►
Description
House Floor Session- 3rd. Organizational Day- January 12, 2023
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Mr
sergeant
of
arms
invite
the
members
into
the
chamber
and
close
the
doors.
I
hereby
declare
the
house
representatives
of
the
113th
general
assembly
of
the
state
of
Tennessee
now
in
session.
Will
the
members
please
stand
with
the
visitors
in
the
gallery.
Please
stand
and
remain
standing
through
the
Pledge
of
Allegiance
representative
himmer
will
introduce
the
chaplain
of
the
day
representative.
B
B
In
addition
to
his
ministry
and
Community
work,
you
may
be
familiar
with
Dr
Stauffer's,
great
opinion,
columns
on
religion,
life
and
civil
discourse
in
The
Tennessean,
and
urge
you
to
read
them
a
tease,
Dr
Soffer
earlier
and
told
him
no
pressure,
but
his
prayer
needs
to
be
profound
enough
to
inspire
us
all
the
house
membership
to
get
along
all
session
and
pass
every
bill
99-0.
So
good
luck
to
that
represent
Freeman.
Would
you
please
do
the
honor
and
introduce
Dr
stock.
C
B
C
Sorry,
Dr
Stauffer
is
an
acclaimed
author
for
his
work
at
the
intersection
of
faith
and
politics
in
an
ever-polarized
world.
His
book
preaching
politics
proclaiming
Jesus
in
an
age
of
money,
power
and
partisanship
should
be
on
everybody's
reading
list
clay
and
his
wife
Megan
are
raising
three
amazing
kids,
Montgomery,
Clayton
and
Wade
I
hope
everyone
will
join
me
in
welcoming
Our
Guest
chaplain.
Today,
Dr
Clay,
Stafford.
D
Thank
you.
It's
an
honor
to
be
here.
Thank
you,
representative,
Freeman,
and
him.
Thank
you
for
having
me
I.
Did
this
many
years
ago,
when
I
first
came
to
Nashville,
it's
good
to
be
back.
I
am
a
proud
graduate
of
TCU,
flew
out
to
Los
Angeles
Sunday
night
and
flew
home
a
little
bit
defeated,
but
there's
a
lesson
there
on
resilience,
I'm
glad
we
made
it
to
the
national
championship
and
it
was
still
a
fun
experience.
D
D
Okay,
good.
There
is
I
want
to
share
a
quote
with
you.
There's
an
author
whose
research
I
followed
a
guy
by
the
name
of
Arthur
Brooks,
and
he
was
head
of
the
AEI
American
Enterprise,
Institute
and
I
teaches
at
the
Harvard
Kennedy
School,
but
he
wrote
a
book
a
number
of
years
ago
called
love
your
enemies
and
in
the
book
he
he
cited.
D
The
research
of
acclaimed,
marriage,
expert,
John
gottman,
and
he
said
one
of
the
problems
in
our
culture
is
that
we
live
in
a
culture
of
contempt
and
he
says
believing
your
foes
motivated
by
hate
leads
to
something
far
worse
contempt.
While
anger
seeks
to
bring
someone
back
into
the
fold,
contempt
seeks
to
Exile
it
attempts
to
mock,
shame
and
permanently
exclude
from
relationship
by
belittling,
humiliating
and
ignoring.
D
Contempt
is
Impractical
and
bad
for
a
country
depending
on
people
working
together
in
politics,
communities
and
the
economy
unless
we
hope
to
become
a
one-party
State.
We
cannot
afford
contempt
for
our
fellow
Americans,
who
simply
disagree
with
us
and
so
I
lift
this
book
up
to
you.
Arthur
Brooks
love
your
enemies.
A
lot
of
his
work
is
excellent.
Would
you
join
me
for
word
of
Prayer
gracious
and
loving
God
as
we
Embark
upon
this
new
year
and
this
new
general
assembly?
We
pray
for
your
wisdom
and
guidance.
D
Hope
where
there's
Darkness
light,
where
there's
sadness,
Joy
and
Grant,
that
we
may
not
so
much
seek
to
be
consoled
as
to
console
to
be
understood
as
to
understand
the
love
to
be
loved
as
to
love,
because
we
know
that
it's
in
giving
that
we
receive
it's
imparting
that
we
are
pardoned.
It
is
in
dying
that
we
are
born
to
eternal
life,
I'm
grateful
for
this
group
for
their
leadership
for
their
passion.
Their
courage
ask
your
blessing
and
guidance
upon
the
great
state
of
Tennessee.
G
Thank
you,
Mr
Speaker,
ladies
and
Gentlemen.
Please
help
me
wish
my
son
Michael
Lynn
Jr
a
very
happy
birthday
today.
Michael
is
a
wonderful
father
to
Alyssa
and
I'm
sorry
Father
to
Mary
to
Alyssa
and
he's
a
father
to
Mikey
Winnie
and
will,
and
this
boy
has
never
caused
me
a
moment's
trouble
in
my
entire
life.
He
has
the
most
wonderful
son.
So
thank
you.
H
Many
of
you
may
have
known
Bobby
or
served
with
him,
but
he
served
for
28
years.
