
I
think
I
requested
from
you
if
you
would
kind
to
walk
me
through
basically
the
committee,
what
you
walked
me
through
earlier
this
morning
about
the
legislation,
because
we
really
do
feel
strongly
about
this
legislation,
but
we
certainly
wouldn't
want
to
do
it
in
a
manner
where
it
would
be
comfortable
and
right
for
everybody.
So
what
could
I
embark
upon
you
to
kind
of
walk
me
through
the.
A
Committee,
what
you
did
earlier
this
morning,
no
objections,
representative
love
you
after
I
make
a
few
comments.
Also
director
of
elections.
Mark
goins
is
here.
If
I
get
something
wrong
or
don't
say
something
he
can,
he
can
correct
us
or
or
answer
any
questions.
It's
my
understanding
number
one.
We
already
what
what
is
conducted
now
in
counties,
davis
and
other
counties
is
at
election
time.
The
election
office
goes
there
and
anyone
who's
eligible
to
vote
or
wants
to
register
to
vote.
They
will
register
to
vote.
A
Anyone
who
wants
to
vote
like
they
do
when
they
visit
other
facilities
like
nursing
homes,
they
will
vote
them
absentee
and
so
they're
already
being
voted
and
they're
already
being
registered.
If
someone
wants
to
register
to
vote
what
the
confusion
gets
in
your
bill,
is
it
it
wants
the
election
commission
to
go
around
and
register
everyone
most
of
the
people
in
jail.
A
Are
there
not
for
a
sentence
but
they're
there
for
holding
till
a
trial
comes
up
and
they
may
be
eligible
now
if
they
register
them
now,
but
in
a
few
weeks
or
months
when
they're
actually
sentenced,
they
will
no
longer
be
eligible
because
they'll
be
a
convicted
felon.
So
it
would
complicate
the
election
commission
to
have
to
check
on
all
that
right
now
it
may
be
one
or
two.
It
could
be
a
lot
of
people
that
they
register
that
day.
A
A
There
could
be
somewhat
dangerous,
plus
the
machine
would
be
in
a
non-secure
location
where
the
election
workers
wouldn't
control
the
environment
too,
but
basically
everything
that
you're
wanting
to
do
for
the
most
part
is
already
being
done,
and
I
just
didn't
see
a
need
for
the
bill
personally,
and
that
was
that
was
my
opinion.
What
had
been
expressed
to
me,
representative,
shaw,.
C
Thank
you
and,
of
course,
I'll
I'll,
certainly
give
representative
love
an
opportunity.
I
I
wanted
to
get
that
information,
because
the
the
those
who
are
in
favor
of
this,
I
think
I've
got
some
ideas,
maybe
that
we
could
come
back
next
year,
where
we
could
correct
some
of
these
issues
that
you
just
pointed
out
where
it
could
be
a
smooth
transition.
C
D
Yes,
sir,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
I
did
want
to
ask
the
sponsor-
and
I
hear
your
comments,
mr
chairman.
My
concern
is
that
there
may
be
people
who
are
actually
in
the
county
jail
who
are
waiting
on
their
court
date
and
possibly
may
be
found
innocent,
and
if
we
register
them
to
vote
it
doesn't
do
any
harm
to
go
ahead
and
register
them
to
vote.
If
they're
found
guilty,
then
they're
not
allowed
to
vote.
D
Who
may
be
there
for,
and
I'm
not
sure
about
this
but
check
with
legal
who
maybe
they're
for
misdemeanors
end
up
waiting
on
their
court
date
and
because
of
a
money,
bail
system.
Sometimes
people
are
just
there
waiting
in
jail
and
don't
have
the
chance
to
be
bonded
out,
and
these
are
persons
who,
I
think
would
qualify
under
representative
shaw's
bill
to
be
registered
and
then,
if
they
either
are
found
guilty
of
a
felony.
D
Then
of
course
that
registration
is
voided.
But
if
they're
not,
we
may
miss
out
on
people
who
are
unregistered,
who
either
will
be
there
for
a
misdemeanor
or
unregistered
and
maybe
found
innocent
of
the
charge
and
now
are
not
going
to
get
the
chance
to
vote
because
they
may
miss
the
deadline
for
registration
simply
because
we
didn't
go
through
the
extraction.
