►
Description
House Floor Session- 26th Legislative Day- April 21, 2021
A
Mr
sergeant
of
arms
invite
the
members
into
the
chamber
and
close
the
doors.
I
hereby
declare
the
house
representatives
of
the
112th
general
assembly
at
state
of
tennessee
now
in
session
with
visitors.
Please
stand
with
the
visitors
in
the
gallery
with
the
members.
Please
stand:
will
the
visitors
in
the
galleries
please
stand
and
remain
standing
through
the
pledge
of
allegiance
representative
lynn
will
serve
as
chaplain
of
the
day.
B
B
B
B
B
Heavenly
father.
Remember
before
you.
Those
who
suffer
want
and
anxiety
from
lack
of
work
bless
them
with
suitable
and
fulfilling
employment,
with
a
just
reward
for
their
labor
father.
Look
with
mercy
on
the
aged.
We
pray
that
they
know
you.
Their
increasing
years
may
well
bring
them
weakness
and
distress
in
earth
or
isolation.
B
B
B
B
O
lord,
you,
minister,
to
all
those
who
come
to
you.
Look
with
compassion
upon
those
who,
through
addiction,
have
lost
their
health
and
freedom,
restore
to
them.
The
assurance
of
your
unfailing
mercy,
remove
from
them
the
fears
that
beset
them
and
strengthen
them
in
the
work
of
their
recovery
and
to
those
who,
minister,
that
to
them,
give
patient
understanding
and
preserving
love.
B
Go
before
us,
o
lord,
in
all
our
doings,
with
our
most
gracious
with
your
most
gracious
favor
and
further
us,
with
your
continual
help
that,
in
all
our
works,
begun
continued
and
ended
in
you,
we
may
glorify
your
holy
name
and
finally,
one
day
through
your
mercy
obtain
everlasting
life.
Lord,
we
pray
this
in
the
name
of
jesus
amen,.
A
E
Interest
in
going
into
public
service
one
day,
so
he's
going
to
shadow
me
and
representative
vaughn
today.
So
if
you
see
him
around
the
halls,
make
sure
you
go
up
and
introduce
yourself
and
and
make
sure
you
talk
good
about
me
and
representative
vaughn,
so
so
so
thank
you
jacob
for
being
here.
Let's
make
him
welcome.
G
H
H
E
E
I
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
I
too
have
a
guest
in
the
gallery.
Today
I
have
thomas
cox
who,
in
spite
of
all
my
faults,
still
chooses
to
be
my
friend
and
they
used
to,
but
he
and
his
wife,
jackie
both
lived
in
putnam
county
for
many
years.
They
now
reside
in
this
lower
state
called
alabama,
but
he
is
here
today
with
his
daughter,
jonna
who's,
celebrating
her
13th
birthday
this
year
and
they're
here
to
find
out
what
it's
like
to
affect
change
in
your
community.
J
A
Walter
mondale,
he
was
a
vice
president
of
this
country,
also
an
ambassador,
a
united
states
senator
and
you
know,
chambered
a
lot
of
great
causes
he
helped
make
sure
and
that
the
office
of
vice
president,
he
really
reshaped
it
to
the
office
that
we
know
today.
Obviously
he
himself
was
a
presidential
candidate.
Didn't
fare
as
well,
but
you
know
he
he
served
this
nation
admirably
and
if
we
could
just
have
a
moment
of
silence
for
vice
president
walter
mondale.
G
G
G
G
D
A
E
A
A
D
A
M
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
senate
bill
1534
as
amended.
This
bill
would
require
the
speaker
of
the
house
and
the
speaker
of
the
senate
to
approve
any
donation
to
the
state
election
commission.
This
bill
also
would
require
the
secretary
of
state
or
their
designee
to
approve
any
donation
to
the
county,
election
commission
or
election
administrator
as
amended.
N
M
M
We
do
not
want
our
elections
to
be
bought,
and
so
this
past
election
there
was
some
grant
money
offered,
but
our
secretary
of
state
felt
that
it
would
be
better
to
not
accept
that
money.
However,
one
of
our
counties
in
the
state
of
tennessee
accepted
475
thousand
dollars
in
grant
funds
this
past
election.
M
M
N
N
M
Well,
we
don't
know
if
they
would
have
approved
it.
That's
the
whole
question.
Would
they
have
approved
it
and
where
it
was
coming
from?
We
don't
know
that
answer
so
going
forward.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
both
speakers
and
our
secretary
of
state
know
exactly
where
the
money
is
coming
from.
We
have
to
know
if
money
is
being
used
in
our
elections,
then
we
need
to
know
where
the
money
is
coming
from.
N
Why
don't
we
just
do
away
with
it
and
and
take
that
responsibilities
and
options
from
both
speakers
just
make
it
transparent
across
the
board?
Because
I
think
at
this
point
it
creates
a
possible
conflict
of
interest.
If
both
speakers
can
say,
okay,
we
like
this
one.
We
don't
like
the
other
and
just
recommendations,
and
thank
you,
mr
speaker,.
E
E
M
I
I
This
gives
them
a
process
by
which
they
could
do
it
and
in
a
part
of
submitting
for
that
process,
those
individuals
will
have
to
submit
how
and
and
who
the
money
is
going
to
during
that
process
to
both
speakers
of
the
house,
and
it
would
have
to
be
approved,
and
so
under
the
guidelines
that
you
just
described,
the
the
monies
that
were
given
there
were
no
restrictions
to
the
money
whatsoever.
This
would
allow
for
transparency
and
accountability
for
those
monies.
E
Or
hurt
what
we
have
going
on
and
it's
and
I'm
pretty
sure
that
in
any
grant
that
you
have,
there
are
some
requirements
and
some
statutes
that
you
have
to
meet
in
order
to
show
some
documentation
for
how
this
money
is
spent.
A
lot
of
people
just
don't
give
you
money
and
say
here
you
go,
you
do
whatever
you
want
to.
They
want
to
know
what
you
did
with
it.
I
Williams.
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
It's
a
good
question.
The
facts
are
that
there's
there's
no
accountability
for
this
money.
Currently,
what
this
does
is
bring
accountability
to
the
process
as
it
relates
to
that.
If
there
was
no
ill
intent
involved
with
the
contributions
to
election
administrators,
then
they
should
have
no
problem
with
going
through
the
process.
All
this
does
is
bring
accountability
to
the
process.
No
one's
saying
they
can't
do
it.
It
excludes
things
like
pins.
I
If
you
want
to
get
pins,
you
could
do
that,
but
it
has
nothing
to
do
with
anything
other
than
following
the
money
and
where
it
goes
and
how
it's
spent-
and
I
think,
as
you
relate
to
comments,
there's
no
fraud
as
it
relates
to
elections,
because
our
election,
our
secretary
of
state,
is
doing
a
fantastic
job
as
it
relates
to
elections.
This
deals
with
the
money
involved
with
elections,
not
the
actual
elections
themselves.
Thank
you.
E
Chairman
dixon
couple
things
wanted
to
kind
of
circle
back.
I
think
the
whole
purpose
of
this
is
because
you
feel
like
the
money,
could
influence
the
election
or
would
influence
elect
the
election
process.
So
if
there's,
if
you,
if
you
don't
feel
like
there's
any
correlation,
then
there's
no
need
for
this
law
in
particular.
E
Also,
this
bill
states
that
both
speaker,
the
speaker
and
the
lieutenant
governor,
have
approval
for
this.
That
is
very
subjective.
Unless
there
is
some
criteria
for
which
the
they
will
be
evaluated.
Now,
if
you
can
show
me
the
the
the
requirements,
the
standards
that
they
will
be
judged
upon,
and
it
won't
be
as
if
it
was
mentioned
earlier-
I
like
this
one.