As
a
member
of
this
body
and
a
member
of
the
general
assembly
from
the
90th
to
the
103rd
General
Assembly,
a
friend,
a
moral
compass,
a
father,
a
husband,
he
loved
his
community
there's
not
an
individual
in
Hamilton
County
on
either
side
of
the
aisle
who
didn't
seek
his
advice,
and
so
this
morning,
with
reverence
I
asked,
we
have
a
moment
of
silence
for
Bobby
wood,
his
family.
Thank
you.
B
A
J
J
He
was
a
long
time
volunteer
and
a
hard
worker
for
the
Wilson
County
Fair,
which
is
now
the
state
fair
and
a
lot
of
his
work
and
Leadership
resulted
in
that,
and
he
was
a
long
time.
Member
of
Maple
Hill
Church
of
Christ,
and
he
certainly
meant
a
lot
to
me-
had
a
great
impact
on
my
family
and
my
life
and
I
just
won
a
memorial
lesson.
If
you
join
me
for
a
moment
of
silence,
thank
you.
K
Members
I
wanted
to
mention
to
you
and
thank
you
Mr
Speaker,
on
Monday
in
my
district
District
81
in
Covington
Tennessee.
We
laid
to
rest
an
unclaimed,
Marine
and
I
just
wanted
to
honor
him
by
mentioning
his
name
here
and
let
you
know
he
was
his
name
is
Raymond
Kenneth
Parker.
He
was
born
January
7
1951..
K
He
received
the
National
Defense
service
medal,
the
Vietnam
service
medal
with
one
star
Good,
Conduct
Medal,
and
so
it
was
a
you
know
as
we
as
tennesseans
are
the
folks
turned
out
and
it
does
bring
tears
to
your
eyes,
and
so,
if
you'll,
just
you
know,
he's
received
his
reward
now,
but
just
remember
if
any
of
his
family
has
ever
found
that
they
will
have
peace
knowing
how
he
was
honored
in
his
death.
So
just
a
moment
of
silence,
please.
L
Thank
you,
Mr
Speaker,
Mr,
Speaker,
Laverne,
mayor
Jason,
Cole
vice
mayor
Steve.
No
would
like
to
invite
you
Monday
to
Martin
Luther
King
Jr
ceremony,
The
Honorable,
John
DeBerry
will
be
the
speaker,
10
o'clock,
Laverne
Tennessee
love
to
have
you
all
over
there
for
some
great
news
and
great
words
of
wisdom
by
John
DeBerry.
Thank
you
mayor.
N
N
J
J
N
Literally
Amber,
thank
you,
Mr
Speaker,
Mr
chairman.
Yes,
my
understanding
it
does
so
when
a
member
steps
to
the
well
just
as
we
did
this
morning,
then
that
five
minutes
would
begin.
You
know
we
can
decide
whether
or
not
to
ask
the
clerk
to
put
it
on
the
board
or
not
or
anything
like
that.
But
your
five
minutes
will
begin
at
that
juncture,
and
it
would
include
questions
such
as
these
as
part
of
that
five
minutes,
but
then
it
would
restart
with
each
new
series
of
questions,
and
so
the
moment
the
presentation
starts.
N
Technically
speaking,
you
know
a
member
could
take
the
entire
five
minutes
before
it
was
15..
I.
Think
we've
only
seen
that
happen,
probably
once
or
twice
where
someone
stood
in
this
well
and
spent
15
minutes
describing
a
bill
I
think
with
any
every
minute.
You
go
past
about
three.
You
probably
start
losing
votes,
so
it's
it's
probably
better
to
keep
it
short
anyways
some
of
y'all
laughed
at
that.
Thank
you,
but
it
starts
with
the
moment.
You
start
speaking,
chairman
Clemens.
J
Thank
you,
Mr,
Speaker
and
additionally,
so
now
the
next
rule
in
here
I
believe
it's
25
proposed
rule.
The
motion
to
extend
debate
is
now
non-debatable.
As
a
motion.
Can
we
get
an
explanation
of
the
intent
on
that
as
to
why
we
will
not
allow
that
motion
to
be
debated,
given
that
our
one
of
the
inherent
functions
of
this
body
is
to
debate
and
thoroughly
discuss
legislation.
N
We
remember
so.
The
motion
to
extend
debate
is
and
there's
nothing
really
to
debate
there.
I
mean
either
the
will
of
the
body
is
to
extend
debate
or
not.
So
there's
really
not
a
lot
of
discussion
on
that.
It's
just
for
each
member
to
consider.
Do
you
wish
to
hear
more
or
do
you
wish
to
proceed
and
vote,
and
so
just
like
someone
calling
previous
question
it,
it's
just.
Do
you
want
to
hear
more?
Do
you
want
to
go
ahead
and
vote.