D
I
know
that
there
are
plenty
of
instances
where
people
are
waiting
in
jail
for
a
court
date
and
there
are
instances
where
you
may
be
arrested
and
then
the
charges
are
dropped
and
sometimes
that
happens
and
people
aren't
given
the
chance
to
expunge.
But
I'm
trying
to
list
out
several
instances
where
there
are
people
who
I
think
would
fit
under
this
category.
D
People
who
are
waiting
in
county
jail,
the
davidson
county
residents
and
their
the
this
position
of
their
case
may
be
that
they
end
up
being
found
innocent
or
that
the
charges
drop
and,
I
think,
there's
nothing
wrong
with
giving
opportunity.
But
since
president
shaw
wants
to
go
ahead
and
roll
it-
and
I
think
they're
also
instances
where
someone
may
have
a
felony
charge
that
is
reduced
to
a
misdemeanor
and
they're
eligible
to
vote.
But
if
we
don't
take
the
chance
to
register
to
vote,
we
miss
that.
D
A
A
It's
no
harm
for
someone
asking
to
vote.
I
think
the
concern
is
just
the
requirement
and
the
legislation
to
require
election
workers
to
go
around
and
ask
everyone
to
vote
when
that
that
may
take
up
a
lot
of
time
and
be
dangerous
to
add
too
many
people
and
too
much
of
a
burden
to
them
to
keep
up
track
with
who's
found,
innocent
or
guilty
or
their
charges
reduced.
Also,
if
there's
nothing
right
now,
preventing
anyone
can
go
to
the
election
office
and
pick
up
voter
registration
forms.
C
B
Correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong,
sir,
but
I
believe
under
federal
law,
we
have
to
provide
that
information
to
the
jails
now
as
far
as
registration
forms
and
all
that,
so
that
information
is
already
there
for
them.
As
representative
love
was
talking
about
that
information
is
already
there.
We
already
do
that
anyway,
so
that
would
be
a
duplication
of
service.
Thank
you,
sir.
A
E
The
system
tennessee
system
for
restoring
voting
rights
is
unnecessarily
complex
and
does
not
work
since
2016
tennessee
has
only
restored
voting
rights
of
3
415
people,
a
lawsuit
filed
in
december
of
2020
challenge.
Child
is
challenging
tennessee's
laws
now,
overall,
tennessee's
overall
disenfranchisement
rate
is
the
second
highest
in
the
country.
E
Tennessee
is,
is
the
only
one
of
11
states
that
disenfranchise
felons
at
all
levels:
prison,
probation,
parole
and
post-sentence.
Two
states
and
district
of
columbia
do
not
restrict
voting
rights
at
all,
even
while
in
prison.
Tennessee
is
the
only
state
that
requires
child
support
to
be
current
under
for
restoration.
E
Tennessee
released
over
6
100
felons
in
2019
and
year
20.,
approximately
half
of
those
released
in
tennessee
reoffend
and
are
reincarcerated
within
three
years.
When
voter
rights
are
restored,
the
research
in
florida
showed
the
recidivism
rate
dropped
12.8
percent
in
tennessee.
That
would
be
795
fewer
people
incarcerated
each
year,
and
that
would
it
right
now,
tennessee
department
of
correction
cost.
The
house,
one
inmate
for
a
year,
is
31
000.,
that
will
potential
savings
to
taxpayers
would
be
over
24
million
each
year.
E
A
I'm
not
talking
about
that.
I'm
talking
about
if
the
judge
like
let's
say
they
sent
him
to.
I
don't
know
five
years
in
prison,
correct
and
a
part
of
the
sentencing
was
that
they
were
not
to
have
their
rights
restored
to
vote
unless
they
had
paid
back
court
costs
or
child
support,
or
whatever
this
would
overrun
overrule
a
judge's
decision.
Wouldn't
it
on
that
particular
thing.
E
B
B
A
E
A
F
So
in
2006,
former
congressman
cohen
and
a
former
state
representative
named
richard
turner,
they
brought
legislation
forward
and
that
the
law
specifically
only
applied
to
folks
who
had
committed
a
felony
so
under
the
constitution,
if
you
commit
an
intensity
constitution,
if
you
commit
a
felony,
you
can
lose
your
rights
to
vote.
If
the
general
assembly
agrees
to
do
so,
they
can
set,
they
have
authority,
set
that
process.