I
don't
like
that
one.
E
A
E
Thank
you,
speaker,
sexton,
and
thank
you
sponsor
of
the
bill.
I
want
to
make
a
quick
distinguishing
remark,
as
is
the
case
with
any
grant
grants
come
with
strings
attached
and
the
grantor
typically
will
have
a
construct
or
requirements
on
how
that
money
is
spent
and
our
elections.
While
we
are
focused
many
times
on
the
partisan
nature
of
campaigns,
our
our
elections
as
run
by
the
state
of
tennessee,
our
tennessee
secretary
of
state,
are
supposed
to
be
that
of
integrity
and
in
a
non-partisan
nature,
and
so
I
applaud
this
bill.
E
I
applaud
your
work
and
I'll
be
voting
in
the
affirmative,
and
I
would
just
simply
encourage
all
of
our
colleagues
that,
if
you
don't
want
to
see
outside
influence
through
the
form
of
grants
with
strings
attached,
as
well
as
to
protect
the
integrity
of
the
process
to
be
nonpartisan,
this
is
a
terrific
bill.
Thank
you.
So
much
representative
representative
griffey.
P
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
thank
you
sponsor,
as
I
understand
it
right
now,
under
tennessee
law.
If
facebook
google
wants
to
dump
half
a
million
million
dollars
in
the
davidson
county
election
commission,
they
could
take
that
money,
wouldn't
necessarily
have
to
disclose
it
and
they
could
spend
all
that
money
in
one
particular
district,
one
particular
precinct
to
try
to
get
out
the
vote
in
that
particular
district,
a
precedent,
and
there
would
be
nothing
the
state
of
tennessee
or
election
officials
could
do
about
that
and
folks,
look
if
y'all
are
all
about
free
and
fair
elections.
P
Bring
another
bill.
Make
another
amendment
make
this
better.
This
is
a
great
step
in
the
right
direction
to
keep
outside
money
from
unfairly
influencing
our
elections.
This
is
critical
to
democracy
in
our
constitutional
republic.
Thank
the
sponsors
both
thank
you,
mr
speaker,
appreciate
you
bringing
this.
Thank
you.
A
J
A
A
A
J
Nearly
four
years
ago,
the
general
assembly
voted
to
reimburse
local
governments
that
provided
health
insurance
benefits
to
families
of
first
responders
killed
in
the
line
of
duty
after
their
death.
This
bill
simply
adds
allowing
the
calculation
of
benefits
under
the
federal
cobra
program
for
the
reimbursement
of
health
insurance
benefit
costs
for
a
first
responders
surviving
family.
With
the
passage
of
this
bill,
the
department
of
finance
and
administration
can
reimburse
local
governments
for
the
health,
insurance
premiums
or
expenses
for
cobra
coverage
for
the
families
who
have
lost
a
loved
one
in
the
line
of
duty.
J
A
E
A
P
A
K
A
A
A
A
G
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
members
house,
bill
749
was
brought
by
the
safe
building
practices
coalition
that
functions
under
the
umbrella
of
the
tennessee
chamber
of
commerce.
This
legislation
creates
a
uniform
and
compliant
process
for
local
governments
to
adopt
codes
or
regulations
that
involve
building
materials.
This
process
would
require
local
governments
to
adopt
building
material
codes
or
regulations
to
the
local
legislative
body
on
two
separate
readings
and
only
requires
a
simple
majority.
G
This
bill
does
not
impact
local
government's
authority
over
zoning
or
planning,
nor
does
it
remove
local
authority
to
promulgate
regulations
under
private
act,
charters,
home
rule
charters
or
general
law
charters
or
other
state
laws,
except
when
they
conflict
with
this
legislation.
Mr
speaker,
I
read
my
motion.
J
I
do
yeah,
I
just
want
to
thank
you
for
bringing
this
up
and
committee.
We
talked
about-
or
at
least
I
talked
about,
the
affordable
housing
housing
crisis
that
we
have
currently
in
middle
tennessee
and
across
the
state.
Maybe
this
is
a
small
step
for
maybe
deregulation.
It
still
gives
the
locals
approval,
but
I
just
talked
to
a
realtor
yesterday
folks
and
the
cost
of
just
lumber
and
steel.
That's
increased
added.
Fifty
thousand
dollars
to
a
home.
Fifty
thousand
rents
have
skyrocketed
back
home.
You
know.
J
P
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
with
sponsor
yield
chairman
boyd.
I
do.
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
Thanks
sponsor
is
this
going?
Is
this
legislation
going
to
add
an
additional
requirement
for
certain
municipalities
jurisdictions
if
they
want
to
limit
the
size
of
the
signs?
The
look
of
the
buildings,
the
materials
used
say
in
germantown
tennessee
franklin,
other
municipalities
that
have
restrictive
building
codes
and
the
type
of
materials
that
are
used
because
they
want
to
maintain
a
certain
level
of
quality
or
certain
look
about
their
community?
P
G
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
This
sets
forth
a
process
by
which
all
local
governments
in
the
state
of
tennessee
will
have
to
adopt
codes
involving
building
materials
from
this
point
forward.
So
if
a
local
government
wants
to
use
only
certain
building
materials,
of
course
they
they
can't
prohibit.
They
cannot
specifically
list
out
little
materials
that
are
prohibited,
but
if
they
choose
to
use
only
brick
or
only
stone
or
anything
like
that,
they
will
have
to
adopt
that
through
the
city
council.
What
this
does
is
and
statewide.
Let
me
let
me
back
up
statewide.
G
There
are
some
local
governments
that
don't
have
any
building
codes,
and
then
there
are
some
that
that
delegate
that
responsibility
to
just
some
member
of
the
the
city
personnel-
sometimes
they
delegate
it
down
to
a
committee
that
would
do
this
and
in
some
places
they
actually
do
run
it
through
the
city,
council
or
county
commission.
So
what
this
would
do
is
it
would
create
a
uniform
way,
statewide
that
this
is
done.
That
would
keep
them
comply
with
existing
state
law.
Representative
griffey.
P
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
Thanks
sponsor
to
me,
I've
always
tried
to
go
by
the
old
adage.
If
it's
not
folks,
if
it's
not
broken,
don't
try
to
fix
it.
It
seems
to
me,
like
we
already
have
a
process.
It's
working,
it's
functioning.
It
allows
our
local
municipalities
to
make
the
decision
what's
best
for
them
at
the
local
level.
I
think
that
this
is.
P
Q
Thank
you,
speaker
and-
and
you
know
when
well
anyway,
so
I
have
the
exact
same
concern
to
to
require
us
to
have
to
go
back
specifically
in
in
say,
nashville
and
put
building
materials
in
an
ordinance
to
me
sounds
like
the
most
you
know,
government
enlarging,
cumbersome
process.
I
can
think
of
we.
We
currently
have
the
ability
today
for
our
elected
officials
to
delegate
authorities
just
like
this.
Q
This
is
the
ultimate
local
authority
that
we
give
and
to
to
take
the
ability
away
to
from
from
our
localities
to
be
able
to
decide.
Their
own
future
is
is,
is
not
good
policy,
and-
and
let's
not
pretend
that
this
is
going
to
be,
for
you
know,
underlayment
or
foundation
materials
or
window
choices.
This
is
going
to
be
purely
architectural
decisions
that
will
limit
a
municipality's
ability
to
move
quickly
to
improve
a
community
by
having
premium
building
materials
required.
Q
It's
done
all
over
the
state.
It's
done
all
over
the
united
states
and
and
we're
going
to
remove
that
ability
and
create
a
cumbersome
process,
whereas
we're
going
to
have
to
come
and
pass
an
ordinance.
How
do
you
do
overlays?