J
Thank
you
Mr
leader,
so
now
with
regard
to
the
The
Voice
vote
provision
in
this
bill
or
Viva
voce
as
referenced
herein
is
there
I
I
understand
that
this
is
an
attempt
to
clarify
or
standardize
The
Voice
vote
procedure
which
I
think
in
the
past
is
a
not
been
addressed
by
the
rules
themselves
and
B
has
kind
of
been
on
a
committee
by
committee
basis,
so
I
understand
this
may
be
an
attempt
to
standardize
that
procedure,
but
I
would
like
some
clarification.
When
must
a
bill
sponsor
request,
a
Voice
vote.
N
You
Mr
Speaker,
and
so
that
is
for
the
for
the
bill
sponsor
and-
and
this
is
literally
and
well
described,
this
puts
in
our
rules.
The
process
that
we've
been
using
for
the
entire
time
I've
been
here
in
the
last
decade,
is
to
do
voice,
votes
and
so
the
you
know,
the
chairman
asked
all
in
favor,
I'll
opposed,
nay,
and
then
you
know,
makes
the
decision.
N
If
you
as
a
sponsor
of
the
bill
and
not
a
member
of
that
committee,
wish
to
have
a
roll
call
vote,
then
you
simply
ask
for
that,
and
the
words
are
before
any
vote
is
taken.
So
it
says
a
roll
call.
Vote
shall
be
taken
at
the
request
of
the
sponsor
of
the
Bill
of
resolution
under
consideration
prior
to
any
Vote
or
at
the
request
of
any
three
members
of
the
committee.
N
So
almost
exactly
the
way
that
I've
and
I
think
both
of
us
have
seen
it
done
for
years,
but
that
puts
it
in
the
rules.
If
I
have
just
a
moment,
and
that
part
is
not
new,
I
mean
it's
just
really
just
kind
of
changes.
The
fact
it
takes
and
a
and
shall
out
and
so
that
that
section
is
not
new,
it's
just
changing
the
channel
to
May
and
the
and
a
beginning,
a
new
sentence.
There
chairman.
J
Thank
you,
Mr
Speaker
and
I
and
I.
Miss
book
I
was
asked
referring
to
a
Voice
vote,
but
I
obviously
meant
roll
call
vote
and
when
to
request
that
roll
call
vote.
So
my
question
then,
is
looking
at
the
language
of
this
bill
to
further
questions.
It
says
prior
to
any
vote.
So
if
I'm,
a
sponsor
of
a
bill
and
I
would
like
a
roll
call,
vote
must
I
request
that,
prior
to
the
vote
on
an
amendment
on
my
bill
or
do
I
need
to
just
simply
request
it
prior
to
final
vote
on
my
bill.
J
A
N
Prior
to
any
amendment
being
voted
on,
it
is
prior,
it
is
before
any
vote,
and
so
my
recommendation-
and
this
is
not
in
the
rules,
but
the
best
practice
that
I
have
seen
from
sponsors
is
that
when
you
step
into
the
well
and
begin
your
presentation,
I
would
ask
for
a
roll
call
vote
at
that
point.
That
is
the
the
best
way
to
make
sure
that
you
have
asked
for
a
roll
call
vote
and
then
one
will
be
taken.
A
J
You
Mr,
Speaker
and
and
then
again
with
respect
to
an
amendment
if
I
want
a
roll
call
vote
on
an
amendment
that
may
be
unfriendly
to
my
legislation
or
friendly.
Do
I
have
the
opportunity
to
then
request
a
roll
call
vote
on
that
Amendment.
If
I
have
an
address
for
a
roll
call
vote
at
the
beginning
of
the
discussion.
N
The
the
rules
are
are
clear,
great
question
and
I
know
we're
getting
down
the
granular,
but
we
should
before
we
vote
on
this.
It
says
before
any
vote
is
taken.
So
if
another
amendment
has
been
voted
on
already
and
then
there
is
a
second
or
third
or
a
fourth
amendment,
and
you
wish
to
have
a
roll
call
vote
on
those.
If
a
vote
has
already
been
taken
on
that
piece
of
legislation,
then
you
would
not
have
an
opportunity
to
ask
for
a
roll
call
vote
on
a
future
Amendment.
J
N
J
Thank
you,
Mr
Speaker,
so
two
clarifying
questions.
So,
if
I
request
a
roll
call
vote
at
the
outside
of
a
discussion
on
a
bill,
will
that
also
cover
the
amendments
to
that
bill
or
must
I
specify
I
would
like
a
roll
call
vote
on
final
vote
on
this
legislation,
as
well
as
any
amendments
brought
during
the
discussion
of
this,
which
I
might
not
be
prepared
for
or
expecting.
N
Lambert,
thank
you
chairman
and
again
great
question
and
check
with
the
parliamentarian,
and
it
would
be
his
rule
in
that
circumstance
that
if
you
wish
to
have
a
roll
call
vote
on
both
the
legislation,
the
final
vote
and
on
each
one
of
the
Amendments
then
specify
that
at
the
beginning,
if
you
do
not
specify
it,
then
one
it
leaves
it
up
to
question
and
two.
There
is
a
very
good
chance
that
the
Amendments
would
not
be
covered
under
your
request
and
so
at
the
very
beginning
of
your
presentation,
before
any
votes
are
taken.