F
F
If
you
are
a
person
that
has
never
been
convicted
of
a
felony,
then
you
do
not
lose
your
right
to
vote.
So
that
is
what
the
distinction
is.
So,
if
I
am
someone
who
is
behind
on
child
support,
I'm
still
eligible
to
vote,
but
once
I'm
convicted
of
a
felony
tennessee
law
and
the
constitution
of
tennessee
allows
you
basically
forfeit
your
right
if
you
will-
and
so
at
that
point
so
in
2006,
the
child
support
provision
was
added
later
on.
F
We
had
a
provision
that
said:
if
you
had
not
paid
your
victim
restoration,
you
couldn't
get
your
rights
restored
and
then
the
other
thing
is
court
costs.
That's
already
been
mentioned,
so
what
he,
what
representative
dixie
is
seeking
to
do
at
least
one
of
the
things
there's
some
other
things
too,
but
the
main
thing
is:
if
this
were
to
pass
the
requirement
to
get
to
be
up
to
date
on
child
support,
to
paid
victim
restitution
and
to
pay
your
court
costs
would
go
away.
F
B
F
So
that's
that
is
one
of
the
issues
that
that
potentially,
if
this
were
to
pass,
so
this
would
be
a
suspense.
So
currently
the
process
is
we
purge
someone
if
they've
been
convicted
of
a
felony
and
in
other
instances
we
don't
rest
our
person
if
they've
been
convicted
of
a
felony,
because
they've
checked
the
yes
box
unless
they
supply
a
certificate
restoration.
F
It's
that
certificate
restoration
that
allows
us
to
know
what
crime
they've
been
convicted
of
in
many
instances.
It
also
allows
us
to
know
if
they've,
if
they're,
caught
up
on
on
various
court
costs
and
victim
restitution,
and
then
we
check
on
child
support
instantly
the
issue
that
we
potentially
would
have
if
you're
convicted
of
another
stay
in
another
state
or
even
some
instances
in
tennessee.
F
We
wouldn't
necessarily
know
what
that
conviction
was
without
further
follow-up,
sometimes
from
the
individual
and
there's
certain
crimes
in
tennessee
voter
frauds
one,
if
you
in
your
official
capacity
as
a
government
agent,
commit
some
type
of
crime
in
your
official
capacity.
You
are
forever
forbidden
from
registering
to
vote,
no
matter
what
you
can't
do
it
and
this
bill,
as
I
read
it,
doesn't
change
that
if
you're
a
murderer,
if
you're
a
sexual
predator,
but
that
we
are
in
elections,
we're
not
criminal.
F
You
know
in
the
criminal
sphere
as
far
as
probation
and
those
things,
so
we
don't
have
necessarily
those
records
and
certainly
don't
have
them
from
other
states.
We
do
work
with
tdot
the
tennessee
department
of
corrections,
but,
and
we
get
some
other
information,
but
it
would
be
very
difficult
to
figure
out
who
is
permanently
disqualified
and
who's,
not
so
that
would
be
one
of
the
issues
that
you
would
have.
F
That'd
be
crazy.
I
think
we
would
have
to
come
up
with
some
process
that
maybe
not
outlined
in
this
legislation.
Administratively,
we
would
have
to
figure
out
some
some
way
to
do
so,
but
there
would
be
some
administrative
challenges
to
do
so,
a
simpler
way.
You
know
if
the
will
of
this
body
is
to
do
this.
I
mean
the
simple
way
to
do
is
just
say:
child
support,
victim
restitution
and
court
cost
is
no
longer
a
requirement
to
get
your
rights
restored,
but
still
keep
the
certificate
of
restoration.
D
Thank
you,
and
let
me
ask
yourself,
director
goins,
as
sort
of
a
follow-up
on
representatives,
to
manage
this
question.
So
currently
you
can
be
behind
on
child
support
and
as
long
as
you
have
not
been
convicted
of
a
felony,
it
does
not
trigger
you
being
unable
to
vote,
but
the
moment
that
it
does.
Even
if
you
serve
your
entire
sentence
and
pay
all
your
court
costs
but
are
still
behind
on
child
support.
F
That's
correct
because
the
legislature
said
if
you
commit,
if
you're
convicted
of
a
felony
you've
lost
your
right.
