Thursday, May 12th, 2011. Texas House of Representatives.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The House, come to order. Members, please register. Have all registered? Have all registered? Quorum is present. The House and gallery, please rise for the invocation. Chair recognizes Representative Hunter to introduce our Pastor of the Day.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, members, it's my honor and privilege to introduce the Pastor of the Day, he's a very, very personal friend of mine. It's Pastor Mark Pew with the King's Crossing Church of Christ in Corpus Christi. He's been there nine years. But before he blesses us, I want you all to know that Corpus Christi brought the rain. Mark Pew.

PASTOR: Thank you. Please bow with me. Gracious God, Creator of the universe, King of kings and Lord of lords, we humble ourselves in your mighty presence this morning as we seek your will and plead for your guidance. The blessings that you have given us are plentiful and we do give thanks this morning for the rain that we are enjoying that we need so very badly. And, Father, we have numerous opportunities before us, but we also have challenges to face, and we pray that you will give us the strength and the fortitude that we need commensurate with the task of this day. I pray today for the men and women who represent our great state here in Austin. From big cities and small towns, all across the political spectrum, but may we put aside the differences between us, and may we all work together for the overall good of our citizenry. We are so blessed here in the State of Texas. Much of the nation looks to us for leadership, and may we never shrink back, and may we be a state that moves boldly into the future. We're blessed with such abundant natural resources, amazing technological base. Father, we're blessed with Houston and the Space Center there. So much agriculture throughout our state, but in need of rain. Medical science, natural resources; we're richly blessed. But we also look around and we see the need to care for the people of our state. Most of us here today are richly blessed far beyond what we deserve. Father, at the same time we have those among us who are vulnerable, our children, our senior citizens sometimes neglected. Give us a passion to care for those who are less fortunate. And, Father God, we pray for our immediate concerns. We again pray for rain in the drought stricken areas of our state. We pray for peace in the war torn areas of our world that our brave men and women can come home and be reunited with their families once and for all. We pray, in the meantime, that well you will keep them from harm's way. Heavenly Father, we pray that you will bless all of our efforts this day, may they be to your honor and glory. In the name of our Savior, we pray. Amen.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Price to lead us in the pledge.

REPRESENTATIVE WALTER PRICE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, guests in the gallery, please join we me as we recite the pledges to our nation's flag and the Texas flag. [PLEDGE]

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Excuse Representative Marcus because of important business in the district, on the motion of Representative Raymond. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Shelton to introduce our Doctor of the Day.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to introduce my colleague and constituent, Dr. Richard Young. He is on the faculty at the John Peter Smith at Fort Worth. He did his medical school training in San Antonio, and did his residency in family practice at John Peter Smith, and is involved in the research program there, in addition to teaching medical students and residents. We are happy to have you and welcome to the House.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair announces the signing of the following in the presence of the House:

THE CLERK: HB 457, HB 564, HB 994, HB 47, HB 1275, HB 1753, HB 2012, HB 2375, HB 2991, HB 3287, HCR 131, HCR 157.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Craddick for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider House Concurrent Resolution 154, congratulating Steve Hartmann on his retirement as the executive director of the University of Lands for the University of Texas System.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've hear the motion Is there objection? So ordered. Chair lays out -- Chair lays out the following resolution?

THE CHAIR: HCR 154 by Craddick. WHEREAS, Stephen Hartmann of Midland retired as executive director of University Lands for The University of Texas System on April 30, 2011, concluding a distinguished career with the institution that spanned more than three decades; and. WHEREAS, A graduate of Southwest Texas State University. Steve Hartmann earned his master's degree in range science from Texas A&M University; he joined UT Lands-Surface Interests as a field Representative in 1976 and served as director of University Lands-West Texas Operations for five years before his appointment as executive director in 1997; and. WHEREAS, Mr. Hartmann was the first individual to assume responsibility for all aspects of University Lands operations including the management of 2.1 million acres of Permanent university Fund properties across 19 West Texas counties; in addition to directing the management of oil, gas, and other mineral operations, he oversaw grazing, farming, and hunting leases, as well as utility easements and business sites; and. WHEREAS, Under the leadership of this dynamic and plain-spoken Texan, the annual revenue from University Lands increased fivefold, adding a cumulative income of more than $3.7 billion to the Permanent University Fund and Available University fund; in 2011, contributions to the Permanent University Fund will exceed $800 million; Mr. Hartmann added significant new revenue sources, including Ste. Genevieve Winery, Mesa Vineyard, which is the largest vineyard in Texas, and vast wind farms to generate power for Texas residents and businesses; moreover, he recently presided over two record-breaking sales of leases for mineral development on university Lands, facilitated by his implementation of technology such as a robust GIS system enabling online mapping and access of well data; and. WHEREAS, The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service recognized Mr. Hartmann in 2009 for land conservation and restoration efforts, and he received the W. R. Chapline Land stewardship Award from the Society for Range Management; he served the Society for Range Management-Texas Section as president, as a director, and in myriad other leadership roles, and he also served on the Texas Tech College of Agricultural Sciences Dean's Advisory committee; in addition, he has given generously of his time and talents as a member of the International Right-of-Way Association the International Pipeline Committee, the Permian Basin Petroleum Association, and Midland's Environmental Professionals; and. WHEREAS, In all his endeavors, Mr. Hartmann enjoys the support and encouragement of his wife, Georgia, and their two sons daughter-in-law, and granddaughter; and. WHEREAS, Admired for his integrity, responsible stewardship of the land, and exceptional business acumen, Steve Hartmann greatly benefited The University of Texas System and the entire lone Star State, and his accomplishments will continue to resonate. In the years to come; now, therefore, be it. RESOLVED, That the 82nd Legislature of the State of Texas hereby congratulate Steve Hartmann on his retirement as executive director of University Lands for The University of Texas System and extend sincere appreciation for his outstanding contributions; and, be it further. RESOLVED, That an official copy of this resolution be prepared for Mr. Hartmann as an expression of high regard by the. Texas House of Representatives and Senate.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Craddick.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker, members, I move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Representative Lewis moves to add all members' names. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Craddick.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker, members, for those of you who don't know Steve, and will never have the opportunity to get to know him, Steve is the executive director of the University of Lands for the University of Texas System. He has been an incredible asset to the state and the University of Lands. I've dealt with him, he gets every penny on every lease and everything. In fact, he says, when I go over to the other offices I used to give him a dime to pay for a drink and he says it's a quarter, get your money out. The resolution captured the accomplishments of a very distinguished career but fell short on portraying some of Steve's true character. I don't know how many times we've ridden back and forth together on the Southwest Airlines, and I told him this morning, because he's moving from Midland, we're probably going to lose a flight because we have gone on it so much going back and forth. We have had a lot of talks going back and forth, and I can't tell you some of the things he told me but is really a wonderful person. He has the state and the university totally his main concern in life. So for the record the record breaking that they just talked about in the resolution, the UT System will be getting my bill for all my advice I gave to you on oil and gas. But, seriously, the state and the University of Lands was incredibly lucky to have Steve at the helm and at such an important task, and he will be definitely be missed by everybody in this state. Members, please take time in a minute to me come visit with Steve on the dais and thank this Aggie for his dedication to the UT System, which is an interesting concept. Steve and his wife, Georgia, are on the dais. He's joined by his parents Francis and Gertrude up here and up above in the gallery, along with his two sons, John and Edward. And we want to thank y'all for coming and appreciate what y'all have done for him letting him do that job. Help me welcome Steve to the chamber. Thank y'all very much.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Madam Doorkeeper?

DOORKEEPER: Mr. Speaker, I have a messenger from the Senate at the door of the House.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Admit the messenger.

MESSENGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm directed by the Senate to inform the House that the Senate has taken the following actions: The Senate has passed --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Geren for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, you might notice that the painting is gone from the wall, and that's because we had a leak in the roof. I actually was trying to get my portrait commissioned to hang there but, no. We have a small leak in the roof and we thought to protect it we should take it down until we get the leak fixed. But that's where it is. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOT NAISHTAT: Rules to take up and consider: House Resolution 1852 recognizing artist Diana Cochese Sprinkle.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. The clerk will read the resolution.

THE CLERK: HR 1852 by Naishtat. Congratulating artist, Diana Sprinkle, on her 34th birthday.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Naishtat.

REPRESENTATIVE ELLIOT NAISHTAT: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. You're, welcome. Members, Representative Darby moves that we dispense with the reading and referral of bills until the end of today's calendar. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Members, I'd like to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider House Resolution 1561.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. Chair lays out the following resolution.

THE CLERK: HR 1561 by Darby. In memory of Dr. Theron Karman Weatherby of San Anglo.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Thank you, members. Today we're paying tribute to the life and accomplishments of a truly honorable man. Dr. Theron Karman Weatherby is from San Angelo. He was a good friend of mine. Karman was not only one of the finest surgeons in San Angelo but kind man who touched many lives. Karman had a heart of gold and enough selfless affection to capture us all. We're joined today by Karman's wife, Caroline Weatherby and her sister, Kay Ellis. Caroline, would you please stand, and Kay if you are -- okay. Accompanying them are Karman and Caroline's son, Tim Weatherby and his son Scott. Okay. Their son Jay, and his wife Janna and their children, Allie, Ben and Caroline. Their daughter, Amy, and her son Hunter, and her daughter, Kristen, and her husband Ed with their children, Alex, Annie and Emily. Members, please join me in welcoming the Weatherby family. They're truly an institution in west Texas. Dr. Weatherby died on March the 11th, 2010. And he we honor his life and commitment to others today. Would you help me welcome the Weatherby family to your House. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Members, this is a memorial resolution. All those in favor please stand. The motion -- The entire Texas House moves passage. And Representative Sheffield moves that all members' names be added. Is there objection? Chair hears none. Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, I would like to recognize a very distinguished group here from the Temple ISD middle schools and high school. They are the superintendent's student advisory counsel, and they actually advise our superintendent, Dr. Battershell there in Temple. And this group, in a student targeted communication campaign. Like to welcome them. I believe I see them in blue and white up here on the east side of the gallery. Get up and stand and give these young people applause for dedication for helping our community be better. Welcome. Chair, members, we are ready to begin consideration of the congratulatory and memorial calendars. The following congratulatory resolutions have been withdrawn: HR1742. Chair lays out the following resolutions: Clerk will read the resolutions.