J
F
N
Famous
speaker
so
I
think
you've
gotten
yourself,
I
mean
you
would
get
yourself
into
a
relatively
gray
area,
where
the
chairman
might
not
recall
that
you
asked
for
a
roll
call
vote.
My
recommendation
would
be
that
you
renew
that
request.
The
rules
do
not
say
that
though,
and
so,
if
you
ask,
for
a
roll
call
vote
at
the
very
beginning
of
your
presentation
of
a
bill
before
any
votes
are
taken,
then
a
roll
call
vote
shall
be
taken.
N
J
N
Lou
Lambert
famous
speaker:
if
there
is
no
objection
and
no
vote
has
been
taken,
then
it
would
not
potentially
affect
the
fact
that
you
could
still
request
a
roll
call
vote.
If
there
is
objection
and
a
vote
is
taken,
then
a
vote
has
therefore
been
taken
on
that
bill
and
it
would
affect
it,
and
so
it
all
would
depend
on
that
circumstance
as
to
whether
or
not
it
is
rolled
without
a
vote
or
with
a
vote.
Because
again
the
rule
says
a
roll
call.
N
N
J
J
N
So
this
is
a
new,
and
this
is
section
85
in
your
rule
packet
for
those
that
are
following
Along
on
this
either
here
online.
The
words
are
no
caucus
other
than
those
representing
parties
that
appeared
on
the
ballot
during
the
last
general
election
may
be
formed
without
the
unanimous
approval
of
the
speaker,
the
majority
leader
and
the
minority
leader,
similar
to
what
we
do
with
the
late
file
bills
committee.
N
Up
to
this
point,
we've
actually
never
had
recognized
caucuses,
and
so
technically
no
caucus
exists
in
the
legislature.
Caucus
is
an
undefined
term,
I
mean
obviously
anyone
can
get
together.
The
Searsucker
caucus
is
a
great
example
of
a
caucus
that
really
isn't
a
caucus.
It's
just
a
group
I
see
some
objection
over
here.
It
is
a
group
of
individuals
that
agree
to
address
in
a
similar
Fashion
on
a
particular
day
and
it's
a
celebratory
type
function.
N
It
is
a
very
important
caucus,
obviously
to
my
friend
from
Shelby
County,
but
who
chairs
that,
but
it's
not
a
caucus
that
conducts
business
and
has
policy
positions
and
everything
else.
The
Republican
and
Democratic
caucuses
are
recognized
in
this
and
would
be
officially
recognized
and
then,
after
that,
any
caucus
that
wishes
to
form
and
gain
official
recognition,
which
I
will
note,
carries
no
particular
special
privileges
or
anything.
At
this
juncture,
I
mean
it
just
would
have
official
recognition
if
you
wish
to
have
a
caucus.
N
J
Thank
you,
Mr,
Speaker,
and
so
to
that
end,
that
process
that
is
laid
out
in
in
these
proposed
rules
is
that
going
so
if
we
get
per
if
a
caucus
seeks
permission
from
those
three
individuals
does
that
caulk
us
then
receive
recognition
for
a
one
year
for
the
two
years,
General
Assembly
or
is
it
in
perpetuity?
What
is
what
is?
What
is
the
life
of
that
caucus.
A
N
Lambert
thanks
Mr,
Speaker
and
so
I,
don't
know
that
we
could
bind
a
future
General
Assembly,
so
in
each
two-year,
General
Assembly,
you
know,
I
think
it
could
be
guiding
as
to
what
caucuses
were
determined
to
be
permanent
caucuses.
I
mean
I,
think
those
three
individuals
whoever
were
to
reside
in
those
seeds.
We
know
who
they
are
right
now,
but
obviously
every
other
year
we
pick
a
new
majority
leader,
a
minority
leader
and
speaker,
and
so
since
that
changes
and
our
rules
change
every
other
year
with
each
new
general
assembly.
N
You
know
this
decision
could
be
made.
I
will
tell
you
that
I
think
it
would
be
best
practice
if
the
three
of
us
fill
these
roles
right
now
and
if
you
all
would
like
us
to
do
this
to
at
least
indicate
which
caucuses
we
desire
to
have
continue
throughout
the
next
few
General
assemblies,
but
I.
Don't
think
that
we
could
bind
a
future
General
Assembly
beyond
the
two-year
term
that
the
people
of
the
state
have
elected
us
to
chairman
Clements.
J
Thank
you
Mr
Speaker,
and
that
was
kind
of
the
source
of
my
question
because
you
know
we
hold
these
offices
for
a
two-year
period
and
a
two-year
period
only
at
the
best
of
our
caucus
members
and
this
body,
so
I
I
just
would
hate
to
see
a
caucus
get
recognition.
And
then
you
know
you
could
have
an
arbitrary
decision
made
by
any
individual,
since
we
require
unanimous
consent
among
those
three
individuals.
A
N
Speaker
I
mean
there
is
no
provision
either
in
the
current
rules,
the
proposed
rules
or
in
Masons
that
I
know
of
that
would
provide
for
that
I
think
that
is
probably
a
habit
or
procedure
that
some
of
our
committees
have
utilized
that
you
may
or
may
not
follow.