So
it's
gone
okay.
Now
it's
a
situation
where
you're
getting
that
right
back.
You
know
if
the
legislature
wanted
to,
they
could
come
in
and
say
if
you
commit
a
felony,
you
never
get
your
right
back
and
in
fact,
have
done
so.
You
know
in
certain
instances,
if
I've
never
been
convicted
of
a
felony,
there's
no
authorization
for
this
general
assembly
to
say
I
could
never
vote
again.
That
would
be
unconstitutional.
F
If
you
were
to
say
someone
has
never
forfeited
their
right
to
vote
if
you
put
additional
qualifications
on
it.
So
this
is
a
situation
where
this
individual
has
lost
their
rights
and
that's
the
only
reason.
So
this
has
been
litigated.
This
issue,
very
specifically,
child
support,
was
litigated
shortly
after
that
law
passed
in
2006
and
and
because
the
court
looked
at
the
fact,
you've
lost
your
right
sure.
F
B
B
B
People
should
pay
their
child
support,
but
I'm
also
a
huge
proponent
of
reestablishing
rights
and
working
toward
low
lowering
the
recidivism
rate
when
people
have
served
their
time,
and
so
if,
if
I
haven't
committed
a
felony
and
I
haven't
been
incarcerated,
then
my
voting
rights.
If
I
choose
not
to
pay
my
child
support,
then
my
voting
rights,
I
still
have
those
voting
rights.
B
I
struggle.
I
guess,
then,
if
someone
has
served
their
time
and
we're
trying
to
get
them,
hopefully
back
on
a
path,
the
the
their
ability
to
vote
or
not,
vote
now
is
tied
to
paying
court
costs
paying
child
support.
In
these
other
things,
I
just
I'm,
I'm
struggling
to
see
the
the
equity
or
the
fairness
in
that
and
again
being
a
freshman,
I'm
trying
to
get
my
arms
around
it.
But
that's
just
that's
my
point
and
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
further
clarification
to
that
or
not
so.
F
Well,
you
know,
as
I
said,
this
was
passed
prior
to
me,
even
become
a
coordinator.
I
mean
it's
2006
and
so
I'm
sure
that
that
was
an
issue
that
was
heavily
debated
at
the
time,
and
you
know
that
was
a
discussion
that
was
taken
at
that
point,
but
I
do
want
to
clarify
it's
not
just
child
support.
It
is
court
costs,
it's
also
victim
restitution,
victim
restitution,
child
and
and
court
costs
was
added
later.
That
was
not
added
in
2006.
G
Thank
you.
I
guess
the
the
question
I
have
for
you,
mr
goins,
is,
I
think,
he's
made
a
statement
the
other
a
moment
ago.
That
I
think,
is
really
the
determining
factor
for
me,
and
you
stated,
and
I
just
want
to
clarify.
You
stated
that
this
is
a
re-establishment
of
a
right.
These
rights
were
stricken
so
to
challenge
to
to
argue
that
these
this
is
comparable
to
something
else,
as
it
relates
has
by
nature
of
the
definition
say
that
they're
completely
unrelated,
in
that
these
people
lost
their
right
to
vote.
G
F
I
think
another
way
to
explain
it
as
a
policy.
It
could
be
that
the
general
assembly
said
we
would
prefer
that
if
you're
not
current
on
child
support,
you
would
not
be
able
to
vote.
However,
you
don't
have
the
constitutional
authority
to
do
that,
because
someone's
not
lost
their
right
to
vote.
Unless
you
said
being
delinquent
on
child
support
is
a
felony
and
so
you're
correct.
I
mean
you
couldn't
under
what
rips
into
mcmanus
is
saying.
It
may
be
that
the
policy
level
would
be.
F
G
F
Correct
so
I
was
here
in
2009
when
the
court
costs
came
in,
and
that
was
actually
something
that
the
clerks.
It
wasn't,
something
that
came
from
the
secretary
of
state's
office.
What
I
remember
the
clerks
actually
had
asked
the
legislature
to
come
in
and
do
that
so
you're
correct
it's
the
general
assembly
that
has
put
put
the
pieces
of
the
puzzle
together,
making
policy
decisions.
Thank
you.
A
C
Well,
it's
important
for
me
to
put
this
on
record.