We've
got
overlays
in
nashville
that
that
our
our
building
committee
can
can
approve
that
that
requires
additional
building
required
materials.
It
requires
stone,
pavers
on
sidewalks,
to
create
a
more
historic
field,
not
in
a
historic
area,
but
to
create
a
different
feel
for
a
community,
and
this
would
remove
that
ability.
Q
G
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
I
actually
we
addressed
a
lot
of
that
concern
with
an
amendment
early
on.
I
shared
some
of
those
same
concerns
as
well,
and
this
bill
does
not
affect
a
city's
ability
to
do
things
like
that
with
historical
districts
or
overlays,
but
but
the
things
that
you're
talking
about
it's
pretty
simple,
you
just
run
it
through
the
the
local
legislative
body
and
a
lot
of
the
local
governments
said
exactly
what
you
did,
and
so
they
said.
G
Instead
of
setting
the
bar
high
and
requiring
a
two-thirds,
would
you
be
willing
to
do
with
just
a
simple
majority
and
we
agreed
to
that
and
then
they
said,
instead
of
it
being
on
two
separate
hearings,
two
weeks
apart,
let's
set
it
up
so
that
we
could
literally
do
it
the
next
day.
We
run
it
through
on
a
monday
and
run
it
again
on
a
tuesday
and
we're
done
so.
We
want
to
give
these
cities
a
way
to
become
compliant
because,
like
I
said,
there's
been
no
consistent
way
in
which
these
codes
are
adopted.
G
Statewide
in
many
cities
and
counties,
any
local
government,
many
of
them
are
in
violation
of
state
law
now
unknowingly,
and
this
is
their
pathway
to
get
get
something
on
the
books.
That's
compliant,
so
that
moving
forward
they
can,
they
can
control
and
regulate
locally
how
they
want
to
design
their
cities
represent
freeman.
Q
Q
Are
we
next
going
to
require
municipality
to
put
ordinance
out
on
what
day
your
trash
gets
picked
up,
or
you
know
how
often
the
the
flowers
get
changed
in
in
your
town
square,
I
mean
we,
we
give
authority
for
local
decisions
to
be
made
all
day,
and
this
just
seems
like
a
cumbersome
process,
but
thank
you
again
thanks.
Thanks.
C
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
and
for
my
colleagues
who
are
some
are
questioning
what
this
bill
really
strikes
at
the
heart
of.
I
appreciate
my
colleague
recommending
one
mentioning
one
of
my
fine
areas
that
I
represent.
One
of
my
jurisdictions,
city
of
germantown,
town
of
collierville,
both
are
highly
restrictive
entitlement
processes
that
we
all
go
through
this.
All
this
legislation
here
today
will
do
is
to
have
other
municipalities
and
other
jurisdictions
to
follow
similar
processes
to
establish
how
projects
are
approved.
C
Suddenly,
we
won't
have
arbitrary
buildings
in
areas
which
don't
have
a
design,
review,
commission
or
design
view
process,
which
is
not
the
elected
body,
it's
typically
an
appointed
body
and
there's
an
entire
entitlement
process
that
that
has
to
do
with
that.
But
what
this
bill
speaks
to
is
the
places
that
do
not
have
that
infrastructure
set
up
with
their
city
and
arbitrary
building
inspectors
code
officials
making
decisions
about
how
much
what
type
of
shingles
need
to
be
on
a
home.
What
type
of
bricks
need
to
be
on
a
home?
C
What
type
of
exterior
siding
these
type
things?
What
this
does
is
this
says
that,
with
regards
to
these
building
materials,
you
cannot
discriminate
against
them,
but
you
can
set
up
a
design
process
that
things
can
go
through
and
with
regards
to
my
two
jurisdictions,
germantown's
design
review
guidelines
are
perfect,
the
way
they're
written
collierville.
C
This
is
just
an
extension
of
those
zoning
codes.
So
with
regards
to
this
for
for
jurisdictions
in
areas
that
are
well
designed
well
regulated,
this
is
a
very
small
bar,
but
for
those
nefarious
actors
out
there
who
are
arbitrarily
making
decisions
with
regards
to
building
materials,
this
gives
them
a
framework
by
which
they
can
catch
up
to
speed
with
everybody
else,
and
it
levels
the
playing
fields
in
those
areas,
and
so
I
support
this
bill.
I
think
it
I
think
it
brings
a
level
playing
field.
C
J
G
Chairman
boyd,
thank
you,
mr
speaker.
You
can't
you
could
not
say
that
a
particular
building
material
is
excluded.
That
is
already
covered
in
state
law.
What
this
does
is
it
creates
a
compliant
way
for
a
city
to
say
we
only
allow
brick,
it
both
says
the
same
thing,
but
but
but
it's
kind
of
a
reverse
engineered
way
of
outlining
what
what
outlining
what
building
materials
are
approved.
A
A
L
H
A
L
L
Say
well
yeah
they
can
and
here's
who
they
can
do
it
to
in
the
45
hospitals
and
those
employees
in
those
45
government-owned
hospitals.
They
can
be
forced
and
medical
students
in
higher
education,
dental
students,
pharmacy
students
and
medical
students
or
medical
care
students.
They
are
they're,
also
exempted
out
of
this
bill.
L
A
B
Thank
you
so
much
for
bringing
this
bill.
This
was
a
huge
concern
for
my
constituents
and
even
my
family.
One
thing
I
did
learn
in
my
reading,
and
maybe
the
amendments
speak
to
this.
I'm
not
sure
is
that,
because
this
vaccine
is
for
experimental
use,
only
the
federal
rules
actually
say
that
no
one
can
be
forced
to
take
a
vaccine
that
has
been
approved
for
experimental
use
only-
and
I
hope
that
is
still
the
case,
because
this
vaccine
is
not
approved.
L
B
L
Holzing,
thank
you,
mr
speaker,
and
that
is
correct.
The
ut
actually
came
and
they
were
worried
because
medical
students,
dental
students,
pharmacy
students,
have
to
do
practicum
work
outside
the
university
setting
and
they're
saying
some
of
those
institutions
might
require
it,
but
it
does
not
affect
the
rest
of
the
students.
A
I
L
L
I
Thank
you.
I
believe
that
representative
lynn's
already
said
that
the
federal
regulations
prevent
this.
So
it's
really
just
a
exclamation
mark.
It
sounds
like
now,
after
over
12
000
deaths
from
covert
and
after
836
thousand
cases
of
covet.
It
seems
to
me
this.
Will
this
give
us
the
wrong
message
to
the
people
of
tennessee?
L
L
When
that
happens,
and
public
health
becomes
the
highest
law,
then
the
only
competency
left
is
in
the
state
holding
hands
with
the
medical
community.
There
are
a
great
deal
of
people
in
this
state
who
are
afraid
of
that.
This
bill
is
an
attempt
to
assuage
those
kinds
of
fears
and
keep
the
constitution
the
highest
law
of
the
land.
R
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
Thank
you,
mr
sponsor
admire
your
commitment
to
liberty
and
your
right.
Our
constitution
should
be
the
highest
law
of
the
land
and
it's
been
good
to
work
with
you
through
the
health
committee,
and
I
think
we
share
those
values
to
support
and
uphold
the
constitution
just
to
clarify
the
air.
It
is
important
that
we
realize
that
from
the
federal
authorities
and
fda
point
of
view,
eua
is
emergency,
use
approval.
It
is
not
experimental
use
approval.
R
R
Trials
for
these
vaccines
were
were
conducted
in
the
united
states
and
abroad.
More
than
70
000
americans
volunteered
to
take
these
vaccinations
when
their
safety
or
effectiveness
was
not
known,
and
yes,
some
of
those
brave
souls
took
placebo
without
their
knowledge
and
to
be
a
part
of
these
studies.