THE CLERK: SCR 45 by Fraser. Recognizing Otto P. Scharth on the occasion of his 88th birthday. SCR 46 by Ellis. Commemorating the 70th anniversary of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. SCR 52 by Watson. Recognizing Donn and Arlene Adelman for their efforts on behalf of Crime Stoppers. HCR 135 by Legler. Honoring Bill Bailey, retiring constable for Precinct 8 of Harris County. HCR 142 by Davis, John. Congratulating Clear Lake High School junior Cameron Blizzard on overcoming cancer. HCR 143 by Davis, Sarah. Honoring Debra L. Friedkin for her support of the ongoing anthropological research at the Debra L. Friedkin site by Texas A&M University's Center for the Study of the First Americans. HR 18 by Alonzo. Honoring the life and music of Stevie Ray Vaughan. HR 465 by Price. Recognizing May 5, 2011, as National Day of Prayer in Texas. HR 466 by Price. Recognizing May 3, 2011, as National Teacher Day in Texas. HR 957 by Strama. Recognizing May 2011 as Fibromyalgia Awareness Month. HR 1156 by Harless. Congratulating Dr. David Anthony on his retirement as superintendent of Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District. HR by 1418 Frullo. Congratulating Laroy and Connie Hawkins of Lubbock on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR 1440 by Workman. Congratulating John P. Reinhart of Cub Scout Pack No. 34 in Austin on receiving the Arrow of Light Award. HR 1441 by Anchia. Congratulating Amy Lillian Ward-Meier and Edward Franklin Meier on the birth of their son, Nolan Edward Meier. HR 1445 by Harper-Brown. Congratulating Edgar and Elizabeth Brown of Dallas on their 70th wedding anniversary. HR 1447 by Schwertner. Congratulating the Artie Henry Middle School band on earning the 2010 Sudler Cup. HR 1448 by Craddick. Congratulating nominees for the 2011 Excellence in Teaching and Unsung Hero Awards, sponsored by the Midland Chamber of Commerce Education Committee. HR 1449 by Craddick. Congratulating Roy and Marylyn Byrd of Lamesa on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR 1452 by Menendez. Honoring Stewart Title in San Antonio on the 100th anniversary of its founding. HR 1453 by Bonnen. Commending Army Specialist Brad Thomas of Jones Creek on his military service and congratulating him on becoming the first baseball player from Brazosport High School to have his jersey retired. HR 1454 by Perry. Congratulating Delbert and Carolyn McDougal of Lubbock on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR 1456 by Hardcastle. Commemorating the 128th Doans May Day Picnic on May 7, 2011. HR 1460 by Branch. Commemorating the 100th anniversary of the Sons of Hermann Hall in Dallas. HR 1463 by Pitts. Congratulating the Waxahachie High School girls' golf team on winning the district championship. HR 1465 by Hamilton. Recognizing National Plumbers Day on April 25, 2011. HR 1507 by Marquez. Recognizing El Paso Tejano rap group Lower Valley Tres for its song "I Love My City." HR 1585 by Harper-Brown. Honoring Suzie Oelschlegel, head coach of the girls' basketball team at MacArthur High School in Irving. HR 1586 by Truitt. Congratulating Bernice Hatcher of Grapevine on her 100th birthday. HR 1588 by Schwertner. Congratulating the girls' cross country team from C. H. Yoe High School in Cameron on its second-place finish in Class 2A at the 2010 UIL state meet. HR 1589 by Johnson. Commending Carl Johnson for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1590 by Johnson. Commending Saundra Ray for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1591 by Johnson. Commending Morris Luster for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1592 by Johnson. Commending Neil Emmons for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1593 by Johnson. Commending Marilynn S. Mayse for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1594 by Johnson. Commending Deborah C. Culberson for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1595 by Johnson. Commending Patrick McCrainey for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1596 by Johnson. Commending Casie Pierce for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1597 by Johnson. Commending Tommy Briggs for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1598 by Johnson. Commending Damion White for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1599 by Howard, Donna. Honoring Dr. James E. Boggs of Austin on his 90th birthday. HR 1601 by Flynn. Congratulating Hubert and Phyllis Lytle of Greenville on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR 1602 by Hilderbran. Recognizing J. Michael Duncan for his service as Knight Commander of Kappa Alpha Order. HR 1603 by Hilderbran. Commemorating the opening of Trent's Retreat. HR 1606 by Morrison. Honoring Bette-jo Simpson Buhler of Victoria on her 90th birthday. HR 1607 by Anchia. Commemorating the 75th anniversary of the construction of the Texas Centennial Exposition's "Home for the Future" in Dallas. HR 1613 by Menendez. Congratulating the San Antonio Water System on winning a Texas Environmental Excellence Award. HR 1618 by Murphy. Honoring Steve Dorman of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 130 in Harris County. HR 1619 by Murphy. Honoring Bob Blackmer of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 338 in Harris County. HR 1620 by Murphy. Honoring Larry Pound of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 356 in Harris County. HR 1621 by Murphy. Honoring Warren Stevens of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 429 in Harris County. HR 1622 by Murphy. Honoring Roman Klein of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 437 in Harris County. HR 1623 by Murphy. Honoring Craig Hagedorn of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 438 in Harris County. HR 1624 by Murphy. Honoring Mary Maxwell of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 483 in Harris County. HR 1625 by Murphy. Honoring Stephen Sherman of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 487 in Harris County. HR 1626 by Murphy. Honoring Stuart Mayper of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 492 in Harris County. HR 1627 by Murphy. Honoring Martha Brownfield of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 493 in Harris County. HR 1628 by Murphy. Honoring Ralph Fite of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 499 in Harris County. HR 1629 by Murphy. Honoring Shelley Hillman of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 504 in Harris County. HR 1630 by Murphy. Honoring Samuel Abraham Mai of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 508 in Harris County. HR 1631 by Murphy. Honoring Helen Bledsoe of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 626 in Harris County. HR 1632 by Murphy. Honoring Jim McSpadden of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 727 in Harris County. HR 1633 by Murphy. Honoring Jill Fury of Houston for serving as Republican Party precinct Chair of Precinct 765 in Harris County. HR 1634 by Torres. Honoring Angel Escobar on his retirement as city manager of Corpus Christi. HR 1636 by Burkett. Congratulating Mary Marlow Woodard on her receipt of the Distinguished Library Service Award from the Texas Association of School Librarians and on being named chair-elect of the association. HR 1637 by Kolkhorst. Congratulating the Brenham Christian Academy football team on winning the 2010 TAPPS Six-man Division II state championshipHR 1638 Margo Congratulating Ida M. Steadman on her retirement as principal cellist of the El Paso Symphony Orchestra. HR 1639 by Margo. Congratulating the El Paso Symphony Orchestra on its 80th anniversary season. HR 1640 by Miller. Welcoming Larry D. Williams, vice president and director of State Auto Insurance Companies, to Texas. HR 1642 by Veasey. Congratulating James N. Austin, Jr., of Fort Worth on the occasion of his 60th birthday. HR 1643 by Deshotel. Honoring the Texas Small Farmers and Ranchers Community Based Organization. HR 1644 by Callegari. Congratulating Emory Camille Callegari on her graduation from St. Michael's Catholic Academy. HR 1645 by Callegari. Honoring the Galveston Company of the Houston Medical Response Group of the Texas State Guard on its activation as the Galveston Medical Response Group. HR 1648 by Cain. Congratulating Nigel Christopher of Mount Pleasant on his selection as the 2011 Titus County Republican of the Year. HR 1650 by Cain. Congratulating Tony Mize of Mount Pleasant on receiving the Chairman's Award for Special Service from the Titus County Republican Party. HR 1651 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Honoring senior pastor Barry Camp and his wife, Martha, for 20 years of outstanding service to Highland Baptist Church in Waco. HR 1652 by Flynn. Congratulating Charles and Rachel Recer of Emory on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR 1653 by Flynn. Congratulating James Louis and Mary Jean Pickney of Wills Point on their 67th wedding anniversary. HR 1658 by Davis, Sarah. Honoring Dr. Larry R. Kaiser for his service as president of The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. HR 1664 by Harper-Brown. Congratulating the City of Irving for its notable 2011 record of achievements. HR 1666 by Harper-Brown. Congratulating Amanda Lambert of Irving on receiving a 2011 Yes I Can! Award from the Council for Exceptional Children. HR 1667 by Harper-Brown. Congratulating Irving Cares on receiving a four-star rating from Charity Navigator. HR 1668 by Branch. Recognizing Jonathan Neerman for his service as Chair of the Dallas County Republican Party. HR 1676 by Gonzales, Veronica. Congratulating the students from Memorial High School in McAllen who were named to the 2010-2011 Texas High School Coaches Association 5A Academic All-State Football Team. HR 1677 by Gonzales, Veronica. Commemorating the 2011 Hispanic Heritage Fiesta in Mercedes. HR 1678 by Gonzales, Veronica. Congratulating South Texas College president Dr. Shirley A. Reed on her receipt of the 2011 Alfredo G. de los Santos, Jr., Distinguished Leadership in Higher Education Award from the American Association of Hispanics in Higher Education. HR 1679 by Munoz, Jr. Recognizing May 2011 as Older Americans Month and honoring the Silver Ribbon Community Partners. HR 1680 by Munoz, Jr. Congratulating Lazaro "Larry" Gallardo, Jr., of Hidalgo County on being named the 2010 Constable of the Year by the National Constables Association. HR 1686 by Frullo. Congratulating George and Lucille Kveton of Lubbock on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR 1687 by Frullo. Congratulating the Reverend Emmitt Clampitt and Barbara Clampitt of Lubbock on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR 1688 by Frullo. Congratulating Douglas and Angela Boren of Lubbock on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR 1690 by Frullo. Congratulating radio station KFYO of Lubbock on its 85th anniversary. HR 1691 by Frullo. Congratulating Alvin and Glenda Burton of Lubbock on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR 1692 by Menendez. Honoring Dolores Mendez for her contributions to the San Antonio community. HR 1693 by Schwertner. Honoring Mary Lopez Dale on running the 115th Boston Marathon on April 18, 2011. HR 1695 by Reynolds. Honoring Cynthia Bennett, president and founder of the Sienna and East Fort Bend Democrats Club. HR 1696 by Reynolds. Congratulating Velma Brown on her election to the board of the Sienna and East Fort Bend Democrats Club. HR 1697 by Reynolds. Congratulating Stephanie Green on her election as secretary of the board of the Sienna and East Fort Bend Democrats Club. HR 1698 by Reynolds. Congratulating Shania Wright on her election as treasurer of the board of the Sienna and East Fort Bend Democrats Club. HR 1699 by Reynolds. Commemorating the 2011 Missouri City Juneteenth Celebration. HR 1700 by Dutton. Congratulating the 2011 eighth-grade graduates of Northwest Preparatory Academy Charter School in Houston. HR 1703 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Ryan Fite on his receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR 1704 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Robert Jackson on his receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR 1705 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Alan Tuberville on his receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR 1706 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Nash Tuberville on his receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR 1707 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Hannah Powers on her receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR 1708 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Kate Harrison on her receipt of an Educators Credit Union scholarship. HR 1709 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Delmond and Diane Rosenkranz of Robinson on their 50th wedding anniversary. HR 1711 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Kollin Kahler of Waco on making the president's list at Lamar University. HR 1714 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating the students of Lorena Middle School for raising more than $2,000 in the Pennies for Patients campaign benefiting the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. HR 1715 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating the all-district athletic and academic honorees from the West High School boys' basketball team. HR 1718 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating the Waco ISD purchasing department on its receipt of a Texas Association of School Business Officials Award of Merit for Purchasing and Operations. HR 1719 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Gene Manske on being named a 2010 Outstanding Farmer. HR 1724 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". Congratulating Clarence and Charlotte Carpenter of Waco on their 60th wedding anniversary. HR 1728 by Johnson. Commending Deloris Hill-Peace for serving as a Democratic Party precinct Chair in Dallas County. HR 1729 by Ritter. Commemorating the 125th anniversary of the Lumbermen's Association. HR 1731 by Torres. Congratulating the members of the Corpus Christi ISD All-Stars for their success in the Special Olympics Area 20 Basketball Competition. HR 1732 by Margo. Congratulating The University of Texas at El Paso women's golf team on winning the 2011 Conference USA title. HR 1733 by Margo. Congratulating The University of Texas at El Paso cheerleading team on winning the 2011 National Cheerleaders Association Co-Ed Division Championship. HR 1734 by Perry. Congratulating the Plains High School academic competitors for their exemplary performance at the regional meet. HR 1735 by Davis, Yvonne. Honoring the members of the Dallas Black Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors for their exemplary public spirit. HR 1737 by Smithee. Honoring the Canyon High School girls' basketball team on winning the UIL 4A state championship. HR 1738 by Smithee. Honoring Joe Lombard, coach of the Canyon High School girls' basketball team, on his exceptional career. HR 1739 by Perry. Recognizing the Texas Dispute Resolution System on its 25th anniversary. HR 1743 by Strama. Congratulating Travis County Precinct 2 Constable Adan Ballesteros on being named the 2011 Constable of the Year and Travis County Precinct 2 Sergeant Dwight Bertram on being named the 2011 Deputy of the Year by the Central Texas Justices of the Peace and Constables Association. HR 1745 by Branch. Recognizing the 38th Annual Swiss Avenue Historic District Association's Mother's Day Home Tour in Dallas. HR 1746 by Pitts. Congratulating the Waxahachie High School boys' golf teams on their success at the 2011 district and regional tournaments. HR 1748 by Sheffield. Honoring Donald Clifton Heath of Temple on his 80th birthday. HR 1749 by Sheffield. Congratulating members of Extreme Cheer & Tumble on winning their division at the 2011 National Cheerleaders Association All-Star National Championship. HR 1750 by Johnson. Congratulating Betty Hooey on being elected to represent Dallas County in the Texas Silver-Haired Legislature for the 2011-2013 term. HR 1751 by Hunter. Congratulating Frank McMillan of Corpus Christi on his receipt of a 2011 Children's Book of the Year Award from the NAESP Foundation. HR 1752 by Hunter. Congratulating Dr. Mary Ann Rankin on her selection as president and CEO of the National Math and Science Initiative. HR 1755 by Burkett. Congratulating Randall Zajic on his retirement from the Mesquite Fire Department. HR 1757 by Morrison. Commemorating the 2011 Warrior's Weekend, taking place in Port O'Connor, May 20-22, to honor members of the military who have been wounded in the line of duty.