I
do
think
that
when
we
look
at
voting
rights,
we
are
it's
it's
a
broad
spectrum
of
issues
that
we're
either
depressing
or
we're
helping.
If
we're
going
to
get
people
back
qualified
to
work
and
even
to
pay
that
child
support
and
all
of
these
issues,
we
got
to
look
at
the
broad
spectrum
of
things
in
that
a
man
who
is
not
working
can't
pay
child
support.
C
A
man
who
is
not
qualified
to
vote
is
cut
short
of
so
many
opportunities
to
be
successful
in
his
life.
To
do
what
he
needs
to
do.
So
I
think,
if
we're
one
of
those
states-
and
we
are
who
believe
in
right
to
work
and
people,
have
jobs
and
do
well,
I
do
think
that's
an
issue
that
we
got
to
revisit
in
some
way
or
the
other,
because
I
believe
that
that
is
really
a
big
hold
back.
C
If
you
will
on
a
lot
of
opportunities
for
people
across
the
state
of
tennessee-
and
I
just
think
I'm
a
man
of
a
second
chance-
you
know-
I
guess
the
reason
I'm
a
man
of
second
chance,
because
good
lord
gives
me
one
every
morning
when
I
get
up,
I
don't
deserve
to
get
up,
but
it
gives
them
me
new
mercy.
They
operate
on
every
day,
and
I
mean
that's
just
my
feelings
that
this
is
something
that
I
think
we
really
and
I
don't
think
we
ought
to
violate
any
laws
or
do
anything
wrong.
C
A
E
Thank
you,
representative
shaw,
but
I
want
to
address
representative
holtzclaw
comment
about
and
maybe
help
mr
goins
here
is
that
when
they
have
their
re-entry
plan,
when
they,
when
they
get
their
red
date,
when
they
get
ready
to
get
released,
they
have
a
they
have
a
hearing.
They
get
a
docket,
they
get
to
go
over
all
this
stuff
and
they
should
go
over
this
stuff
a
year
ahead
of
time.
G
Thank
you,
the
representative,
I
I
appreciate
your
comments
and
and
your
passion
about
this
topic
and
representative
from
on
my
committee.
I
I
too
am
a
man
of
second
chances.
I
matter
of
fact
I'd
say
I'm
a
70
times,
seven
kind
of
guy,
maybe
not
just
second,
but
I
will
say
that
this
kind
of
I
think
we
we
kind
of
get
lost
in
the
weeds
here.
We
can
forgive
somebody
even
in
the
midst
of
their
incarceration.
G
I
I
recognize
that
people
have
child
support,
concerns
I've
volunteered
with
men
and
and
the
local
sheriff's
office,
who
are
delinquent
on
their
child
support
as
well,
and
had
this
discussion
quite
often
to
be
honest,
and
so
my
concern
is-
is
that
it's
a
rush
to
say
that
we
have
to
give
this
back
to
them
sooner,
just
because
they
already
paid
their
debt,
but
a
part
of
the
debt
of
the
crime
that
they
committed.
Is
this
restitution?
G
So
you
can
get
a
if,
if
you
were
for
some
reason,
missed
this
election,
no
one's
to
say
you
can't
get
those
rights
back
by
the
next
election,
which
is
why
the
legislature
codified
this
opportunity
to
do
that,
and
so
it
may
be
that
they
miss
that,
but
because
they
have
to
pay
the
restitution
as
far
as
court
costs
are
concerned.
But
I
can
appreciate
your
concern.
I
I
think
that
it
it
it.
G
E
I
was
like
thank
you
for
your
comments,
but
I
just
want
to
reiterate:
tennessee
is
only
one
of
11
states
that
takes
away
this
right
at
all
levels,
whether
it's
prison,
probation,
parole
or
post-sentence,
so
the
same
way
that
we
took
it
away
that
doesn't
make
it
right
at
some
point.
We,
it
is
never
too
late
to
do
the
right
thing
and
I
think
that
getting
people
a
chance
to
get
to
re-enter
society
and
be
a
productive
member
and
becoming
a
asset
by
making
them
feel.
E
Just
this
small
small
thing
of
voting
voting
that
a
lot
of
our
people,
people
who
look
like
me
died
for
this
right.
People
have
fought
for
this
right
and
I
think
that
it
was
taken
away
arbitrarily.