Some
of
those
people
were
here
in
nashville
and
some
of
them.
I
know
personally
who
participated
in
those
trials,
so
the
vaccination
was
tried
and
considering
that
almost
80
million
or
more
vaccinations
have
been
given
in
the
united
states.
R
R
The
incidence
of
covet
infections
is
low
after
vaccination
and
even
if
it
occurs,
the
disease
is
very,
very
mild,
and
I
think,
from
that
point
of
view,
safety
and
effectiveness
of
these
vaccinations
have
been
proven
to
me.
It's
god's
gift
to
science,
and
I
think
we
should
honor
that
and
realize
that
it
is
not
experimental
treatment.
Let's
not
call
it
that
a
question
mr
sponsor.
There
was
some
discussion
and
concern
the
students
who
come
to
institutes
of
higher
learning
colleges.
R
L
Chairman
holzing,
this
last
amendment
clears
that
up
doesn't
affect
the
meningitis
issue
at
all.
The
wording
did
cause
some
problems,
but
that's
fixed
now
and
the
way
it
was
originally
written
that
first
amendment
that
came
out
of
the
senate
also
included
every
student
in
higher
education.
So
this
amendment
fixes
that,
and
it's
only
confined
to
those
students
on
your
other
comments,
the
bill
doesn't
take
up.
The
efficacy
of
this
vaccine
at
all
has
nothing
to
do
with
that.
This
bill
just
reinforces
individual
sovereignty
over
their
own
body.
A
R
R
Let
us
let
us
maintain
the
const,
the
supremacy
of
our
constitution,
but
let
us
not
create
an
atmosphere
or
thought
that
is
anti-vaccine,
because
if
we
are
confronted
with
such
a
calamity
as
a
nation,
we
should
be
together
and
it
is
by
being
together
that
we
will
overcome
difficult
times.
But
let
us
not
create
a
negative
attitude
of
trust
towards
medical
treatment
and
vaccination,
because
a
biological
warfare
situation
is
a
possibility
and
again,
I
hope,
not
and
pray.
Not
mr
sponsor,
once
again.
Thank
you
last
question,
for
you.
L
S
S
S
Now
I
don't
believe
in
pushing
anything
off
any
on
anybody
that
they
don't
want
to.
That's
that's
not
why
I'm
here,
but
I
can
tell
you
this
virus
has
taken
people
to
the
grave
based
upon
what
you
are
doing
right
now,
because
there
were
people
who
felt
like
they
didn't
need
to
take
it
and
nobody
could
make
them
take
it.
S
S
You
can't
close
the
church,
nothing
you
do
you
can't
close.
You
couldn't
close
it.
If
you
wanted
to,
you
could
send
the
united
states
arm
and
you
couldn't
close
it,
because
the
church
is
in
us
and
not
in
brick
and
mortar,
but
I
rise
against
this
bill
because
you
are
putting
people's
lives
in
danger
by
telling
folks
they
shouldn't
take
this
vaccine.
Thank
you.
L
Chairman
halsey,
no,
I
disagree
with
you.
I
have
not
told
anybody
not
to
take
the
vaccine.
I
want
as
many
people
who
want
to
get
it
to
get
it
and
I
won't
argue
the
efficacy
of
it.
This
bill
doesn't
have
anything
to
do
with
that.
I
will
say
that
medical
tyranny
is
no
less
tyrannical
than
any
other
form.
I
have
lost
friends
myself.
L
P
P
I
have
some
individual
liberty
to
determine
what's
best
for
me,
my
family
or
whatever.
What
gives
a
right
to
any
of
you
to
tell
me
what
I
have
to
inject
into
my
body?
I'm
sorry
we
are.
This
is
america.
We
have
some
individual
freedoms
and
liberties.
We
retain
that.
The
government
does
not
have
the
gov.
We,
the
people,
give
the
government
limited
authority,
not
unbridled
authority,
not
unfettered
authority.
We
decide
what
authority
we
give
the
government
this
bill
is
a
great
bill.
P
My
only
concern
is,
it
doesn't
go
far
enough
and
protect
us
from
corporations
and
employers
from
demanding
that
we
take
vaccines
that
we
may
not
personally
agree
with,
and
every
individual
in
tennessee
and
america
has
to
make
a
decision
for
themselves
and
for
their
family.
Is
this
vaccine?
Is
this
medication?
Is
this
appropriate
for
me?
Is
this
a
pro
for
my
family?
It's
not
the
job
of
any
of
us
up
here
in
the
general
assembly
to
make
those
decisions
for
people
and
their
families.
P
O
O
O
We
also
talk
about
keeping
government
out
of
our
lives
or
or
or
at
bay,
but
in
this
body
we
give
government
when
it's
convenient
power,
to
do
everything
just
about,
but
here's
a
case
where
we're
finally
saying
government
stand
down,
you
can't
have
it
both
ways,
I'm
supporting
the
bill,
because
this
is
my
body,
but
we
need
to
have
that.
Keep
that
same
energy
when
it
comes
to
women's
bodies
and
when
it
comes
to
other
things.
O
We
tried
to
run
a
resolution
that
said
racism
was
a
threat
to
public
health
and
the
cds.
They
it
was
killed
twice
and
the
cdc
came
back
and
said.
Racism
is
a
threat
to
public
health
a
day
later,
and
what
this,
what
the
sponsor's
bill
does
is,
gives
us,
as
a
black
as
black
people,
an
opportunity
to
say
no
to
government
and
being
forced
to
take
a
test.
When
we
know
the
history
in
the
united
states
when
it
comes
to
health
care
and
the
treatment
of
black
folks
has
been
disparate
and
experimental
representative.
O
That's
actually
on
the
bill,
because
this
is
why
I'm
supporting
the
bill,
because
it
gives
us
an
opportunity
to
decide
for
ourselves
what
we
want
to
do
with
our
bodies
and
to
refuse,
if
it's
looking
like
we're
being
experimented
on
or
not
to
be
able
to
say
no,
you
can't
force
me
to
take
this
vaccination
now.
Here's
the
other
thing,
though
we
give
we
give.
O
Let
me
end
it
right
there,
mr
speaker,
let
me
end
it
right
there
and
mr
sponsor,
I
say
thank
you,
but
to
those
that
that
want
to
take
this
vaccination
by
all
means.
Take
the
vaccination
for
those
that
want
don't
want
to
take
this
vaccination.
I
don't
believe
that
you
should
be
forced
to
take
this
vaccination.
Thank
you,
mr
sponsor.
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
A
A
A
G
A
A
E
E
E
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
members,
this
this
amendment's
fairly
simple.
It's
simply
about
accountability.
This
will
create
a
permit
to
identify
those
who
will
be
who
will
be
participating
in
doing
the
liquor,
buy
the
drink
to
the
car.
It
will
simply
allow
abc
to
be
able
to
clearly
identify
these
businesses
in
order
to
be
able
to
regulate
and
to
be
able
to
oversee
this
process
very
simple,
nothing
more
to
it
than
that.
It
will
simply
provide
a
permit
allowing
them
to
be
able
to
identify
those
who
are
going
to
be
offering
the
service.
A
K
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
These
following
five
amendments
have
been
brought
from.
What
we've
determined
is
is
a
an
industry
that
feels
like
the
hospitality
industry
is
in
competition
with
them,
which
they
are
not.
Of
course,
this
industry
has
has
boasted
50
to
75
percent
of
increase
in
revenues
over
the
last
year,
when
our
hospitality
industry
has
has
lost
75
percent
of
their
industry.