THE CHAIR: Members, the question is on the adoption of the congratulatory resolutions read by the clerk. Is there objection? Chair hears none. All the congratulatory resolutions are adopted. Members, we are about to go on the memorial calendar. If you have conversations, members, please take them outside the rail. We ask you to please take your seats. The following memorial resolutions have been withdrawn: HR 1459. Chair lays out the following memorial resolutions. Clerk will read the resolutions.

THE CLERK: HR 1425 by Hughes. In memory of Richard Wayne Napier of Mineola. HR 1444 by Harper-Brown. In memory of Giorgio Joseph Primo of Irving. HR 1450 by Hilderbran. In memory of Ross Snodgrass of Kerrville. HR 1451 by Hilderbran. In memory of George Milton Keller of Mason. HR 1455 by Raymond. In memory of Reynaldo Chapa, Jr., of Benavides. HR 1461 by Branch. In memory of Roy Richard Rubottom, Jr. HR 1464 by Pitts. In memory of James Rutledge Mason of Waxahachie. HR 1587 by Schwertner. In memory of Marilyn Stiles Shoemaker. HR 1604 by Lavender. In memory of June Hodges of Omaha, Texas. HR 1608 by Anchia. In memory of Evelyn Rhodes Witte Sterling of Dallas. HR 1609 by Anchia. In memory of William Sanders Barnhill, Jr., of Dallas. HR 1610 by Anchia. In memory of Isaac Field Roebuck, Jr., of Dallas. HR 1611 by Anchia. In memory of Irwin Ira Steinberg of Irving. HR 1612 by Anchia. In memory of Ruth Christine Howes of Dallas. HR 1614 by Pena. In memory of Benigno "Benny" Layton of Elsa. HR 1615 by Pena. In memory of Donny Cardenas of Edinburg. HR 1646 by Harper-Brown. In memory of Mildred B. Brandon of Irving. HR 1655 by Woolley. In memory of William Arnold McMinn, Jr., of Houston. HR 1657 by Hopson. In memory of Lafonda Ann Davis of Austin. HR 1665 by Harper-Brown. In memory of James Edward Rose of Irving. HR 1672 by Gallego. In memory of Johnny Emil Malik of Alpine. HR 1673 by Gallego. In memory of John Frank "Trey" Woodward III. HR 1674 by Gallego. In memory of Thelma R. Hoyle of Alpine. HR 1683 by Hunter. In memory of Ricardo G. "Richard" Alvarado of Alice. HR 1685 by Woolley. Commemorating the dedication of the Herbert Gee Municipal Courts Building in Houston and paying tribute to the life of Judge Gee. HR 1689 by Frullo. In memory of Bobby Gene Brown of Lubbock. HR 1710 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Julia Hikel of Elm Mott. HR 1712 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Cyril W. Cernosek of West. HR 1713 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Joy Allen Oliver of Lorena. HR 1716 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Vernon W. Sloane. HR 1717 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Betty Jean Slater of Riesel. HR 1720 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Victor D. "Bud" Wiley, Jr., of Waco. HR 1721 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Milton Roy Overgoner of Belton. HR 1722 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Mary Ruth Galloway of Waco. HR 1723 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Mary Helen Torres of Waco. HR 1725 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Donna L. Carey of Robinson. HR 1726 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Clara Samuelson of Waco. HR 1727 by Anderson, Charles "Doc". In memory of Olivia Tucker Cloud of Waco. HR 1736 by Smithee. In memory of Francis Edward "Frank" Barrett of Hereford. HR 1744 by Strama. In memory of Drennen Peter O'Melia. HR 1747 by Sheffield. In memory of U.S. Army Staff Sergeant Mecolus C. McDaniel

THE CHAIR: Members, the question is on the adoption of the memorial resolutions read by the clerk. Members, these are memorial resolutions. All those in favor, please rise. The memorial resolutions are unanimously adopted. Members, we're about to go on the calendar. Is Representative Simpson on the floor? Chair recognizes Representative Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Thank you Madam Speaker. Members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider HR1963.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The rules are suspended. Chair lays out HR 1963. Clerk will read the resolution.

THE CLERK: HR 1963 by Simpson. Honoring the staff and residents of the Highland Pines Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in Longview on the occasion of National Nursing Week.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: I move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The motion is adopted. Thank you. Is Representative Kolkhorst on the floor of the House? Is Representative Sylvester Turner on the floor of the House? Representative Turner? Members, members, the House will stand at ease until 10:40, which will allow members to get to the floor to take up some motions before the end of the routine motion period.

(The House stands at ease.)

THE CHAIR: Members, there has been a motion for reconsideration made by Mr. Orr. Chair recognizes Representative Orr on the motion of reconsideration.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Mr . Speaker, members, I move to reconsider the vote that was taken on Senate Bill 141 by Senator Eltife, and move for adoption.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion -- Mr. Taylor?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Madam Speaker, I rise in objection.

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Taylor?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: I rise to -- This is a debatable motion. I'd like to speak against the motion to reconsider.

THE CHAIR: Please come down front. Chair recognizes Representative Taylor to speak against the motion.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, members, I rise against this motion. There were several bills that died yesterday. They had their chance. There are many bills that are going to die at midnight tonight that will not have a chance to be debated or voted on this floor. Bills by Representative Torres, Representative Harper-Brown, Representative Sheffield, Representative Hunter, Representative Harless, Gallego, Hochberg. Many members have worked hard on their legislation and they deserve their chance to get at least one vote. This bill has already had a chance to get one vote. I think that we should respect what the chamber did last night, we should not reconsider this bill in light of the fact that tonight,so many of our bills that so many of our colleagues have worked so hard on are going to die because they didn't even get one single vote on this floor. I oppose it.

THE CHAIR: Representative Lucio, for what purpose? Representative Chisum, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Okay.

THE CHAIR: (inaudible) Do you want to come down there or do you need recognition?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Yes. Representative Chisum, I yield. I yield.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: This motion to reconsider has to be done at a certain time on the calendar. I guess we're in the reconsider time; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: That's correct. It has to be done before the tenth order of business of the day.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: So we're right here? If this is the last day to hear bills, our bills on the calendar; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: That is correct. This is the last day House bills can be voted out of this chamber.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Okay. So, we're probably going to be here to until midnight.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: And if we keep reconsidering, then we may not move any bills.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: That's correct. If we spend all day reconsidering those that we already voted down yesterday, and this bill has

(inaudible) controls in it. It was voted down for a good reason. But I'd like to -- In consideration of the chamber I think we should just take a vote. I move not to reconsider this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Okay. So your motion is to substitute the motion -- to not consider?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: I am opposing this motion. I encourage members to vote no on the motion to reconsider.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: That's your motion, is vote on the motion to reconsider?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Vote no. Vote no.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Orr.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Mr . Speaker, members. Members, I have never come up and asked to reconsider a vote. I don't think that the House -- of this bill got a fair hearing yesterday. There were a lot of people off the floor. As a matter of fact, this team of financial institutions, which I am a member of, the committee voted 9-0 in committee to vote this bill out. Yesterday, all nine members voted against it and there was a lot of confusion on what this bill does. There were no amendments on this bill. It's not going to take a lot of time. I think people really need to understand what this bill does. The industry, they've been working on this bill for over two and a half to three years, it was an interim study. All industries came together, worked this out, came through committee and then it got on the floor and it got confused. And I think it's fair to do a reconsideration of this vote and I move to do so.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: Madam Speaker? Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Murphy, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: I'd like to make a parliamentary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: State your inquiry, Mr. Murphy.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: I 'm reading in the rule book under Rule 7, Section 37, and it says in Sub-section C that a motion to reconsider the vote by which a joint resolution or current resolution is defeated is not in order unless the members previously provide at least one-hour's of notice with intent to make the motion by addressing the House when the House is in session, and it states that if a member intends to make the motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill or resolution is defeated. So, I'm wondering how this rule is practiced. I'm not seeing that notice provided.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Murphy? Yes, ma'am, you are correct. Rule 7, Section 37C is a motion to reconsider -- a motion to reconsider is not in order unless members previously provided a one hour notice by addressing the House when the House is in session. However, that objection must be made timely as well. Chair recognizes Representative Orr to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: M adam Speaker, are you saying it wasn't timely given on my part? Hold on one second. I'll come down front, Mr. Speaker. Maybe I can understand a little bit better if I come down closer.

THE CHAIR: Come down, Mr. Murphy. Thank you. Chair recognizes Representative Orr to close.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Me mbers, I know we are wasting time. This is the last day. So, I will close; but I'm going to tell you this did not get a fair shake on the floor yesterday. The committee voted out 9-0. This is worthwhile to reconsider a vote and I so move.