I
don't
know
why
it
was
in
the
past,
but
after
11
states,
only
one
of
11
states
do
this.
So
there's
a
lot
of
other
states
that
didn't
feel
need
to
take
away
someone's
citizenship
just
because
they
correct
committed
a
felony
crime.
G
Multiple
things,
one:
no
one's
taking
away
their
citizenship;
two,
no
one's
taken
away
their
right
to
vote
the
moment
they
committed
the
crime
they
rendered
their
right
to
vote
and
that
their
right
to
vote
was
rendered
upon
conviction.
That's
that's
the
facts.
No
one's
taking
it
away
their
decision,
the
repercussions
of
their
decisions
to
commit
a
crime
caused
them
to
be
in
this
predicament.
There
is
a
way
out
the
legislature
and
I
support
the
way
out.
That's
the
difference.
Thank
you.
A
E
E
A
A
That,
mostly,
of
course,
if
they
do
these
these
things
and
pay
restitution,
they
they
can
resume,
but
the
the
one
issue
you
can
argue,
court
costs
or
even
child
support,
but
victims
restoration
when
a
person
has
violated
someone's
rights
and
harmed
another
person
that
they
had
to
go
to
prison
for
and
then
to
say
when
they
get
out
of
prison
that
they
don't
have
to
pay
the
victim
back.
The
restitution,
that's
almost
like
we're
cutting
their
senate
shorter,
like
it's
almost
an
insult
to
the
victims
that
they
don't
the
victim's
restoration.
A
It
seems
like
that
should
be
a
priority
that
that's
real
startup.
That's
almost
like
a
part
of
their
sentencing.
It's
almost
like
letting
them
vote,
while
they're
in
prison
because
they
they
haven't
paid
the
victim
back.
So
I
I
you
know,
that's
the
the
one
part
of
your
bill
that
really
sticks
with
me
is
is
about
the
victim
restoration.
A
D
D
A
few
years
back,
we
passed
legislation
actually
members
that
allowed
us.
We
passed
a
statement
that
allowed
men
or
women
who
owed
child
support
rather
to
make
a
payment
arrangement
with
the
mother,
and
that
cleared
it
up,
but
we
did
not
allow
make
a
payment
arranged
with
the
state,
and
so
we
had
a
duality
right
there.
A
dual
system
for
people
and
again
tennessee,
is
the
only
state
that
has
this
requirement
and
it
allows
it
to
accrue.
D
D
H
B
A
E
Right
now,
currently,
we
we
take
away
their
voter
right
very
easily
with
one
one
suit.
It
takes
one
step
to
take
it
away,
but
in
order
to
get
it
back,
it
takes
all
these
steps
to
get
it
back.
That
inherently
says:
there's
something
wrong
with
the
system
and
it's
up
to
us
to
fix
it,
and
I'm
asking
you
to
help
me
fix
it.
I
think
that
there
are
some
I'm
not
saying
this
is
a
perfect
bill
and
I
agree
with
representative
love.
E
It
does
need
some
work
and
I
think
that
we
can
get
there
if
we
work
together
to
do
this,
and
so
I
would
ask
that
we
could
move
it
to
the
full
well,
we
can
park
it
and
have
some
time
to
work
over
it
over
the
summer.
That
would
be
my
my
ask
of
the
committee,
because
I
think
that
this
is
a
really
good
bill.
I
think
it
sparked
some
good
conversation
and
actually
representative
wright.
I
think
that
there
is
a
bill.
That's
out
there
that
is
going
to.
E
I
think
it's
going
to
suspend
the
payments
out
there,
while
they're
in
jail.
I
don't
know,
I
think
it
reduces
it,
but
I
think
there's
a
bill
out
there.
I
haven't
seen
it
yet,
but
I
think
there
is
one
out
there
that
will
address
that.
But
if
not
maybe
that's
something
that
we
can
address
in
this
bill.
So
I
would.
I
would
love
to
continue
to
work
on
this
and
and
get
it
there
park
it
I'd
say
it's
not
a
perfect
bill,
but
it's
a
start
and
then
we
all
need
to
start
somewhere.
G
Representative
dixie,
I
I
appreciate
the
fact
you're
very
passionate
about
this,
and
I'm
gonna
say
this
again,
just
because
you
keep
saying
it
again,
but
when
you,
when
you
commit
a
crime
and
you're
convicted
of
that
crime,
no
one's
taking
it
away.