K
They
are
intended
to
confuse
and
to
muddy
the
waters,
and
with
that
explanation
and
and
the
fact
that
this
this
amendment
alone
quadruples
the
requirements
for,
let's
just
say,
attacks
on
those
that
will
be
involved
in
the
in
the
process,
which
it
clearly
states
in
the
bill
that
that
you
already
have
to
have
a
liquor
but
the
drink
license
and
this
quadruples
of
that
cost.
So
with
that
understanding,
I
would
move
that
we
table
this
amendment.
A
E
E
Had
a
restaurant
owner
talk
to
me
about
how
the
alcohol
is
being
brought
to
a
car,
it's
being
handed
to
a
miner,
while
someone
legally
able
to
buy's
in
the
driver's
seat,
there's
so
much
that
goes
on
with
this,
with
the
with
the
restaurant
taking
this
to
the
vehicle
that
is
important
for
abc
to
be
able
to
identify
who
is
offering
this
service.
I
think
it's
extremely
important,
so
thank
you,
mr
speaker,
and
I
would
request
passage.
A
The
parliamentary
situation
as
representative
zachary
has
moved
amendment
number
three
representative
ramsey
has
moved
that
motion
to
the
table,
we're
voting
on
the
tabling
motion,
all
those
in
favor
vote
when
the
bell
rings.
Those
opposed
vote.
No,
as
I
remember
voted,
does
any
member
which
changed
her.
A
E
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
Yes,
what
this
amendment
does
is
it
defines
serving
size
currently
in
the
bill
serving
size
is
not
clearly
defined
when
it
comes
to
just
alcoholic
beverages.
So
essentially
I
mean
you
get
a
you
know
a
16
ounce
cup
of
liquor.
This
defines
that
that
serving
size
for
wine
and
then
for
for
mixed
drinks
and
other
things
so
just
gives
a
more
specific
definition.
E
A
K
K
K
The
beer
alone
is
available
everywhere
in
growlers.
It's
a
gallon
size.
So
I
think
this
is
just
another
intent
to
hobble,
an
industry
that
we're
desperately
trying
to
bring
forward.
This
is
a
micro
industry,
mom
and
pop
everything
that
they
buy
and
everybody
that
they
hire
is
done
locally
and
and
we're
in
desperate
straits
to
to
see
that
that
the
60
percent
that
still
exists
are
able
to
flourish.
So
with
that
statement,
sir,
I
would
make
a
motion
that
we
table
this
amendment.
A
E
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
and
and
just
to
touch
on
this
one
one
final
time.
The
way
that
the
bill
was
currently
written.
It
says
that
a
serving
it
consists
they
they
can
serve
alcohol
that
consists
of
single
servings
of
alcoholic
beverages
or
beer.
Single
servings
is
not
defined
currently
in
the
bill.
This
amendment
defines
that,
and
it
says
what
a
single
serving
is
and
make
sure
that
you
can't
get
16
ounces
of
of
liquor
when
you
drive
off
this
puts
a
limit
on
that.
A
Q
I
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
This
bill
here
would
would
the
bill
itself
ask
for
a
period
of
two
years
to
do
this,
since
that
everything
is
opening
back
up,
and
we
know
we
cannot
get
back
lost
revenue,
but
we
could,
but
this
bill
here
simply
takes
it
down
from
two
years
to
six
months.
It
goes
in
acts
enacted
in
july
2021,
and
this
would
terminate
on
january
1
2022,
and
with
that,
mr
speaker,
I
moved
passage
of
this
amendment.
K
And
thank
you,
mr
speaker.
Ladies
and
gentlemen,
we
we've
found
that
many
restaurants
have
borrowed
money
to
stay
in
business
and,
and
just
imagine
yourselves
with
your
businesses
when,
within
a
month's
time,
you
lost
eighty
percent
of
your
employees
that
you
lost
sixty
percent.
Seventy
five
percent
of
your
revenues
and
and
those
employees
don't
stand
at
the
back
door
waiting
to
come
back
in
so
this
is
going
to
take
time.
A
I
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
well
this
amendment
here
it
was,
it
simply
states
that
the
preferred
food
and
alcoholic
beverages
or
beer
must
not
be
sold
under
a
section
from
an
establishment
with
a
window
or
a
kiosk.
In
other
words,
you
can't
do
a
drive
through
window,
and
I
picked
this
up,
and
I
mentioned
a
certain
restaurant
taco
bell
about
that,
and
I
think
that
maybe
it's
trying
to
start
one
down
here
in
nashville
now,
but
this
bill
would
simply
this
memo
would
simply
say
you
cannot
receive
this
packaged
drink.
I
A
A
I
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
I
once
again
have
my
concerns
about
going
and
driving
up
to
a
window
and
someone
reaching
out
a
a
a
cup.
That's
got
a
seal
on
it,
but
you
can
start
drinking
right
then,
and
I
understand
the
the
issuance
of
maybe
from
another
window
that
these
sponsors
talking
about,
but
I
just
think
this
would
be
a
little
temptation.
I
A
A
L
A
K
Their
employee
and
staffing
is
extremely
different
from
package
stores
and-
and
I
think
this
is-
this-
is
just
another
effort
to
hobble
a
an
industry-
that's
already
been
hobbled
by
by
un
unfortunate
circumstances,
the
the
private
business
that's
struggling.
So
with
that
understanding
and
realizing
that
this
this
would
be
a
huge
impediment
to
the
re-establishment
of
prosperity
in
our
our
tourism
and
hospitality
industry.
I
would
move
that
you
vote
yes
and
move
that
we
table
this
amendment.
A
L
Thank
you
and
thank
you
sponsor.
I'm
just
striving
to
get
folks
to
to
play
on
a
level
playing
field.
Private
liquor
stores
have
played
by
the
rules,
so
has
everybody
else,
and
so
I
think
we
should
still
abide
by
the
same
rules
for
everybody
else.
So
I
I'm
moved
that
you
that
you
that
you
vote
against
the
tabling
motion.
A
D
A
A
K
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
and
I've
already
spoken
a
good
bit
about
this
bill.
This
is
a
small
business
bill.
It
is
a
micro
business
bill.
It's
a
mom-and-pop,
it's
a
tourism
business
bill.
This
suffering
industry
is
needs
to
be
supported.
We
need
to
give
them
some
help.
I
was
told
that
20
of
some
of
these
industries,
when,
when
all
that
was
left
was
curbside.
20
was
mixed
drinks
that
went
with
food,
so
this
bill
describes
explicitly
how
it
can
be
done.
K
Who
can
do
it,
and
with
that
I
would
say.
Essentially
what
this
bill
does
is:
extends
executive
order,
17
allowing
for
the
struggling
hospitality
industry.
It
will
allow
them
to
sell
alcohol
with
the
purchase
of
food.
If
the
alcohol
is
provided,
has
a
lid
and
is
not
a
bottle
of
liquor
requires
licensees
selling
alcoholic
beverages
to
go
with
food.
It
requires
them
to
collect
and
remit
the
liquor
by
the
drink
tax,
which
is
going
to
be
a
boost
and
a
revenue
for
a
state
as
well
as
local
entities.
A
F
A
K
And
the
abc
described
to
us
a
tape
that
once
it's
removed,
cannot
be
put
back
and
the
evidence
of
where
it
was
removed
from
is
is
apparent
so
that
law
enforcement
can
determine
if
indeed
it's
been
tampered
with.
That
was
their
recommendation
at
the
moment.
We
have
this
in
place
with
executive
order
with
no
restrictions.
F
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
thank
you
for
clarifying
that
and
getting
that
on
the
record.
For
me.
I
appreciate
it
and
appreciate
what
we're
doing
for
the
hospitality
industry
I
just
want
to.