THE CHAIR: Members, members the question occurs on the Orr motion to reconsider. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed, nay. A record vote has been requested. Record vote's granted. Show Representative Taylor voting no. Show Representative Allen and Representative Farrar voting aye. Show Representative McClendon voting aye. Have all members voted? All members voted? There being 112 ayes and 32 nays, the motion prevails. Chair lays out SB 141. Clerk will read --

THE CLERK: SB 141 by Eltife. Relating to debt management services and the regulation of debt management services providers; providing a penalty.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Anchia.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, members. I appreciate your vote to reconsider this motion. I know my Chair and members of the committee, all who supported this bill coming out of committee were not on the floor. And I know Representative Kolkhorst called me and say hey, I feel real bad about the way that vote went down. So I appreciate you giving this bill a fair shake. I want to be brief, because I know this bill is very important to Senator Eltife and me. But I want to walk you through how we got to where we are on this bill. This is a byproduct of a no more than half a dozen and probably a dozen stakeholder meetings with industry relating to debt settlement. There were problems in the debt settlement industry, they have been well chronicled, onever a thousand complaints from consumers since 2007. There were even -- It was even committed by the major trade associations that we needed to professionalize this industry. So we worked collaboratively with them over the interim. We had interim hearings on this. We had a hearing this session on this issue. It was voted out 9-0. And frankly, members, I think this will be a good bill for consumers and it will provide industry the ability to continue functioning while driving out bad actors in their industry. And that's what the industry wanted. So that's why the two major trade associations (inaudible) and Task are for this bill. I will also note, members, that there was only one person who testified against this bill, and their one complaint was that it didn't go far enough in its regulation. So for people who are concerned about regulation, the one complaint is that it didn't do enough regulation. Otherwise, people were satisfied and worked very hard on this. I'm thankful for the efforts of Senator Eltife and the members of the committee, and I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Taylor?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Does the gentleman yield for some questions?

THE CHAIR: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I do yield for questions.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Representative Anchia, this bill gives rule making authority to commissioner to the commissioner, it sets pricing within the statute itself. Could you just sort of just talk us through the rule making authorities that the commissioner has under your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Well, you could argue that there's less authority for the commissioner under this bill, frankly, than what is contained -- certainly what is contained in the model act. What happened was the reason there was pricing and some fees put the in the bill is that the industry asked us to do that. They were uncomfortable with the commissioner setting fees by rule, so they came to us and said please put it in the statute itself and actually striked -- and if you look at page 13, line 15, please strike the Finance Commission's ability to set fees under this section. So this is an accommodation, this is a negotiation with industry where they said please put it in the bill, but strike the commissioner's authority to set fees.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: So you think the fees that are set out in this bill are the right fees for industry today?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I do. I think they're fair. The industry -- We asked the industry to come with up with a fair model where they could still make money and provide services to consumers but, at the same time, (inaudible) in important consumer protections.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: And then this industry didn't exist 20, 30 years ago did it?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I imagine not. This is a relatively new phenomenon. But, let me say this: Debt management has been here for a long time, and debt management is where you may go in as a consumer and say hey, listen, I need to get my financial house in order. And you would think you would go to credit counseling and no money changes hands between you and the credit counselor, other than maybe some administrative fees. Debt settlement is very different. Debt settlement is where you go in and say, hey, my financial house is in order. When you negotiate with my creditors I'm going to pay you money up front and we will provide services in the reducing the amounts that I owe my creditors. And that's what happens in debt settlement. It's a relatively new phenomenon. Just to put it in proper context, debt management is regulated where no money changes hands, debt settlement is not.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Okay. And in -- So in the future, if an entrepreneur who is running one of these companies wants to change the prices, but statute tells them that they can't, what do they have to do to go change prices ten, twenty, thirty years from now?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: The assumption of the question is not correct. They can change their prices. In fact, there's some very small up front fees that are set as ceilings right now, but even those will increase over time with the CPI index that's on page -- that's on the bottom of page 13 in the bill that -- it allows those changes to increase. In fact, under Section J -- Subsection J, there's three options that the industry brought us on how they do their business. Under section J, no price ceilings at all. And I expect most of the companies will choose that section.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Okay. Page 9, line 15, the commissioner may authorize a provider to charge a fee based on the the nature and the extend of the account that (inaudible) services. So if a provider wants to provide those services, they cannot charge a fee unless the commissioner gives them permission to charge a fee; is that correct? Is that what that says?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Not if they offer Section J under the bill, under the options of the Section J. So, no, I mean they -- No.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Okay. That's not what the bill says. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Weber?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Will the gentleman yield for some questions, please?

THE CHAIR: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I do.

THE CHAIR: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Thank you, Rafael. You and I had a conversation yesterday. I initially voted against the bill and then I had to come to on an understanding. Refresh -- Can you tell me again the difference between a consumer credit repair organization and a -- explain the two differences, please.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: You bet. You bet. So, Representative Weber, if you go in to a debt management company and you want to get your credit repaired -- by the way, that's already regulated under state law and has been for a while now, they put you on a plan and help you develop the plan to meet your financial situation. And you, you as the consumer, execute that plan. Debt settlement, you go into a debt settlement office and they say pay your money up front and we will deliver a service for you on the back end that will reduce -- that will reduce your total financial liability to your creditors. And what's happened in the marketplace, a lot of money's been taken up front and no services or few services have been rendered on the back end, and that's what's created problems.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Madam Speaker, I'm having trouble hearing. Can you get some order, please?

THE CHAIR: Members, may we have some order?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Okay. Rafael, if I remember correctly you were saying that what was happening to a lot of our Texas consumers was that those debt -- Say it again --

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Settlement.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: -- settlement companies were getting money on the front end and then basically absconding with that money and our consumers were not getting what they paid for. Would you kind of liken that to the roofing companies that came in after Hurricane Ike and took a bunch of money, and then they split and left the state with it, because they weren't regulated?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: We learn -- We learned from those situations, we have learned our lessons from sub-prime; that meaningful and common sense consumer protection makes sense.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Right. So, in essence, to regulate credit repair, but not to regulate the other one is really a travesty; it's not a fair, equitable situation, is it?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Listen, I agree with you. We have tried to strike the right balance in this bill. Senator Eltife worked with consumer groups and industry, and we think we've struck a good balance that is favorable to industry, where they are going to continue to operate and the good operators are going to be rewarded under this bill; the bad operators are not going to make it. I think that's the balance we need to strike here.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: I think I'm going to change my vote to (inaudible). I appreciate your --

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Representative Weber.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Ms. Kolkhorst?

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I will. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: I just want to go over this, Raphael, and I thank Bob Orr for the motion to reconsider. One of the things that you and I discussed last night was that there have been a thousand complaints, but how many cases has the attorney general actually prosecuted?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: You raise a good point, Representative Kolkhorst. Six. So here's the issue and the balance that we strike in policy for regulation: Do we want taxpayers to have to put the bill of the Attorney General litigation on the back end, or do we want to take some preventative measures on the front end to protect consumers so that taxpayers don't have to enter into the litigation through the Attorney General on the back end? I think this is going to save taxpayers money in the long term, because the AG's Office can't do this all by themselves.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Well, one of the things -- I'm very proud of my staff, and what we try to do is always help our constituents. The thing that struck me was where does someone go when they have a complaint and they almost have to know how to navigate the field to get to the Attorney General's office, and sometimes our constituents aren't quite well versed in traversing the minefields of our government to get there; am I right?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I agree. And now the commissioner, you know, would have the ability in consultations, stakeholder meetings with the industry to say hey, just put an 800 number, complaint number, you know, in some of the docs that and have, then they can call me if there's an issue. Right now, a consumer might go to the Better Business Bureau, a consumer might find the AG, they might find the Finance Commissioner; but they might find nobody.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Right. And I know that you're a very thoughtful member here, and we will be monitoring this in the interim to make sure it rolls out the proper way and that we don't have an egregious agency running out of control; am I right?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: That's absolutely right. In fact, we've stripped some authority from the Finance Commissioner on setting fees in this bill at the request of industry in order to allay some of those concerns.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you for that.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Madam Chair.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against SB 141? Chair recognizes Representative Taylor to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Mrs. Speaker, members, I tremendously respect Representative Anchia and I know how hard he has worked on this, how many hours he's put into this and how much this legislation means to him; and so it is with trepidation that I speak against it. But I'm opposed to what this bill does, as far as bad actors in this industry, there are absolutely bad actors in this industry. I don't want to say -- And I think that's true for any industry. I had meetings in this building last summer, with these members, the Attorney General's Office, I spoke with them. I asked them, the bad actors that you're finding out there, can you prosecute them? And the answer to that was, Representative Taylor, we can't. Under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act we can't go after the bad actors in this industry. So this bill doesn't do us anything to help us go after the bad actors, what it does is implement price control. It specifically takes all pricing in this industry and puts it in this bill or gives it to the commissioner to decide. I don't think that's right. I came here to stop government from intruding into people's lives. I want to read you one quick section of the bill. The commissioner shall compute and publish the dollar amounts of fees or other charges from amounts different from the amount of fees of other charges specified. The commissioner, a bureaucrat, will now have control over pricing in this industry. Government control of pricing is wrong. I'm opposed to that. I believe in the free market. I believe in enterprise. I think consumers and entrepreneurs acting in their own best interests should make these pricing decisions. Price controls don't work. It didn't work for the National Socialist party in Nazi Germany, it don't work in Venezuela, it didn't work with the Soviet Union, it didn't work for Richard Nixon in 1972.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Mr . Speaker? Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Orr, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ROB REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Wi ll the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Van , this just came through our committee, came out with a 9-0 vote. And I just got to come and say you are saying to caps all fees. And the reality is in Section J of this bill it does not cap the fees whatsoever. As a matter of fact, they can charge whatever they want on debt collection; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: There are portions where it is still free, but lots of other places, and specifically the place where I just read, where -- and I'm just you and I were in the same meeting and they're -- clearly the commissioner -- and this statute controls fees --

REPRESENTATIVE ROB REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Bu t you're portraying this as this is a complete control environment, and that the government now is going to be able to put every fee into place. And that's not true, is it?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: There are some fees that are not -- are not -- that are controlled by the statute, but are not stipulated. That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Th ank you very much.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: But there are many fees unfairly, and that stifles innovation --

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Madam Speaker? Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: I yield.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields, Mr. Christian.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Mr. Taylor, I'm not up on the issue of (inaudible), but are you telling me this increases the control of government over small businesses?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: It does. And this is what's so upsetting to me in bills like this. This industry will now be put on to Austin rat bill. They're going to have to hire lobbyists, come here, beg with the legislature to change this law. Go to the commissioner, go to hearings, ask for to be able to offer new products, ask that -- They can no longer innovate new products. This industry didn't exist 30 years ago, if we had had this law in place -- if we had had laws that stifled them in innovation we can't create new products.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Does this -- Does this help decrease the cost of the products to consumers or will it increase it cover the new requirements?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Well, here's the problem with what this legislation does, is we hope, we think that these are the right prices today, but some point in the future these prices may be too low, which will drive this industry out of business and then consumers go to get this service, or maybe prices will be too high at some point in the future and then in which case consumers won't be able to afford it. So, either way, establishing prices in statute is a bad idea. We've seen example after example of why it doesn't work, even in here in our own country. I think this is a mistake and I oppose it.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : I agree. Thank you Representative Christian.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Anchia to close.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I appreciate the earnestness with which Representative Taylor is arguing his point, except that it's wrong. And we just sat with the Finance Commissioner in the back, and she just explained why everything he just said was not accurate. And we went through the bill and there are to price controls in here. And I hope that they would defer to the six republican members of committee, to the republican Senator who -- who authored this bill in the Senate and I'm carrying it for him, the work of stakeholders during the interim. There's been a lot of work in this bill and I just think Representative Taylor's got it wrong. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: The question occurs on the passage to third reading of SB 141. It's a record vote, members. Clerk, ring the bell. Show Representative Veasey voting aye. Show Representative Aliseda voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 111 ayes and 35 nays, SB 141 is passed to third reading. Chair recognizes Representative Veasey for an introduction.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Hello members, please help me welcome the Fort Worth Metropolitan and Black Chamber of Commence and their Pass Forward Group that is here today in the gallery. The Pass Forward Group, this particular group started in April 2011, and they are doing a lot of good in the community, learning abut business and nonprofits in the area. Pass Forward, welcome to your Texas Capitol. Thank you very much. Please wave and be recognized.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Aliseda for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Members, I'm providing notice of my intention to move pursuant to Rule 7, Section 37C to make a motion to reconsider my vote -- excuse me, to reconsider the vote which House Bill 359 was defeated.