You
forfeited
that
right
and-
and
it
concerns
me
a
little
bit
that
you
say
you
want
to
work
with
us
and
yet
we
can't
even
agree
on
that
simple
component
of
the
bill,
but
because
I
love
you
and
you
sit
beside
me
on
the
house
floor
for
a
while.
G
I
I
think
we,
as
a
body
have
been
directed
not
to
work
on
not
to
move
bills
to
be
worked
on,
but
if
this
is
something
that
you're
very
passionate
about,
if
if
we
instead
of
just
killing
it
now,
you
could
take,
you
could
take
control
of
it.
Take
your
bill
off
notice,
I'm
sure,
based
upon
the
communication
here,
there's
at
least
three
of
us
that
would
love
to
talk
to
you
about
it
and
see.
If
there's
something
we
could
come
up
based
upon
the
caption
that
you
got
and
see
if
there's
something
there.
G
B
I
guess
I
have
just
a
couple
of
things.
The
and
I'll
echo
what
chairman
williams
said:
it's
not
it
it's
not
taking
away.
You
know
I,
and
I
really
want
to
support
this
legislation.
I
really
do,
but
they
forfeited
their
voting
right
in,
in
my
opinion,
it's
about
restoring
their
voting
rights
with
these
conditions.
That's
that's
the
way
I'm
trying
to
process
it,
and
I
struggle
also
with
if
the
victim
restitution
was
not
kind
of
one
of
the
conditions
that
we
wanted
to
do
away
with.
B
If
you
had
not
committed
a
felony,
you
would
not
have
victim
restitution
correct,
I
mean
so
that,
in
my
mind,
is
tied
directly
to
committing
the
felony.
So
again
I'll
say
I'm
with
I'm
with
chairman
rudd.
I
mean
I
really.
I
really
do
want
to
support
it,
but
it's
I
struggle
with
the
victim
restitution
part
being
taken
out.
So
that's
just
that's
my
feedback.
Thank
you.
Roxanna.
A
E
E
A
To
understand,
I
think,
in
a
lot
of
cases,
I'm
struggling
understanding
your
question.
I
think
a
lot
of
cases
of
victim
restoration.
Let's
just
say
that
I
don't
know.
Let's
say
somebody
stole,
I
don't
know.
Let's
say
they
stole
money,
embezzled
money
or
they
stole
a
car
and
wrecked
it,
and
the
family
can't
afford
to
replace
it
and
they're
actually
have
a
monetary
loss
and
when
they
get
out
of
prison,
they're
there
to
get
a
job
and
try
to
repay
that
money,
and
then
their
rights
would
be
restored.
E
A
E
G
The
the
house
rules
changed
this
year
as
it
relates
to
bills
and
my
fear
I
just
want
to
confirm,
with
based
upon
the
house
rules
whether
he
should
do
that
or
he
should
take
it
off
notice
in
this
posture
here
and
then
he
can
put
it
on
notice
next
year,
because
I
think
that
some,
the
way
the
calendar
works.
I
think
it
could
be
that
you'd
lose
this
bill
and
you'd
have
to
use
one
of
your
15
next
year
to
refile
exactly
the
same
bill,
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
you're
covered.
A
A
For
the
purposes
of
adding
that
amendment,
which
will
rewrite
the
bill,
I'd
like
to
go
ahead
and
put
that
on
now,
mr
chairman,
is
that
we
have
four
four
seven
seven.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
sir,
here
a
motion
and
a
second
on
the
amendment,
do
you
have
any
objections
of
applying
the
amendment
seeing
none
all
those
in
favor
say
aye.
A
G
G
A
B
A
We
need
item
number
four
hb
1157,
which
was
taken
off
notice.
We
need
to
have
a
motion
to
reconsider
our
actions.
Have
a
motion.
Second,
second,
what
we're
doing
here
is
we.
We
took
that
off
notice.
What
that
is
the
third
calendar.
We
have
to
do
the
same
thing
there.
According
to
the
house
rules.
We
need
to
send
that
to
the
special
calendar
of
the
final
calendar
next
week,
so
move
second
with.
Second,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
opposed,
nay,
eyes
have
it,
and
I
believe
that
conducts
concludes
our
business
today.