You
know
the
hospitality
industry
in
the
town
I
have
the
pleasure
of
presenting,
along
with
several
others,
has
been
devastated
by
the
pandemic,
but
to
be
fair,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
go
above
and
beyond
for
every
industry
in
tennessee
that
has
been
impacted
by
this
pandemic,
and
I
look
forward
to
further
efforts
to
do
that.
But
thank
you
for
this
legislation.
K
J
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
quick
question
on
my
colleagues
question
follow-up.
So
the
tape
would
be
used
in
evidence
that
if
a
person
was
pulled
over
for
driving
under
the
influence
suspected,
that's
how
the
officer
would
determine
whether
or
not
that
they
had
actually
opened
that
while
they
were
driving
is
that
correct
represent.
K
K
J
J
J
K
I
want
to
be
very
honorable
to
my
colleagues
here,
but
we
we
have
had
amendment
after
amendment
with
people
that
are
not
involved
in
the
industry
at
all.
This
bill
came
from
the
hospitality
industry.
This
was
a
request
from
the
people
that
have
suffered
over
the
last
year
and
have
faced
these
statistics
that
I
have
mentioned
today,
and
so
this
is
what
they
want
of
course,
you're
exactly
right.
This
industry
does
not
want
people
forever
buying
and
taking
out
of
their
restaurant.
K
They
don't
make
the
money
that
way,
but
right
now
for
many
of
them.
That's
the
only
way
and
of
course
you
can
go
to
nashville
or
memphis
or
chattanooga
downtown,
and
and
see
a
microcosm
of
tourism
and
people
coming
in
from
other
areas.
But
but
my
town
is
different
and
there's
still
restaurants
closed
and
there's
still
restaurants
that
only
bring
to
the
curb,
and
that
may
be
the
situation
for
a
while.
So
with
that
statement
and
that
understanding
I
would
move
this
motion
to
the
table.
A
All
right,
proper
motion,
probably
second
primarily
situation-
is
representative.
Suppicky
has
made
a
motion
to
re-refer
the
bill
back
to
state
government
representative
ramsey
has
moved
that
motion
to
the
table
that
cuts
off
all
debate,
except
for
that
is
sponsored
representative
picky.
You
are
recognized.
J
A
L
L
K
And
thank
you,
mr
speaker,
and
and
thank
you
chairman
halsey.
We've
talked
about
this
several
times
before
and
I
checked
on
it
for
you,
the
the
state
law
allows
that
practice
to
be
in
existence,
and
it
has
way
before
last
march
the
we
just
passed
here
not
long
ago
that
allows
cracker
barrel
to
sell
wine
and
they
can
do
the
same
process
and
have
been
able
to
so.
K
E
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
Members.
This
bill
is
simply
addressing
a
symptom
and
not
the
core
issue.
We
have
the
restaurant
industry,
and
I
have
many
restaurant
owners
in
my
district
has
been
crushed
by
this
pandemic.
Many
restaurants
in
my
district,
my
small
district,
are
not
going
to
reopen
in
knox
county.
Many
restaurants
are
not
going
to
be
open,
because
government
forced
restaurants
to
close
health
directors
and
health
boards
still
have
restrictions
in
the
metro
areas
on
these
restaurants.
E
So
if
we
want
to
help
the
restaurants,
we
can't
help
the
restaurants
by
allowing
them
to
sell
liquor
by
the
drink,
which
is
a
minimal
impact
on
their
bottom
line.
We
need
to
move
these
blasted
restrictions
that
are
targeting
these
business
owners.
These
small
business
owners
at
our
restaurants
allow
them
to
reopen
completely
in
knox
county.
Our
health
director
has
us
limited
at
50.
E
It
is
absolutely
absurd.
There
is
still
a
limit
here
in
davidson
county.
We
need
to
stop
targeting
these
business
owners,
allow
them
to
reopen
their
business
and
allow
them
to
thrive
and
provide
for
their
family.
So
if
we
want
to
help
businesses,
let's
remove
these
restrictions
and
I'm
again
I'm
opposed
to
this
bill,
obviously,
but
goodness
gracious,
let's
allow
business
to
thrive
and
forget
all
these
arbitrary
restrictions
with
no
factual
or
statistical
basis,
for
keeping
them
close.
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
K
Since
last
march,
we
have
developed
a
lot
of
political
attitudes
and
political
responses
to
what
has
been
transpiring
from
the
governor's
office,
the
president's
office
and
different
requirements,
and
and
policies
that
have
come
down.
But
but
we
don't
have
a
any
sort
of
initiative
to
stand
on
the
necks
of
our
small
businesses.
To
make
this
point.
So
I
I
encourage
you
to
make
these
points
when
you
have
a
pulpit
to
do
that,
but
not
with
this
bill.
K
And
this
is
all
that
the
hospitality
industry
is
asking
us
today.
We
can
move
and-
and
we
can
espouse
and
and
project
all
of
the
political
issues
and
try
to
move
forward
with
those.
But
please
separate
that
from
this
bill.
This
is
a
a
help
bill
for
an
industry
that
that
actually
is,
is
the
largest
employer
in
the
state.
It's
an
industry
that
has
that
has
more
tax
revenue
than
any
other
industry
in
the
state
and
so
less
listen
to
their
plea,
listen
to
their
requests
from
their
representatives
and
and
move
forward.
C
K
Representative,
thank
you,
mr
speaker.
Everything
is
in
place.
The
the
owner
of
the
property
has
to
have
a
liquor
by
the
drink
license
which
requires
the
employees
that
deal
with
alcoholic
beverages
to
be
certified
in
by
the
state
designated
abc
training
programs.
So
they
can
only
in
those
training
programs,
they're
trained
to
only
deliver
a
product
either
at
the
table
or
at
curbside
or
wherever
to
the
person
that
has
the
valid
picture.
Government
id.
C
K
At
that
point,
and
if
you
notice,
when
you
go
through
the
grocery
store
line,
if
you
have
an
alcoholic
beverage
and
the
person
is
under
age,
that's
dispensing
it
to
you
or
tallying
your
bill
that
they
have
to
leave
the
premises
and
allow
somebody
that's
21
or
over,
to
come
and
take
care
of
that
business.
That's
still
in
effect,
and
after
this
bill
in
two
years
after
the
requirement
of
it
is
gone
and
at
sunsets
that
will
still
exist
in
the
grocery
stores,
as
it
does
now.
C
You
know,
as
you
as
most
of
the
members
know,
I
usually
blue
light
alcohol
bills,
because
it's
while
I
don't
drink
it's
a
legal
right,
so
I
don't
want
to
stand
in
people's
way
of
a
legal
right.
I
vote
on
administrative
bills,
but
I'll
usually
blue
light,
because
I
just
don't
personally
agree
with
it.
I
might
have
to
vote
no
on
this
one,
as
I
discussed
with
you
yesterday,
there's
one
big
issue
here
or
really
two
we're
never
going
to
get
over
this
covid.
C
If,
if
this
code
would
last
two
years
that
this
bills
allow
this
practice
to
continue
we're
going
to
be
a
third
world
country,
our
economy
will
be
dead.
This
won't
save
restaurants
or
anything.
We
need
to
get
over
this
and
get
back
to
normal,
as
other
people
have
said,
we're
already
filling
up
restaurants
and
when
you
get
outside
memphis
and
nashville
and
major
metropolitan
areas,
we've
been
normal
all
along
for
the
most
part
and
you
get
into
rural
areas
and
suburban
most
of
the
suburban
counties.
C
I
think
it's
a
bad
practice
to
continue
this
for
two
years,
because
it's
going
to
encourage
the
extension
of
other
emergency
powers
and
other
things
that
really
stifle
the
economy
for
the
next
two
years.