THE CHAIR: Members, you heard Mr. Aliseda's intention to make a motion. There is an objection. Members, notice has been given to Rule 7, Section 37C. This notice of intent has been made. We're about to move on to the general calendar, and after that period will expire before the one-hour period required by the subsection, the time for making this motion was extended for one-hour while the House was in session. That motion will become eligible at 12:14 a.m. -- p.m., p.m. The first order of business at the time that the House is available after that time. Chair recognizes Mr. Darby for a recognition.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Thank you, members. Real quickly, I want to recognize a young lady here, Lainy Yowst*, who's the honorary page today working for Representative Schwertner. The -- Her parents are in the audience, we want to recognize them Gerald and Shelly Yowst from the San Angelo area. Welcome to your Texas House. And thank you, Lainy, for your service today to the legislature.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Workman for a recognition.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Thank you Madam Speaker. Members, a couple of weeks ago we adopted House Concurrent Resolution 109 that recognized Bedicheck Middle School Junior Marine Corp. I'd like to have take a minute to recognize these outstanding students. We have a group in the south gallery, if y'all will please stand? And we have a group in the north gallery, would you please stands? The junior Marine Corp at Bedicheck is comprised of sixth through eighth graders, and was founded five years ago by Staff Sergeant Derrick Morton. Wave, Sergeant Morton, a former Marine and member of the school's faculty. The group started with 44 cadets, now has 167. The corp teaches values of citizenship, personal responsibility and self discipline. Student cadets must pass all of their normal classes, demonstrate high moral standards and adhere to a strict code of conduct. Today, at 1:30 on the sout steps, the drill team, the rifle team from Bedicheck Middle School will be performing, rain or shine, 1:30 on the south steps. And I would encourage you to go out and watch that. And, members, just please welcome these fine young students from Bedicheck Middle School here in Austin, Texas.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Driver, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: What were some of the things that these young folks were learning?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: They were learning personal responsibility, citizenship, service, leadership.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Can we get some of the House members, still -- are some of the House members too old to get in this group, do you reckon? Can we get some of them installed?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: I'm not sure if some of us are past the eighth grade yet, so we might still be eligible.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: That's what I wanted to check on. Thank you, sir.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Orr.

REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Members, speakers, I am honored to have Elder Elementary fourth graders here today. They are on their tour of the Texas Capitol learning about Texas government. And would y'all please stand up? Please welcome them to the Texas Capitol.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Gonzales from El Paso.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. Today we have in the gallery we have from El Paso, Texas, specifically in District 76, the students from the Harmony Science Academy. Welcome to your Texas House of Representatives. Please stand for a recognition. And this group with Harmony Science Academy has competed internationally in robotics competition, and have taken home several prizes. Thank you for being here today. Welcome to your Texas House.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Workman for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Members, I have the last bill on today's calendar and I would ask if you would consider invoking the Bible Rule, which is last shall be first and first shall be last, and allow me to lay out my bill first this morning? All in favor say aye.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out on third reading and final passage Senate Bill 647. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 647 by Hagueer. Relating to the continuation and operation of the office of the public insurance counsel.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Taylor of Galveston. Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Member s, this is a sunset bill for the office of insurance counsel. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 647? Question occurs on final passage of Senate Bill 647. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Show Representative Gonzales of Williamson voting aye. Show Representative Gonzales of El Paso voting aye. Have all members voted? There being 142 ayes and 5 nays, Senate Bill 647 finally passes. Chair lays out Senate Bill 602 on third reading and final passage. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 602 by Rodriguez. Relating to allowing a governmental body to redact certain personal information under the public information law without the necessity of requesting a decision from the attorney general and the calculation of certain deadlines under the public information law.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Hernandez Luna.

REPRESENTATIVE ANA HERNANDEZ LUNA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is Representative Monica's bill that was passed yesterday that clarifies language with public information at request. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against SB Senate bill 602? The question occurs on final passage of Senate Bill 602. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 142 ayes and 0 nays, Senate Bill 602 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading and final passage Senate Bill 615. Clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 651 by Whitmire. Relating to criminal asset forfeiture, the disposition of proceeds and property from criminal asset forfeiture, and accountability for that disposition; providing civil penalties.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There -- This bill relates to criminal -- forfeitures --

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Ms. Woolley?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: Will the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: Mr. Gallego , there was an amendment put on your bill yesterday that has my district attorney, from Harris County, and the district attorney's association pretty concerned about the removal of control from the legislature and giving it to the AG over confiscated goods. Could you talk to me a little bit about that?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: Y es, ma'am. I would disagree with that characterization of removing control from the legislature, because the legislature always retains the opportunity to write to -- to change the statutes. That amendment, which I will tell you, it is evolving. It was done at the request of the Attorney General's office to kind of clarify some language, but it's continually evolving. And Senator Whitmire and I are having conversations about that, that I think will be resolved in the way that is satisfactory to not only the members of the House, but the members of the Senate as well. I will say two other things, Ms. Woolley, I came to the House as a prosecutor and so I'm well aware of the of the turf fight and the concerns. And, number two, I was a little disconcerted about an alleged agreement on the bill because it's my name on the bill. I -- I mean usually the two parties have to agree for there to be an agreement. But I'm aware of the issue. I'm very cognizant of it. I'm very sensitive to it and we're working now to work through.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: Does it take local control -- I mean will it take funds away from what they're getting at the local level and the Attorney General's office there?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: T he amendment I offered Ms. Woolley fundamentally does two things. And the first is -- Let me take them in reverse order. It reimburses the state auditor for costs that are incurred by the auditor in performing audits, which I think we can all agree is a good thing. And the second thing is there's been a dispute over what these proceeds can be used for. And there is no -- I mean some DA's, for example, there was a DA who paid for a district judge and took all their staff to conferences in Hawaii. There's been DA's who used their funds to essentially purchase liquor and other things for celebrations. There's been -- and so there's been no way to regulate what they could use -- what is an official purpose. If you can use this money for official purposes and so that's what the amendment was designed to do. The attorney general, as you know, has the authority to write a written opinion about what is or is not Kosher under the under the law, and so their office has suggested that they, as part of that authority that they already have, that they should be able to opine, issue an opinion on what's an official purpose.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: Well, in my opinion, I hate to see the legislature lose control to anyone --

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: I can assure you that that is not happening. That is not happening. That is not happening.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: I know my DA has been well satisfied with the way the legislature has handled control, and I wanted to make you aware of that.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: M s. Woolley, I will tell you, as a committee Chair I very much relish the legislature's control over certain issues, and so this amendment in no way does anything that would, in any way impede legislative prerogative over legislative authority.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: Thank you, Mr. Gallego.

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. King?

REPRESENTATIVE SUSAN KING: Will the gentleman yield for some questions?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Gallego do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: Y es, Mr. King.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Thank you, as I remember, the asset forfeiture bill came in in '89, and it was -- Do you recall that it was the product of a lot of negotiation between the DA's, the Attorney General's office who then was represented by Ryder Scott, I think under (inaudible) as part of that. And the District Attorney's Association in all the major cities and -- and police association and -- Do you recall that the agreement was that these funds that were seized, either cash or tools from a crime, they're used in the commission of a crime, the intent was that they were to be used at the local level to offset the costs that was made necessary by enforcing and arresting these criminals, and all the investigations; do you recall that being the purpose of that forfeiture?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: I think the (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: -- local level?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: T he idea was to help provide additional revenue, essentially, to fight our crime.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: How to make criminals pay -- I mean, how forfeiture -- they were making effort.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: A bsolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: And I guess the concern that -- that's popped up with this, as I understand the amendment, what it does is it takes the authority to determine how those assets are seized to away from the local law enforcement community, and gives it to the Attorney General's office. So if money is seized in Erath County, instead of the Erath County law enforcement officials determining how that money is going to be used, does your amendment put it under the Attorney General's Office?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: No . I would disagree with that entirely, Mr. King. Because I will tell you that as I read the amendment, the Attorney General, under this amendment, is essentially to decide what officials might categorize -- it's not going to say you can or can't buy (inaudible) have. There are certain things that are official purposes and certain things should not be. And somebody needs to determine what is buying liquor, for example, for a party; is that an official purpose of your office?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: (Inaudible) to determine, to designate what's official and not official. I guess in the 20 plus years it's been law, it's been so successful and I can't think of any -- I'm sure there's some random situations like you are expressing. My concern is, are we not risking that the State of Texas, rather than -- rather than Granberry PD or Fort Worth PD will end up getting to determine how the money's spent, and maybe the money will not even get back to those local agencies? Is it -- Are we sure the money will get back to the local agencies that seized it?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: M r. King, I will tell you that -- and we're both attorney's and so I understand that there's a myriad of opinions; but I understand the language -- the language is not designed to give the Attorney General of Texas any authority at all in determining what specific purchases can be made or, in any way change the percentages of who can get what and what with it. The issue is to develop some guidelines for how -- what is appropriate or what is not an appropriate expenditure. And, frankly, the Attorney General --

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Hilderbran.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Hilderbran. Members, it would be a lot quicker if we just make sure we have the amendments and the amendment to the amendment up here as soon as possible when we are on these bills. Chair recognizes Mr. Hildebran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I'm sorry I had to get the amendment to this amendment to get it exactly right. This amendment replaces the amendment that I put on yesterday, and makes the provision only apply to the 198th judicial district, which is totally encompassed by my state representative district. I have another amendment to the amendment that is going to add a sheriff as one of the officers that could be a part of the committee that we set up in the district, but this only impacts my local state representative district and no other district

(inaudible) making amendment. And we've got an amendment to the amendment.