As
you
see
as
you
see
fit.
However,
if
it
is
a
habit
or
procedure
or
prefer
a
preference
of
a
particular
committee
chairman
and
committee,
you
may
draw
the
ire
of
that
committee
by
not
following
whatever
procedure
that
they
have
asked
you
to
do
so.
N
J
You
Mr
Speaker.
My
concern
here
obviously
goes
to
we're
limiting
debate,
we're
making
motions
on
a
motions
to
limit
debate.
Non-Debatable
and
now
you
know
we
get
into
committee
and
questions
may
arise
during
committee
and
so
I
I
have
sincere
concerns
about
any
practice
or
any
rule
facilitating
or
allowing
a
committee
chairman
to
arbitrarily
decide
they're
not
going
to
allow
committee
questions
on
the
spot
because
new
information
may
arise
at
any
time.
J
J
So
what
is
what
is
the
intent
behind
this
I
I
I'm,
sincerely
concerned
and,
as
our
members
of
my
caucus
about
this
attempt
to
limit
debate
and
control,
discussion
on
issues
and
arbitrarily
allowing
or
facilitating
a
committee
chairman
to
try
to
narrow
debate
to
previously
submitted
questions
in
advance
is
doesn't
seem
to
further
the
objective
of
this
deliberative
body?
Can
you
speak
to
that
intent
or,
while
we're
not
prohibiting
that
practice.
A
N
Some
of
us
in
this
chamber
may
be
a
bit
more
gregarious
than
others
I'm,
not
accusing
anybody
of
anything,
but
I
may
resemble
that
remark
some
days.
It's
not
fair
for
some
of
us
that
may
enjoy
a
longer
conversation
to
completely
and
totally
consume
the
debate
on
this
floor
because
we
all
get
weary.
We
all
want
to
have
succinct
and
efficient
debate.
N
N
J
Thank
you,
Mr
Speaker
and
I'll
wrap
this
up
pretty
soon.
So
my
question
was
regarding
the
committee
to
which
you
referred
there.
At
the
end,
all
too
often
I've
heard
on
this
floor,
you
had
the
opportunity
to
discuss
that
committee.
You
had
an
opportunity
to
amend
that
billing
committee
well
now
I'm
concerned
that
we're
limiting
the
debate
in
the
committees
as
well
or
and
not
expressly
by
these
rules,
but
not
expressly
prohibiting
the
limit
of
debate
in
in
these
rules.
So
that's
the
source
of
my
concern.
We
are
a
deliberative
body.
J
You
know
analysis
discussion
of
these
issues
throughout
the
committee
process
and
so
I
have
sincere
concerns
that
we
are
allowing
the
ability,
chairman,
the
unilateral,
Authority
and
ability
to
limit
debate
in
their
own
committee,
where
these
issues
should
be
discussed
throughout
the
process.
So
that's
the
source
of
my
question,
that's
the
intent
and
and
I
guess
it's
a
question
about.
Why
aren't
those
practices
prohibited.
N
Literally
Amber,
thank
you,
Mr,
Speaker
and
again
debate
can
be
extended,
I
mean
it
could
be
limited.
I
mean
the
the
vote
of
this
body
decides
that
I
do
want
to
be
very
clear.
The
five
minutes
is
upon
the
floor
of
the
house,
so
a
committee
can
decide
to
do
more
or
less
depending
upon
what
that
committee
would
like
to
do
in
their
committee
rules.
If
they're.
N
J
All
individuals
are
heard.
I
would
love
to
have
assurances
in
these
rules
that
everyone
who
wants
to
speak
on
legislation,
whether
it's
about
five
minutes
or
otherwise,
has
that
opportunity.
I,
don't
see
that
Assurance
in
here
and
we've
had
that
discussion
in
previous
years.
Of
course,
that's
at
the
discretion
of
the
speaker
who,
who
does
the
best
of
his
ability
on
this
respect,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
communicating
that
we
have
the
opportunity
to
thoughtfully
debate
and
discuss
issues,
and
so
that
and
I.
J
N
N
I've
noticed
folks
have
begun,
moving
around
the
floor,
discussing
things
with
each
other,
that's
fine,
but
we've
been
going
for
21
minutes
and
I
I.
Think
we've
lost
some
of
our
colleagues
here
in
this.
Whereas
had
this
been
a
discussion
and-
and
this
is
fine-
this
is
a
great
way
to
do
it.
But
had
this
been
a
discussion
in
which
there
are
multiple
individuals
asking
these
questions
and
answering
the
chairman
Farmers
up
here
with
me
to
join
in
that
as
well.
It
is
a
more
robust
debate
and
this
is
good.
N
I
mean
we've
had
this
back
and
forth
and
I
think
that's
helpful,
but
the
goal
is
to
get
more
of
us
involved
in
each
debate,
and
thus
you
get
more
diversity
of
opinion,
but
for
21
22
minutes
now
we've
been
going
and
and
that's
fine,
but
it
is
better
I
think
when
we
have
lots
of
different
folks
that
are
able
to
get
in
on
the
conversation
and
debate
because
they
may
bring
something
to
the
table
that
you
and
I
together
may
not
be
able
to
that.