I
think
we
need
this
needs
to
be
for
a
very
much
shorter
time
span
like
six
months,
and
we
renew
it
january
or
something
that
just
two
years
is
just
too
long
and
it's
setting
a
bad
president,
but
I'm
gonna
have
to
vote.
No.
Thank
you.
A
T
T
Recognized.
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
members.
This
is
not
an
alcohol
related
bill,
so
hopefully
you'll
be
relieved
at
that.
This
bill
has
been
worked
on
and
assisted
with
the
bankers
association,
along
with
the
help
of
farmer's
credit.
What
it
does
is
for
about
40
years
now
our
homestead
exemptions
hovered
around
5
000.
This
increases
the
homestead
exemption
for
individuals
to
35
000.
It
increases
for
jointly
held
property
to
52
500.
with
that,
mr
speaker,
I'll,
be
glad
to
answer
any
questions.
Otherwise
I'll
renew
my
motion,
representative.
A
A
E
A
T
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
This
legislation
was
brought
to
me
by
our
ethics
and
guru
campaign
and
what
it
is
currently
any
civil
fines
that
are
issued
by
that
registry
are
under
the
ag's
office
to
pursue
and
collect
what
this
does
is
it
allows
them
to
hire
outside
counsel
in
order
to
collect
fines
that
have
been
issued
by
the
registry
in
a
more
efficient
manner,
quicker
manner.
T
Currently,
there's
about
over
a
million
dollars
worth
of
fines
that
are
out
there,
there
are
some
that
could
have
some
statute
problems,
so
this
would
make
it
easier
for
the
bureau
of
ethics
to
collect
those
fines
with
that.
Mr
speaker
I'll
be
happy
to
take
any
questions.
Otherwise,
I
renew
my
motion
representative.
H
H
T
Thank
you
for
the
question.
I
can
assure
you
that
that's
nowhere
in
the
intent
of
the
legislation
to
make
it
any
sort
of
partisan
issue
at
all
what
this
does
is
allow
them
to
hire
a
specialized
law
firm
that
deals
specifically
in
the
collection
effort.
There
are
several
of
those
out
there
and
by
that
relationship
with
the
registry,
those
lawyers,
those
firms
etc.
Do
that
collection
work
by
our
own
rules.
I
stand
here
as
a
lawyer
as
an
officer
of
the
court.
T
That
would
say
they
cannot
take
a
case
based
upon
a
particular
partisan,
particular
issue.
They
are
dealt
with
whomever
it
is
and
that
those
particular
fines
are
to
be
pursued,
so
they
have
to
pick
a
law
firm
or
a
collection
law
firm
for
lack
of
a
better
word.
That
would
look
beyond
any
issues
that
you
bring
up
in
your
question,
but
thank
you
for
the
question
representative.
H
A
T
H
A
H
T
This
legislation
is
designed
to
be
statewide.
Obviously,
so,
if
there's
a
case
that
the
registry
is
pursuing,
that's
in
memphis
or
nashville
or
knoxville,
or
jacksonville
or
gulletsville,
where
I'm
from
sumner
county,
whatever
the
case
may
be,
there
may
be
certain
firms
that
appear
in
those
courts
that
appear
in
nashville
that
don't
appear
in
memphis.
So
you've
got
a
various
different
folks
that
could
appear
across
our
state
to
prosecute
these
cases.
T
So
there's
no
way
to
limit
who
the
registry
could
hire
as
long
as
they
are
a
competent
firm
that
does
this
specialized
work
in
the
collection
world
and
there's
not
an
abundance
of
those
type
firms
across
the
state
that
do
that.
But
there
are
some
that
only
appear
in
western
tennessee.
There
are
some
that
only
appear
in
middle,
then
there's
some
that
only
appear
in
knoxville
so
or
eastern
tennessee.
H
H
F
T
T
Our
ag's
office
obviously
represents
the
state,
have
a
lot
of
cases
and
when
you
have
one
sector
of
what
they're
responsible
for
doing,
sometimes
they
may
not
get
worked
as
fast
as
someone
would
like
them,
like
the
registry
would
so
in
a
collection
world.
If
you
do
collection,
work
the
longer
the
case
pins,
the
harder
it
becomes
to
collect
those
assets
subject
to
that
fine.
T
F
Thank
you
what
I
hear.
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
What
I
hear
you
saying
is
that
the
attorney
general
reporter's
office
is
stretched
thin
and
stretched
thin
over
95
counties,
but
this
earlier
this
year
we
passed
legislation
to
expand
jurisdiction
to
all
95
counties
in
certain
cases,
and
the
attorney
general's
office
said
there
was
nothing
wrong
with
that.
So
I
don't
know
why.
Specifically
in
collections
cases,
we
want
to
protect
the
efficiency
and
workload
of
the
attorney
general's
office,
but
in
say
constitutional
or
alj
related
cases
we
don't
mind,
sending
it
to
all
95
counties.
F
Well,
I
understand
this
to
be
in
the
interest
of
the
ag's
office
and
and
and
their
concern.
This
is
brought
by
the
campaign
of
ethic
or
finance,
I
suspect,
with
the
with
the
consent
of
the
ag's
office,
but
I'll
move
on.
So
my
next
question
is
collections
agencies
collections
firms
generally
collect
they
get
paid
based
on
the
percentage
of
what
they
collect.
F
T
Representative,
this
does
not
impact
the
registry's
ability
to
negotiate
any
fine.
They
they
assess,
whether
whether
there's
more
or
less
or
whatever,
the
fine
is.
It
has
no
implication
whatsoever
of
their
ability
to
settle
a
particular
fine
should
they
desire,
regardless,
if
there's
a
firm,
hired
or
not
president
clements.
F
A
A
A
T
A
R
T
T
I
rescheduled
this
thing
three
or
four
times
and
had
no
idea
that
my
insurance
company
had
requested
additional
information
from
my
provider,
and
so
I
didn't
know
any
of
this
until
they
actually
denied
my
claim-
and
I
said
well
why
in
the
world,
did
you
not
tell
me
that
that
I
that
y'all
were
asking
for
more
information
from
my
doctor?
I
might
have
been
able
to
call
my
doctor
and
let
them
know
hey
give
them
the
information
you
requested.
T
Insurance
companies
said
because
we're
not
required
to-
and
I
said
well,
hopefully,
you
will
be
now
so
what
this
bill
does
is
that
it
puts
in
if
the
insurance
company
asks
for
additional
information
in
a
pre-authorization
setting,
they
at
least
have
to
copy
the
patient.
So
the
patient
knows
that
there's
been
that
request,
so
hopefully
they
can
assist
the
insurance
company
in
paying
a
claim.
So
with
that,
mr
speaker
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
your
questions.
Otherwise,
I
will
renew
my
motion
representative.
E
E
Payer
and
the
provider
and
and
oftentimes
these
these
clients,
they
know
their
doctor,
they're
friends
with
their
doctor.
They
go
to
church
with
their
doctor.
All
they
had
to
do
was
shoot
them
a
text
message
and
say:
hey
did
you?
Did
you
get
that
question
from
the
insurance
company?
I
think
this
makes
perfect
perfect
common
sense.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
bringing
this
legislation.
A
A
A
C
A
C
A
A
A
P
D
A
A
P
P
Our
textbooks
are,
however,
on
a
six-year
cycle
of
evaluation,
so
sometimes
it
comes
up
with
a
or
an
lea
has
to
request
a
waiver.
What
this
bill
does.
Is
it
set
forth
a
process
on
how
our
state
board
may
process
these
waiver
requests?
This
bill
gives
clarifying
language
on
how
the
process
will
occur
with
our
state
board
in
granting
these
waivers,
and
it
also
aligns
the
enactment
dates
between
a
previously
passed
bill
that
we
did
in
special
session
and
this
legislation,
and
with
that,
mr
speaker,
I
renew
my
motion.