THE CHAIR: Following amendment to the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment to the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Hilderbran.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Hilderbran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this only adds the words or sheriff to the last section, describing who is eligible to the committee we created. I move adoption of the amendment to the amendment.

THE CHAIR: Representative Hilderbran sends up an amendment to the amendment. Is there objection? To the amendment Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hilderbran on his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: Now the amendment as amended is the way that I wanted for my local district, so I move passage of this. I believe it's acceptable to the author but, again, it only affects my representative district. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Representative Hilderbran sends up an amendment, it is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: M r. Speaker, now that the amendments are adopted, I want everybody to look at them and -- and I want to be able to have some conversations outlined with some of the people who are asking about it. So I'm happy to me postpone it now that the amendments are on there until let's say 1:00 o'clock, so that we can continue to have conversations about how exactly what the amendments say and why they're there. Okay. So, I move to postpone at this point until 1:00 p.m.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion is there any objection --

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Mr. Speaker, can I ask the gentleman a question?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Hartnett?

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: S ure.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: There's a lot of concern about the amendment. Why are we postponing the bill to work on the amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Mr. Har tnett, that's exactly right. I have the opportunity to talk about some of the issues.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Gallego has made a motion to postpone to 1:00 o'clock. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Miles for a quick recognition.

REPRESENTATIVE BORRIS MILES: Mr. Speaker, members, I know we're at a time crunch to get to work, but I want to introduce to you Mr. Harry Goldberg, otherwise known as Bruiser, from my district. This young man is ten years old and he's already taking college courses, college courses. So I want to also recognize his mother, Mrs. Goldberg, Mr. Goldberg, up there. This is a young man from my district and we call him the child prodigy. Say hello to Harry Goldberg.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out on third reading and final package Senate Bill 1087. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 1087 by Corona. Relating to state-issued certificates of franchise authority to provide cable service and video service.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hilderbran to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is the bill we passed yesterday that adds all video providers under the same standards of the state law. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 1087? The question occurs on final passage of Senate Bill 1087. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Villareal voting aye. Show Mr. Raymond voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 145 ayes and 1 nay, Senate Bill 1087 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading and final passage Senate Bill 279. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 279 by Davis. Relating to inclusion of pets and other companion animals in protective orders; providing a penalty.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mrs. Laubenberg to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: (Inaudib le) pet protective orders in cases of domestic violence. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 279? The question occurs on final passage of Senate Bill 279. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Torres voting aye. Have all members voted? There being 133 ayes and 11 nays, Senate Bill 279 is finally passed. Chair lays out for third reading and final passage House Bill 3328.

THE CLERK: HB 3328 by Keffer. Relating to the disclosure of the composition of hydraulic fracturing fluids used in hydraulic fracturing treatments.

THE CHAIR: The Chair recognizes Mr. Keffer, who is late, to explain his measure.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the disclosure bill we passed yesterday. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3328? The question occurs on final passage of 3328. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Keffer voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 133 ayes, 12 nays; House Bill 3328 finally passed. Chair lays out for third reading and final passage House Bill 2592. Clerk, please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2592 by Truitt. Relating to notice and disclosure requirements for certain credit services organizations regarding charges and consumer borrowing.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you. This is the cab bill we passed yesterday on second reading. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2592? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2592. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 123 ayes, 23 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 2592 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading and final passage House Bill 25389. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2589 by Pena. Relating to the distribution and delivery of voter registration applications by volunteer deputy registrars; providing criminal penalties.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Pena to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: This is the bill we dealt with yesterday that provides a penalty for a deputy registrar who intentionally fails to return voter application registrations. There is an amendment.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Pena.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: This is a penalty amendment. It makes the penalties uniform for people who falsify information on the mail-in ballot.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnham, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'd like to ask the what the penalties will be --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Pena, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Okay --

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I gladly yield. The penalties for knowingly providing false information on applications for a ballot to be voted by mail has a penalty of a -- state jail penalty. But if you're the person -- if you are the person who falsifies the information, that's knocked down to a misdemeanor. This simply -- This simply makes it uniform. There's no reason for it to be knocked it down.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I don't understand. You make a state jail penalty. You say another individual it becomes a misdemeanor. Explain what you mean by that.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Okay. Currently it's a state jail felony if you provide false information on a mail-in ballot. Okay. If a person does that --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Current law, not the bill. Current law?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: However, if you -- If it is you who does it, not somebody else -- it is you get it discounted to a misdemeanor. This simply makes it uniform.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Uniform to what?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Okay. Well, it's a Class A misdemeanor, to provides false information. If either the voters themselves provide false information or about to the voter (inaudible) what's that's what it currently says. This simply makes it uniform as a state jail felony.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm still not clear what you're making it uniform with.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Okay. Let me see if I can explain it better. If there's a mail-in ballot and he knowingly provides false information on the ballot, that is currently a state jail felony. However, if you do it for yourself it is a misdemeanor.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: The individual as opposed to what, your --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: This simply makes it uniform. There's no reason for the discount. There's no reason for it not to be uniform. That's simply what it does.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: ( Inaudible) yield for a couple of questions?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Pena, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hanks. Representative Pena, I was trying to understand something you said about this, this is for deputy registrars?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: You mean the amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Y es. And/or the bill. I missed something you said.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Okay. I'll explain the bill itself. The bill itself is the one we passed out yesterday, it provides a penalty for a deputy voter registrar who intentionally fails to turn in voter registration applications to the voter registrar.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I t it's started out as being about voter registration cards and now you're amending it to be dealing with early votes, and I was trying to figure out if that wasn't a problem with regard to the initial intent of your bill. It seems like you're adding something that wouldn't fit there, because voter registration and voter ballots are earlier, vote ballots are different. And it --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: It all has to do with is voter fraud.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: O kay. But the deputy voter registrar, do they handle earlier vote ballots? I didn't think they were able to handle early vote ballots, are they?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Could you ask it a different way? Could you ask the question again?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I 'm trying to understand what you're doing now with regard to voter registrars. Your amendment did what? What did your amendment do?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Well, let me tell you, first of all, what the amendment says. And so what we agreed to yesterday that you provide a penalty to a deputy registrar who intentionally, that means they knew, to -- that they failed to turn in the voter registration to the voter registrar.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: V oter registration applications?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: O kay. And so what is the penalty for that?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: A state jail felony.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A state jail felony? What was -- is that what you bill is creating, a state jail felony?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: S o now you're doing an amendment that does what?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: In -- If you knowingly provide false information on an application for a ballot to be voted by mail, you -- if you do it for someone else, it is currently a state jail felony. If you do it for yourself, it's a misdemeanor. There's no reason for the distinction. I'm simply making it uniform.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: D oes this fit in this bill, is my question?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I believe it does.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I want to respectfully -- Can I ask you --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Come on down.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I'm sorry, we're going to try to work this out. I move to postpone the amendment.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, what time will he be postponing to?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: 11:50 today. In a few minutes. A.m. Very good.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out for third reading and final passage House Bill 628. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 628 by Callegari. Relating to contracts by governmental entities and related professional services and to public works performance and payment bonds.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Members, this is the project delivery for criminal process that we did yesterday. There are a couple of amendments.

THE CHAIR: Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Callegari.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Members, this amendment just includes instructional material as an item that are on the amendments that I placed yesterday.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Callegari sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Murphy.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Murphy.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: T hank you, members. This amendment is about letting property owners make improvements on TexDOT right of way at their cost, at the property owner's cost. There's no state money used, no federal money used. And this is something needed by TexDOT to allow them to continue doing what they've been doing for years, and so it's acceptable to the author. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Murphy sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Callegari to close.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Creighton, for what purpose.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: Will the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Callegari, do you yield.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Yes, I will yield.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: Represe ntative Callegari, we've talked about earlier allowing me to ask you some questions about legislative intent of this bill, is that okay with you?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: Okay. You said yesterday that the bill consolidates alternative delivery methods such as design build and construction manager at risk in the one chapter of the government code; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Yes, that's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: And in moving the language into Chapter 2267 you repealed several existing statutes; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Yes, that's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: In making those changes, the language of your bill does not -- does not make any substantiative changes to the existing construction manager at risk delivery methods, does it?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: No, it does not.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: So it is your intent to maintain the status quo with regard to the construction manager at risk, that's correct as well?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: Thank you, Mr. Caligari. I appreciate your leadership on this bill and on the committee as well. Mr. Speaker, I move to me exchange -- that this exchange be reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Callegari to close.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: I move passage.

THE CHAIR: The question is on final passage of House Bill 628. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 145 ayes and 1 nay, 2 present not voting; House Bill 628 is finally passed. Chair lays out for third reading and final passage House Bill 1205. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1250 by Turner. Relating to the procedures for reducing or terminating community supervision and the establishment of certain time credits through which a defendant's period of community supervision is reduced.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Turner.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is the bill that we voted out with about a 111 votes yesterday that the Senate advised that those who owned state -- I mean who were on probation for state jail crimes, defendants, get their GEDs, college degrees, finish their restitution. It is supported by Alex, supported by the Texas Public Policy Foundation, supported by the DA's, District Attorneys; and I would ask for your strong support today.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1205? The question occurs on passage of House Bill 1205. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 131 ayes, 14 nays, House Bill 1205 finally passes. Chair lays out on third reading and final passage House Bill 2748. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2748 by Martinez Fischer. Relating to grants to student clubs for dropout prevention.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Martinez Fischer.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is the bill that we passed yesterday that changed the criteria for dropout grants to be placed directly with the schools, and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2748? The question occurs on the final passage of House Bill 2748. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 168 ayes and 73 nays -- There being 68 ayes and 73 nays, 2 present voting; the measure by Mr. Fisher fails to pass. Chair lays out -- Members, there has been a request for verification. Verification has been granted. All members take your seats. Members this is a verification. All members need to take your seat. We will begin by verifying the names of the nays.

THE CLERK: Anderson of McClendon -- Anderson of McClendon.

THE CHAIR: Is Mr. Anderson on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

THE CLERK: Aycock, Beck, Berman, Bohac, Bonnen, Branch, Brown, Burkett, Button, cane, Callegari, Carter, Christian, Cook, Craddick, Creighton, Crownover, Darby, John Davis of Harris, Sarah Davis of Harris, Driver, Elkins -- Elkins?

THE CHAIR: Is Mr. Elkins on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

THE CLERK: Flynn, Flelow, Gooden, Hamilton, Hardcastle, Harper-Brown, Hartnett, Howard of Fort Bend, Hughes, Hunter, Jackson, King of Parker, King of Taylor -- King of Taylor?

THE CHAIR: Is Mr. King of Taylor on the floor? Is King of Taylor on the floor of the house? Strike her name temporarily.

THE CLERK: Kolkhorst, Kuempel, Landtroop, Laubenberg, Lavender, Legler, Louis, Madden, Miller of Comal, Miller of Erath, Morrison, Murphy, Nash -- Nash? Orr, Otto, Parker, Patrick, Paxton, Perry, Phillips, Pitts, Price, Schwertner, Sheets, Simpson, Smith of Tarrant, Smith of Harris, Smithee, Taylor of Galveston, Taylor of Collin, Truitt, Weber, White, Woolley, Workman, Zedler, Zerwas. Verify the ayes, please.