Each
of
them
may
have
thought
of
so.
J
Thank
you,
Mr,
Speaker
and,
and
yes
and
I
hope
we
will
open
this
up
to
further,
but
I
told
you
we
had
to
you
know
before
we
pass
this
five-minute
roll.
We
had
to
take
advantage
of
it
right.
So
other
members
are
encouraged
to
ask
questions
about
this,
because
discussion
is
vital.
Sunlight
on
on
how
this
body
operates
is
vital
and
I
would
encourage
every
member
of
both
parties
to
ask
questions
about
this,
as
you
should
all
have
concerns
Mr
Speaker.
My
question
I
have
a
parliamentary
question
for
the
clerk.
If,
if
able.
M
Mr
Clerk
Mr
Speaker.
This
is
a
committee
report
and
committee
reports
may
not
be
amended.
However,
there
are
Provisions
in
this
in
these
proposed
rules
and
our
past
rules
that
there
is
a
process
to
amend
the
rules
at
a
later
time
giving
notice
and
it
requires
66
votes
to
amend
these
rules.
But
as
far
as
this
report
today,
it's
an
up
or
down
vote
chairman.
J
A
P
P
Many
of
the
things
we
do
on
this
floor,
they're
intricate,
they're,
complicated
they're,
not
that
simple
and
there's
some
members
that
have
better
knowledge
and
greater
knowledge
about
certain
subjects
that
sometimes
need
to
be
explained
even
to
the
members
here,
if
you're,
not
in
committee
with
a
certain
Bill.
Sometimes
it
takes
a
there's
a
curve
in
order
for
us
to
catch
up,
and
none
of
us
want
to
vote
erroneously
on
something
that
we
thought
we
understood
and
we
go
back.
We
did
understand
it
been
here.
P
A
long
time
same
things
modified
changed,
some
good,
some
questionable
and
some
not
for
the
best.
The
key
of
it
is
that
we
knew
and
understand
that
this
job
can
be
very
tedious.
Sometimes
it
takes
a
long
time.
Sometimes
sometimes
I
don't
like
it,
we
get
hungry,
we
take
medicine.
We
have
to
do
things
back
at
home,
we're
working
we're
doing
all
kinds
of
things
multiply,
but
at
all
times
we
should
have
adequate
time
to
understand
what
we're
doing
to
the
people's
business.
P
There
are
some
guys
and,
ladies
on
this
floor,
they
are
really
really
sharp
on
certain
things
and
that's
if
I'm,
not
in
committee,
how
I
began
to
learn
on
some
of
the
stuff
to
bring
me
up
to
speed
five
minutes.
I,
don't
know
it's
enough
or
not.
I,
don't
know
if
it's
enough
or
not
I
really
don't
know,
but
I
know
it
can
scrouch
it.
You
know
what
I'm
looking
for
is
to
get
a
good
understanding
and
all
that
getting
a
good
understanding.
P
So,
when
I
cast
my
vote,
I
know
what
it
is
that
I'm
doing
and
I
want
to
know
what
it
is.
That
and
I
learned
a
lot.
We
all
do
what
it
is
that
my
colleagues
is
trying
to
do
so.
I
can
actually
talk
about
it
when
I
go
back
in
an
intelligent
way,
so
five
minutes
may
not
be
enough.
15
minutes
may
be
too
long,
maybe
somewhere
in
the
middle,
but
understanding
the
transparency
is
something
that
the
people
want,
something
that
the
people
deserve,
something
they
need
and
we
need
it
as
well.
A
Q
R
Thank
you
thank
you,
Mr
Speaker,
and
and
thank
you
to
everyone
that
worked
on
the
rules.
I
think
we
got
a
pretty
decent
a
pretty
decent
guideline,
but
I
too
I
think
that
I
think
that
we
should
probably
increase
that
time.
Just
a
little
bit,
I'm
not
saying
going
to
15
minutes,
I'm,
not
even
saying
going
in
10
minutes,
I
would
say
you
know,
seven
minutes
or
you
know,
seven
to
ten
minutes
should
be
fine,
so
you
know
and
Mr
Mr
leader.
R
N
Leader
Lambert
just
trying
to
do
the
quick
math.
If
everybody
in
the
chamber
had
five
minutes
I
very
quickly,
it
would
be
literally
hours.
There
are
99
of
us,
my
preference
would
be
and
I
think
what
we
would
prefer
is.
Let's
take
a
vote
on
this
package.
We'll
know
where
everyone
stands
on
that
if,
for
some
reason
it
were
to
be
unsuccessful,
I
hope
it
would
not.
Then
we
could
always
regroup
and
try
for
something
else.
But
I'd
like
to
see
where
everybody
is
on
this
particular
proposal.