Sharon.
H
H
E
Knox,
thank
you,
mr
speaker,
so
my
question
from
a
lot
of
teachers
that
I've
talked
to
what
their
concern
is
when
you're
teaching
a
skill,
maybe
it's
a
difficult
skill,
long
division.
Whatever
a
lot
of
times,
students
need
a
lot
more
practice
than
what's
in
the
textbooks
and
so
they'll
pull
worksheets
from
wherever
they
can
find
them
that
are
teaching
the
skill
that
they
are
currently
teaching
their
concern
is
they
might
pull
it
from
a
book
that
says
common
core
standards
because,
quite
frankly,
the
tennessee
standards
are
the
same
as
common
core
standards.
A
P
What
yes,
well,
what
this
bill
addresses
is
our
textbooks
and
our
instructional
materials
you
may
be
getting
to
a
little
bit
of
supplement
materials,
maybe
not
understand
your
question.
This
allows
for
a
process
that,
when
a
lea
has
a
particular
materials
which
may
may
be
common,
as
we
all
know,
one
size
never
fits
all
as
we
go
through
the
process
of
anything.
This
is
allows
a
process
to
where
the
lea
can
say.
We
like
to
request
a
waiver.
E
P
Chairman
mike
thank
you
and
I
think,
you're
getting
off
and
look
to
the
supplemental
materials,
our
our
textbooks
and
instructional
materials
which
go
through
our
textbook
commission
every
six
years.
This
is
a
process
where,
by
these
are
adopted,
you're
getting
in
a
little
bit
to
supplement
materials,
which
is
another
issue.
We
also
have
legislation
addressing
that
this
particular
legislation
doesn't
get
into
that.
F
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
I'm
going
to
follow
up
with
my
colleague
from
shelby
county's
question.
Under
the
senate
amendment,
it
appeared
to
add
that
a
charter
school
can
request
a
waiver
under
the
tennessee
public
charter
school
act,
and
it's
on
my
understanding
that
that
part
of
the
code
allows
them
more
flexibility
than
other
public
schools.
F
P
F
Right,
thank
you
and
I
understand
that.
Of
course
we
have
a
lot
of
charter
schools
here
in
metro
and
my
st,
my
own
children
attend
metro
schools,
but
I
apologize
it's
on
the
fly
following
up
on
my
colleagues
question
on
the
on
the
on
the
mark
calendar
it
on
page
12
of
15
of
mark
calendar.
It
says
sentiment.
One
ad
said
a
public
charter
school
may
request
a
waiver
for
the
use
of
textbooks
and
instructional
materials
in
accordance
with
the
tennessee
public
charter.
F
Schools
act
2002,
it's
my
understanding
and
I
and
I
may
be
wrong,
but
the
public
charter
schools
act
gives
charter
schools
a
little
bit
more
flexibility
under
the
waiver
provision.
So
if
they
can,
we've
amended
this
to
allow
them
to
request
a
waiver
under
that
act.
So
I
guess
my
concern
is
that
we're
giving
charter
schools
more
flexibility
than
traditional
public
schools,
even
though
they're
both
considered
public
schools?
So
I
may
be
misunderstanding
that
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong,
but
that's
that's
my
question.
If
that's
correct,
why
are
we
doing
that.
P
Thank
you
for
for
that
question.
I
is
my
understanding
that
that
would
not
be
correct.
Now,
charter
schools
fall
under
independent
management
of
a
of
a
charter
school
board.
They
have
flexibility,
what
they
do,
but
when
it
comes
to
state
standards,
standards
that
our
textbook
commission
adopts
and
that
we
as
a
general
assembly
set
set
the
standards,
they
follow
the
same
rules
and
regulations
that
any
any
other
school
would,
and
I
would
support
that
representative.
A
A
R
A
H
D
H
Thank
you,
mr
speaker.
This
bill
amends
the
confidential
records
sections
of
our
code
to
add
that
photographic
evidence
or
video
evidence
of
minors
in
a
fatal,
minor
motor
vehicle
accident
that
depicts
a
deceased
minor
victim
at
the
scene
of
the
accident,
shall
be
treated
as
confidential
and
shall
not
be
open
for
inspection
by
members
of
the
public.
Unless
the
custodial
parent
or
legal
guardian
weighs
the
confidentiality.
A
A
A
M
A
A
A
D
House
bill
570
by
chairman
reagan,
relative
to
administrative
procedure.
Mr
speaker,
on
april
14
2021
sending
substitute
house
bill
570
for
senate
bill
1086
adopted
amendment
one
and
reset
house
bill
570..
As
amended
on
april
15
2021,
the
senate
further
considered
house
bill
570
adopted
amendment
2
and
passed
house
bill
570
as
amended
john
reagan.
You're
recognized.
C
I
moved
to
adopt
amendment
one
and
non-concurrent
senate
amendment
number
two
and
for
the
benefit
of
some
of
my
colleagues,
I
did
bring
my
notes
this
time
senate
amendment
number
one
takes
what
this
house
passed
and
breaks
it
up.
It
actually,
I
hate
to
say
this,
but
it
actually
improves
the
bill
a
little
bit
by
requiring
that
the
entities
that
were
stayed
reappear
after
75
days
and
the
stay
can
be
renewed
by
either
chamber.
C
A
Chairman
chairman
reagan,
music,
concurrence
number
one,
probably
second,
discussion
on
the
amendment
and
the
objection
to
the
call
of
the
question
scene.
None
all
those
favor
of
synonym
number
one
vote.
I
when
the
belt
rings,
those
opposed
vote
no
has
every
member
voted.
Does
they
remember
which
change
to
vote.
A
A
D
C
T
C
A
D
D
R
A
Chairman
kumar
moves
to
not
happily
concur
incentive
number
one,
probably
second,
any
discussion
on
the
amendment.
Any
objection
to
the
question
scene.
No
in
all
his
favor
send
amendment
number
one
vote
when
the
bell
rings.
Those
opposed
vote
no
has
every
member
voted
same
everyone's
changed
their
vote.
A
C
A
You've
heard
the
caption
any
objections
without
objection.
The
rules
are
suspended.
Representative
mitchell,
I
move
adoption
of
hcr
479
representative
mitchell
moves
adoption
of
house
joint
resolution,
479
property
seconded
any
objection
to
the
question
scene.
None
all
those
favor
house,
joint
resolution,
479
say
I
I
those
boats
say
no,
the
eyes
have
it.
I
declare
it
adopted
with
objections.
The
motion
week
series
table
representative
hardaway
you're
recognized.
H
A
N
A
A
G
D
D
C
J
C
Reagan.
Thank
you,
mr
speaker,
members.
I
will
be
making
this
announcement
again
tomorrow,
but
I'm
making
it
today
because
of
the
shortened
time
spans
that
we
have
the
joint
government
operations.
Rule
review
committee
meets
on
monday,
26
april
21.
That's
next
monday
in
house
hearing
room
one.
I
make
this
announcement
because
any
amendments
or
scheduled
speakers
must
be
made
before
close
of
business
on
friday.
C
O
O
There's
nothing
to
celebrate
here,
there's
nothing
good
about
an
individual
being
convicted
of
murder.
There's
nothing
good
about
a
member
of
our
law
enforcement
community
being
convicted
of
murder.
There's
nothing
good
about
a
family
losing
a
family
member.
This
is
hurtful
this
is
hurtful
to
that
family.
This
is
hurtful
to
their
community.
You
hear
a
lot
of
people
saying
justice
was
served,
it's
not
unless
you
can
bring
that
family
member
back
to
life
justice
hasn't
been
served.