THE CLERK: Aliseda, Allen, Alonzo, Alvarado, Anchia, Anderson of Dallas, Burnam, Castro, Chisum, Coleman, Davis of Dallas, Deshotel -- Deshotel?

THE CHAIR: Is Mr. Deshotel on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

THE CLERK: Dukes, Dutton, Eiland, Eissler, Farias, Farrar, Gallego, Garza, Giddings, Gonzales of Williamson, Gonzalez of Hidalgo, Gonzales of El Paso, Guillen, Gutierrez, Hancock, Harless, Hernandez Luna, Hilderbran, Hochberg, Hilderbran?

THE CHAIR: Is Mr. Hilderbran on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

THE CLERK: Hopson, Hopson?

THE CHAIR: Is Mr. Hopson on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

THE CLERK: Howard of Travis, Huberty, Isaac, Johnson, Kleinschmidt, Larson, Lozano -- Lozano?

THE CHAIR: Is Mr. Lozano on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

THE CLERK: Lucio, Lyne, Mallory Caraway. Margo, Martinez, Martinez Fischer, McClendon, Menendez, Miles, Munoz, Naishtat, Olivera -- Olivera?

THE WITNESS: Is Mr. Olivera on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily.

THE CLERK: Pena, Pickett, Quintanilla, Raymond, Reynolds, Rodriguez, Scott, Shelton, Solomons, Strama, Thompson, Torres, Turner, Veasey, Villareal, Vo, Walle.

THE CHAIR: Is Mr. Anderson of Dallas on the floor of the House? Mr. Anderson of McClendon on the floor of the House? Verify Mr. Anderson. Is Mr. Deshotel on the floor of the House? Strike his name temporarily. Strike Mr. Deshotel's name. Is Mr. Elkins on the floor of the House? Verify Mr. Elkins. Mr. Hilderbran on the floor of the House. Verify Mr. Hilderbran. Mr. Hopson on the floor of the House? Strike his name. Is Ms. King of Taylor on the floor of the House? Strike her name. Is Representative Lozano on the -- verify Ms. Lozano's here. Is Mr. Olivera on the floor of the House? Strike his name. The following members were present voting aye, but their machines malfunctioned. Show them voting aye: King of Zavala and Jackson. Show Representative Smith of Tarrant voting aye. The following members were present voting no, but their machines malfunctioned. Show them voting no: Mr. Sheffield, Ms. Riddle, Mr. Hancock, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Aliseda, Mr. Solomons, Mr. Fletcher -- and that was Mr. Anderson of Dallas. There being 64 ayes, 77 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 2748 fails to pass. Chair lays out on third reading and final passage House Bill 1528. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1528 by Miller of Erath. Relating to consolidating precincts in a primary election.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker and members, this is the election bill that allows consolidation of precinct voting places in primary elections. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Please excuse Mr. Olivera because of illness, on the motion by Mr. Laredo. No. Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1528? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1528. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Gallego voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? Show Mr. Deshotel voting aye. Have all members voted? There being 130 ayes, 15 nays, House Bill 1528 is finally passed. Chair recognizes Mr. Gallego for a recognition.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, it gives me great pleasure to recognize a few students from Del Rio High School who are here. Roger Gonzales and the future business leaders of America who are traveling on their way to Dallas and decided to pop in and visit the Texas House of Representatives. A word about their organization, they're one of the more active clubs in Del Rio High School, and they have a phenomenal track record of success in all of their former members and their former students. So please, they're at east gallery, please help me welcome them. And, if y'all would stand? Please help me welcome them to the Texas House of Representatives.

THE CHAIR: Members, members, we have an announcement. It's the Chair's intent to keep working through lunch. Possibly later on in the day we'll take a break to do some committee hearings. But at this time we will keep working through lunch. The Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business, house Bill 2589. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2589 by Pena. Relating to the distribution and delivery of voter registration applications by volunteer deputy registrars; providing criminal penalties.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Members, we had a concern about an amendment. I've withdrawn it. I now move passage. Chair recognizes Representative Davis of Dallas to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hank you, members. I appreciate Chairman Pena for pulling down that amendment because, clearly, it was not in tune with what the bill originally started out being. But now I'd like to talk about -- briefly about this bill, because I just want to make mention that we're now about to criminalize volunteers. While I don't condone our support voter registration or any deputy registrars not doing what it is they've signed up to do, but they are volunteers. And to the extent they are volunteers, I'm not certain we want to discourage participation in the political process. We need to encourage and create an environment where people will participate in our government -- in this governmental process. I think 2589 will have just the opposite effect in that it would allow folks to be concerned about whether or not they made a mistake, whether or not they would be going to jail. And to the extent that that's what we're possibly doing to volunteers who, not knowingly, will make a mistake, I'm just concerned that this will be a little punitive and will have the effect of deterring people from participation in the process. And I'd just ask you all to think about the various folks that you have out doing voter registration. And ask if this is what you want to do, to criminalize those volunteers who make mistakes. With that, members, I'd just ask you to really think about it because that's not how we get people involved. We want people to be involved and not people to -- to -- ask and not people who are going to be afraid to volunteer and participate in the process. That's my concern with this bill. I think that --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Alonzo.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Would the lady yield?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Davis, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I do.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Ms. Davis, one of the bills that we discussed was one of the major bills in the session was voter ID. Do you remember that?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I do.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Okay. And the discussion going on in this bill relates to voter fraud -- fraud, fraud, fraud -- and do you recall the debate on voter ID, how many people were prosecuted for that?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I remember the concern brought up with that, and it was very few. I don't remember if it was ten, even throughout the entire state. And so I'm just concerned what we're going to do with this bill is encourage people to not participate, rather than to participate in the process. My thought is the more people we can get engaged to take ownership and be involved in their government, the better it will be. And I just worry that when we start creating state jail penalties, aren't we doing something just the opposite, which would discourage people's participation?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And right now have you heard -- are you aware of one prosecution regarding fraud as it relates to this issue right here?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I am not aware of it. Typically, folks who sign up to do deputy registrars, to be deputy registrars, to get people to register to vote, they do it with the intent to have get people to have -- participate in the process. So very -- I'm not aware of a any, deputy or registrar who is very seriously and committed to getting people registered and accurately and correctly registered.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And -- and in the voting process the usual case is that either people vote for someone or vote against someone; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hat's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And isn't this more of a discussion along the lines instead of just talking voting for, voting against, discouraging people from participating; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: That's correct. I think deputy voting -- voter registrars don't get into who you are voting for, they just want to get you signed up to be in the process. And I think what happens is now is we're about to penalize folks who are just trying to get folks engaged in the process.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: So instead of being helpful, this is more, you know, not helping the process and encouraging people to participate in the voting process?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: W ell, and I think that's my concern, is that I know that everybody is concerned about voting integrity and voter registration, voter involvement, I just don't think this is helping with voter involvement or integrity. These are folks who volunteered to get out and register new voters. And now, you're going penalize them and if they don't do something right, and I think that's a concern that we all who are involved in the process ought to be concerned about.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you, ma'am.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Aliseda, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Will the gentle lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I will.

THE CHAIR: Lady yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Ms. Davis, with respect to -- this bill is strictly about registrars, is that not correct?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: D eputy registrars, that is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: It has nothing to do with voting?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hat's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: And what I have found, at least in some counties in this state, is that voter registrars can be selective as to who they turn in the application.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: My experience is just the opposite. Typically people who are voter registrars, they register people at grocery stores, the seniors at schools; and they don't concern their selfs with who or what party they are. They just register the voter.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: I believe the intent of this bill, though, is to make sure that the registrar turns in the application in a timely manner, or turns it in at all; because the registrar could selectively screen. For example, if the registrar was a -- a democrat, and they had registered people that they perceived as republicans, they might not turn in the registration.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Except for the fact that deputy registrars, in my judgment, have no basis to determine who people vote for by party; because that's not part of the registration process. Deputy registrars register you based on your being 18, a citizen and eligible to vote. They don't discern themselves with the partisan issue of a democrat or a republicans. So, therefore, that never comes into play.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: I would disagree with you. I think we've had some very partisan organizations come into this state come and register the people --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Keffer raises a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Members, I know y'all want to get to vote so we can move on with the bills. I just want to say that this is requiring knowing information, not mistakenly, recklessly, not gross negligence, but knowingly. Somebody knowingly does this they ought to be held accountable for and it, and you voted for it yesterday. I ask for passage.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. (inaudible) for what purpose?

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Gentleman yield.

THE CHAIR: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Pena, I just want to reemphasize that. What the bill says, it's not about mistakes, what the bill says is knowingly causes a voter applicant -- application containing false information to be delivered to the registrar. This is not about at volunteers who make mistakes, this is about crooks.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: That's right. This bill came from the Attorney General's Office (inaudible) increase in this problem and I'm simply following through.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: W ill the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Pena, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: C hairman Pena, would you agree that most deputy registrars never getting to -- are you aware that when they sign up as a deputy registrar it's not partisan, is that -- isn't that correct? When a deputy registrar signs up to be a dement registrar, it's not partisan. It's not whether you're a democrat or a republican; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Most? You said most?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: No , I'm saying all.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Oh, I can't say all.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: B ut when county -- When county election folks swear in deputy registrars, or deputy registrars have sworn in, it is not an issue with partisan politics, is it? I's not a D or an R --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I'm looking for bad actors here. I'm not looking. The partisanship doesn't matter. If a republican does this then they need to go to jail.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: B ut I want to make sure we clearly distinguish the fact that this is not a partisan issue. This is just strictly --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I will accept what you have to say.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I s that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I'll accept what you have to say, okay? I don't know the motivations of all these other people. I can't say all. What I'm looking at is people who knowingly break the law. Knowingly. I don't want to allow people who do it by accident or make a mistake, I just want bad actors.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: B ut based on your bill, someone could get -- A volunteer deputy registrar could end up being in the middle of a big legal fight and potentially go to jail with this bill, and they are volunteering; would you say that's correct?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: If they break the sanctity of our electoral system, and they knowingly break the law, yes, they need to go to jail and be accountable.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: W hat if they don't knowingly break the law and it happens that the -- it happens at voter registration cards, they that -- that they signed up, they put them in the mail. The person says they didn't get their return -- they didn't get their ballot -- I mean their voter registration card. They didn't get it. Who is going to be responsible for that?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Nobody's going to be responsible. If they make a mistake, it's not against the law under this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A nd I understand that. I just want to understand what's going to be the telling difference from a mistake and an intentional.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Well, knowingly is well defined in the law. It requires a conscious -- You have to desire the outcomes of what it is you are trying to achieve. So they have to knowingly break the law. It can't be an accident.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A nd who defines knowingly? That's what I'm trying to understand.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Well, like all our laws, the fact finder decides that.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I 'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: It'll go to -- First of all, it probably goes through a law enforcement, and they'll have some discretion. Then it'll go through an prosecution. The prosecutor has some discretion. Most of these things won't be prosecuted. Prosecutors don't have time for this sort of thing. It's going to take a flagrant violation in order for this to occur and be prosecuted.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A nd so are you aware of any occurrences anywhere now? Have you had any experience where this has occurred?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I've had discussions with the Attorney General of the State of Texas and his staff, and they've told me this is a growing problem.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: H ow many cases did they indicate that they've had to prosecute based on this being a knowing problem? Did they indicate that?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: No, they didn't give me a specific number.