N
N
So
long
as
there
is
a
desire
to
have
debate
on
this
floor,
I
think
the
speaker
over
the
last
few
years
has
proven
I
hope
to
all
of
you
that
he
wants
to
have
robust
debate
on
this
floor
and
as
long
as
there
are
folks
ready
to
ask
questions
and
new
questions,
then
he
has
proven
over
and
over
again
that
he
will
allow
us
to
do
so.
So
the
five
minutes
is
literally
just
kind
of
per
engagement.
Not
overall,
and
so
hours
of
debate
is
what
could
easily
happen.
R
N
I
think
the
math
is,
if
we
all
took
five
minutes:
okay,
it's
8.25
hours
now
I've
been
here
10
years,
I,
don't
know
of
a
bill
that
would
take
more
than
8.25
hours
for
us
to
figure
out
what
we
should
do
with
that
bill
and
how
we
should
vote
now.
Maybe
one
will
come
along
and
if
it
does,
the
good
news
is.
We
can
vote
to
extend
debate
and
take
as
much
time
as
we
want
to
that
is
included
within
these
rules,
but
surely
to
goodness
8.25
hours
on
each
bill.
R
R
The
question
is
going
to
be
called
for,
so
that
five
minutes
is
not
going
to
even
matter
it's
going
to
be
a
moot
point,
and
so
you
know,
but
but
in
that
in
that
20
to
30
minutes
of
of
debate
in
the
aggregate
you
know
having
given
members
all
the
members,
it's
not
just
for
Democrats,
but
Republicans.
Also,
you
know
all
of
the
members
an
opportunity
just
a
little
bit
more
time.
It's
just
I
was
just
asking
for
a
consideration
on
and
the
last
point
is
you
know.
R
Most
of
us
are
not
going
to
speak
on
every
Bill
anyway,
so
we'll
never
meet
that
eight
eight
hours
that
you
know
in
the
Aggregate,
and
so
you
know
you
know
I
just
want
you
to
give
it
some
consideration.
You
know
I,
don't
know
if
you
know.
Obviously
it's
going
to
pass,
let's
be
real
about
it.
Now
it's
going
to
pass
right
so,
but
but
before
a
vote
is
taken,
you
have
the
power
to
pull
it
back
and
just
change
that
five
to
a
seven.
So
that's
all
I
was
asking.
Thank
you,
sir.
S
S
N
Thank
you,
Mr
Speaker,
it's
under
rule
number
18,
which
is
in
the
current
rules,
but
since
we're
re-adopting
rules.
Obviously
all
these
are
hypothetically
new,
but
this
has
not
been
changed
in
years
and
I
just
want
to
read
it
real,
quick.
No
members
should
be
recognized
by
the
speaker
unless
the
member
addresses
the
chair
from
such
member's
desk.
As
you
have,
sir.
In
all
cases,
the
member
who
shall
First
Rise
shall
be
entitled
to
speak
first,
but
when
two
or
more
members
shall
rise.
S
F
A
N
Lambert,
thank
you
Mr
Speaker,
so
the
rules
are
as
stated,
and
it
it
literally
says
when
two
or
more
members
shall
rise.
At
the
same
time,
the
speaker
shall
name
the
member
who
shall
speak
first.
I
would
not
want
to
either
add
or
subtract
from
the
language
that
we
are
voting
on.
That
is,
that
is
literally
what
the
language
says.
H
A
A
So
would
you
like
for
me
to
hold
that
list
until
those
six
raise
their
hand
to
see
if
they
want
to
be
on
there?
Or
would
you
like
for
me
to
make
sure
that
all
six
get
caught
on
in
the
order?
So
they
can
be
hurt
because
I
cannot
take
the
list
from
the
Democrat
leadership
and
tell
you
what
happens
on
the
floor
if
somebody
raises
their
hand
and
they
stand
up
and
you
think
they're
going
to
talk
and
they
call
the
question,
then
that's
a
non-debatable
motion
and
we
put
it
on
the
board.
A
So
I
think
what
you
would
like
if
you
want
to
continue
the
same
way,
is
to
have
some
leeway
in
certain
situations,
especially
since
the
minority
caucus
would
like
to
be
heard
of
submitting
names
on
occasion
that
are
that
will
be
called
on,
even
if
they
don't
raise
their
hand.
But
if
you
would
like
force
just
to
take
the
hands
that
are
raised
and
they
ordered
they're
raised
and
you
roll
the
dice
on
someone
calling
the
question
before
you,
then
you
cannot
get
upset
if
that
person
calls
the
question
representative,
Hardaway,
wonderful,.
A
A
We
have
seen
that
time
and
time
again
the
minority
caucus
gives
me
a
list,
I
call
on
them
without
asking
them
to
rise
and
be
recognized
that
they
would
like
to
speak
so
either
we
can,
if
you
want
to
have
discretion.
That
is
fine.
If
you
want
to
stick
to
the
rules
and
not
have
that
discretion,
that
is
fine,
but
we
cannot
complain
if
you
rise
late
and
somebody
calls
the
question
before
you
represent
far
away.
Thank.
S
A
S
Right
on
the
five
minutes,
you
you
had
some
back
and
forth,
but
I'm
I'm,
not
sure.
If
you
made
it
clear
whether
someone
one
person
could
filibuster
all
of
A's
questions,
it
could
go
either
way
if
I'm,
the
sponsor
and
I'm
filibuster.
Four
minutes
to
one
question:
is
that
going
to
eat
up
that
particular
member's
time
or
is
there?
Is
the
respondents
time
separate
from
the
sponsor's
time.
A
N
S
N
Amber,
thank
you
Mr
Speaker,
so
each
chairman,
you
know
they
organized
their
calendar.
However,
they
see
fit.
That's
that's
why
they're
our
chairman,
and
so
chairman
farmer,
other
chairman,
that
you
know
may
be
appointed
by
you,
know
the
the
speaker,
whoever
he
chooses
today
to
be
our
chairman
and
subcommittee
chairman.
S
S
However,
there
have
been
chairman
who
have
essentially
Kill
Bills
by
continually
placing
them
at
the
end
of
a
calendar
not
getting
to
those
calendars
and
just
letting
the
time
run
out
on
the
session.
So
I
I
would
ask
that
we,
if
that's
not
addressed
in
the
the
the
current
rules
that
are
being
presented.
A
N
Lambert
so-
and
this
is
why
chairman
farmer,
as
you've
previously
mentioned-
and
if
the
speaker
didn't
hear
you
clearly,
you
were
bragging
on
the
fact
that
chairman
farmer
has
done
a
really
good
job.
As
a
chairman
and
I,
don't
know
if
the
speaker
is
taking
that
consideration
or
not
in
the
decisions
he's
making
a
little
bit
later,
but
we
all
think
chairman
Farmer's
done
a
good
job,
and
so
he
found
in
rule
83
as
you
and
I
were
going
back.
These
words
that
are
helpful
here.
N
The
chair,
after
advising
with
the
vice
chair,
shall
set
the
counters
for
hearings
before
the
standing
committee,
taking
into
consideration
the
necessity
and
importance
of
the
legislation
before
the
committee.
Those
bills
and
resolutions
requested
by
the
sponsors
to
go
on
the
calendar
show
first
be
placed
on
the
calendars,
provided
that
the
sheriff
to
revising
the
vice
chair,
so
I'll
set
the
calendar
for
hearings.
T
N
A
reasonable
number
of
bills
and
everything-
and
it
goes
on
from
there.
So
not
only
is
it
the
policy
of
different
committees
and
inherent
within
their
committee
chairmanship,
ability
as
prescribed
by
the
speaker,
but
it
actually
is
in
rule
83
that
they
set
how
those
calendars
go
depending
upon
how
much
time
and
everything
else
that
we'll
take
for
that
bill.
S
S
83.,
so
I
would
just
ask
all
of
the
chairmen
just
out
of
a
sense
of
fairness,
not
to
kill
bills
by
placing
them
at
the
end
of
a
calendar,
time
and
time
again,
with
the
intent
of
not
getting
to
those
bills
and
letting
time
run
out
on
the
session
right.
So
thank
you.
Thank
you
speaker.
Thank
you,
gentlemen.
Thank
you
to
the
rules
committee.
U
Yes,
there
are
bills
that
we
should
talk
eight
and
a
half
hours
about
when
we're
in
spirit
spending
billions
of
dollars
of
the
citizens.
Money,
yeah
I
think
we
ought
to
spend
a
little
time
on
that
or,
if
we're
changing
the
whole
funding
system
of
how
our
children
are
educated
in
this
state.
We
ought
to
spend
a
little
time
on
that.
U
So
we're
arguing
over
this
this
morning,
over
probably
three
or
four
bills
that
you
will
see
this
year
and
maybe
three
or
four
you'll
see
next
year
I've
seen
maybe
three
people
speak
15
minutes
con
consecutively
in
10
years,
I've
been
here
so
I,
don't
know
why
we're
having
to
do
this?
You
know
this.
It
really
makes
no
sense.
You
can
the
list
the
Speaker
gets
after
those
six
people
are
on
that
list.
U
There's
somebody
set
up
to
call
question
after
that
that
per
last
person
on
that
list,
so
I
mean
let's
just
debate,
issues
that
we
need
to
debate
here.
Are
the
minority
voice
in
this
and
go
on?
The
majority
has
the
votes
to
win
the
votes,
but
in
a
free
Society
in
a
Democratic
Society,
the
minority
voice
should
be
heard,
and
let's
not
limit
that.
So
you
know
with
that
being
said.
I
I
asked
the
sponsor
this
report.
U
V
A
A
J
A
J
O
A
A
W
A
E
J
A
X
Thank
you,
Mr
Speaker.
It
might
be
more
appropriate
for
me
to
make
this
announcement
after
yours,
but
for
those
of
you
who
are
fortunate
enough
to
be
assigned
to
the
finance
committee,
just
a
heads
up
that
we
will
begin
our
budget
hearings
next
Thursday.
So
even
though
some
folks
will
have
a
little
bit
longer
off,
finance
committee
will
expect
them
back
next
Thursday
to
begin
budget
hearings
at
noon.