REPRESENTATIVE SARAH REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: S o they --

THE CHAIR: Representative Taylor raises a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2589. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Show Mr. Chisum voting aye. Mr. Keffer voting aye. Have all members voted? There being 113 ayes, 33 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 2589 finally passes. Pursuant to Rule 7, Section 37, the Chair is going to recognize Representative Aliseda for a motion to reconsider. Chair recognizes Representative Aliseda.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: I'm making a motion to consider Bill 359, which is otherwise known as the passenger's side bill.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 359. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 359 by Allen. Relating to the use of corporal punishment in public schools.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Smith.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to withdraw my amendment that was added to this bill yesterday. We're going to place it with another amendment.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Hilderbran, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

THE CHAIR: Who would you like, Mr. Hilderbran?

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: I need to ask questions about the bill. When would the appropriate time -- There's another issue that we didn't discuss yesterday about campus police that I wanted to ask about.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Nash.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: Okay, Representative Nash, when -- after the bill failed yesterday, there's a lot of discussion with different parties inside and outside about the bill. An issue was raced to me that something in the bill addressed how campus police are to -- Is there anything in the bill that addresses campus police?

REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA NASH: Absolutely not. Wait until he lays out the amendment -- but stay right there, you're welcome to ask a question when he lays out the amendment. I think it'll be clear.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Geren for an announcement, members.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, tonight for dinner Mr. Hamilton and myself are bringing in barbecue and pies, and it will be available in the back hall and it will be at no charge.

THE CHAIR: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Giddings.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Giddings.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker and members, this is the amendment that we had on yesterday that has to do with students who are in the sixth grade or lower, that says that we will not issue them a Class C misdemeanor for behavior that is nonviolent, nonsexual, non-harassing. And I appreciate all the support that you gave us on that -- on yesterday. And somebody asked me what the Chief Justice said about it when he was over giving the State of the Judiciary, and he said this, quote, "Schools are central to this equation. More than 80 percent of Texas adult prison inmates are school dropouts. Charging kids with criminal offense for low level behavioral issues exacerbates the problem. Among those suspended and expelled, minority and special education students are heavily over represented. Of course, disruptive behavior must be addressed, but criminal records close doors to opportunities that less punitive intervention would keep open. Let us endeavor to give them a chance at life before setting them on a path into the adult criminal system." Move adoption of the amendment.

THE CHAIR: Members, Ms. Giddings sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Chisum.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Chisum.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: M r. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Berman?

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: W ill the gentle lady yield?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Berman, the lady has yielded the floor. We now have an amendment before us, and the Chair recognizes Mr. Chisum. Mr. Chisum, you are recognized.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Mr. Speaker, members, this amendment just takes out counties of 50,000 and less in rural schools. We have a better -- we have a different discipline problem than they have in the major schools and we're okay with the system we have right now. We know the parents, we know who's in the school and we know how to handle our discipline. So it if you are 50,000 or less, you would be out.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Allen to speak against the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE ALMA ALLEN: Mr. Speaker and members, there are 1039 school districts in the State of Texas, and only -- only 13 of those are over 50,000. So we would be talking about the majority of the school districts in the State of Texas, which is the majority would be most of the students in the State of Texas. And I move not to accept this amendment. Table.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M r. Speaker? You need to read the amendment. It says county school districts.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Howard, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: W ould the lady yield for a question? I think the amendment --

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: I accept the amendment.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Chisum sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Is anyone wishing to speak for --

REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA NASH: We need to lay out the bill first, and I think it'll be more clear to you, Mr. Zedler.

THE CHAIR: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment. Give the clerk a little room.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Workman.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Workman.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Finally Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, my amendment on Ms. Allen's bill changes this from an opt in to an opt out amendment. So that in the beginning of each school year, the school district that has adopted a corporal punishment policy must let the parents know so that they can have opt their children out of the corporal punishment policy. And they can do that, of course, at any time during the school year, but they do it at the beginning of the year. So this is an opt out, not an opt in.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: Could I ask the gentleman a question, my friend, Mr. Workman?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Workman, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: I do yield.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: I don't know if we've done a survey of school district guidelines, but at least the school districts that I've worked in, that that that already happens now.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Corporal punishment, you mean?

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: No, not the corporal punishment. The opt in and the opt out. The parents are asked permission at the beginning of the school year now.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: So I'm trying to to -- What is this?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: I think that it's probably understood that they can do that, this just puts it into law.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: Okay. It's in the school board policy.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Yes --

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: I'm just wondering, because we seem to have -- we seem to be letting off mandates on teacher contracts and a whole lot of other stuff, but we coming on mandate with this.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: No, this is permissive, purely permissive.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES WHITE: Yeah, okay.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Workman sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Move adoption on 359. Move passage, I'm sorry.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against or on House Bill 359?

REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA NASH: I think Mr. Zedler.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Miller of Erath to speak against the bill. Chair recognizes Mr. Miller of Erath.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker and members, I think most of us in this room have missed the basic premise of what this bill is. I want you think about what you're doing, because many of you before you came to this registrar, served on your local school board. Many of you served on local city council, many of you served on other boards, of hospital districts, MUD districts; and when that board meeting convened, the number one complaint that you had, and your fellow members of that board was that Washington, D.C. and Austin was taking away your local control. Anything in this bill today, the local school district can do now on their own. The author even said most of the large school districts have banned corporal punishment. You know what, that's a local decision. We don't need to be taking anymore -- The local school boards now have very little discretion now as it is, and here is one more mandate coming out of Austin telling a local school board what they can and cannot do. For that reason, I'm opposed to this bill.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Miller, would you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I yield.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Represen tative Miller, I'm just trying to get a good understanding. Now, with the bill as it is right now, if you live in an area and your population is 50,000 or less, this bill does not apply; correct? A county, it does not apply?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I'm not sure on that provision.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Well, the amendment says -- that's what the Chisum amendment says, if it's 50,000 or less this bill does not apply.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. Would that cover your area?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: No.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. And then secondly, the bill says now that parents can what, opt in, opt out? It's a permissive sort of bill?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: That's right.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: So now the bill now puts the power in the hands of parents, right?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: It does.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Now you are not saying that we need to override a parent's desire as it relates to their kids?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that that decision should lie with the local school board. We shouldn't be micro managing school business.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: But let's go even below the local school board, let's go below the local school board. I would think that the patient's rights should be real localized --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I don't disagree with that, but their grievance wouldn't be with Austin, it should be with their local school board. Those are elected members to those bodies. If they don't agree with those local members they can throw the bums out.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I know, Representative Miller. All I'm saying is this: With the amendments that have been put on we have watered down the bill. If you're in a county of 50,000 or less you don't have to worry about 359.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I realize we've watered down the bill. I'm trying to put its head under the water.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Well, I understand. But sometimes we need to stay above the water. And so, in the secondary, it puts the power in the hands of parents.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Parents have that power now. They can take their grievances to the local school board. I'm sorry, we disagree on this.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I understand your concern, but I think the authors have done a great job in trying to satisfy as many people as possible. I would hope that you'd think about it and vote for 359.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Menendez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Would the gentleman yield for a couple of questions?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Miller, will you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I yield.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Do you recall this week we passed the bill by Mr. Sheffield that said right now, even though all school districts must test their kids for physical fitness, Mr. Sheffield argued successfully on this floor that the control ultimately should be to the parent, and we voted for this bill to say parents have the right to --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: That bill is no longer before the House.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: No, I understand completely. But how did you vote on that bill?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I'm sorry, I can't hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: How did you vote on that bill?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I don't recall.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Did you vote with the parent that had the local control --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Maybe it was

(inaudible) local if I remember correctly.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: -- or with the schools? Because the reason that I ask you is that if you truly believe that the parents have the ultimate control over the fate of their children in their schools --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: They do. And I agree with that. And their grievances shouldn't be with Austin, it should be with the local school board. It's a local issue, we're taking away local control. That's the only issue I have.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Well, you are taking --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: I'm not for taking away parents' control, but I believe they have that and they can take their grievances to the local school board.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Well, currently, the schools can hit the children unless we pass this bill where they can write a note and say you may not hit the children. Thanks to Mr. Workman's amendment, the patients have the ultimate control. If you believe the parents should have the ultimate control of their children --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Well, actually what this bill does is Austin is, this body, Austin, is taking control of how this issue is dealt with at a local level. All I'm saying is if a school district wants to ban corporal punishment, I'm fine with that. But it needs to be a at a local level (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: I agree, and the most local level and control of every child is their parents. And I think that we believe -- do you or do you not --

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Each parent can go to their local school board. Elected members. It's not an appointed body.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Sid, I've heard you and many of my other republican friends on the floor ask me about personal responsibility. Do you not believe in personal responsibility?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Philosophically , I'm against big government intrusion and I think that's what this bill does. I don't think we ought to involve ourselves in it. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: I understand. But I believe that we have to give the parents the right to control their children even in the schools.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Villarreal to speak for the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: I just want to say something real simply. As a parent, with a school age child, my little girl is in first grade, I don't think we need to complicate this. This is really simple. We want to make sure that a parent like me, who has a school child, who disagrees with a school board that has decided to allow corporal punishment; to opt out. This lets me, as a parent, say no, you cannot spank my child. Because in my house we don't discipline our kids in that way. This is simply allowing a parent to make a decision on how they want to raise their kids. I ask you to vote for this bill.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. King to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Members, I really appreciate the authors and their joint authors, and I know their hearts are in the right place on this. But, friends, why don't we just abolish school districts? I mean why don't you get rid of the whole idea that we have local officials that the parents and -- and the local constituents elect and put in and say hey, will you go run our schools and design a school system that fits our local community and our needs and that teaches our kids, and the character and the basics of education that they need? I mean, why don't we just do away with them? We tell them, first off, why to teach, how to teach and when to teach it. We tell them what days they have to go to school. We tell them what they have to pay their teachers, what the contracts have to look like for he teachers. We tell them now what foods they can and cannot feed, like they can't make these kind of decisions on their own, like we don't trust them as being competent. We think we are the ones that can make those decisions. And now we're taking away from local school districts the simple ability to develop a disciplinary -- a disciplinary policy for their schools. And, you know, I can just speak for myself as a high school student --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Jackson, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Not just yet, Mr. Jackson.

THE CHAIR: The gentleman does not yield at this time.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: But let me just speak for myself. I was a very, very unruly kid in high school and getting my tail worn out -- I'm telling you, I'm telling you, and I can remember to this day the times I got licks from those coaches and those vice principles and, you know, it made a significant impact in my life. And I just -- Yeah, I mean, we're all joking around about this. But the bottom line is you got to remember what you are voting for. We conservatives are supposed to believe in local control and limited government, and now we're going to be voting today again to tell our school superintendents, and school board members, and parents, and all those folks who participate in their local school boards; we are going to be telling them we don't even trust you to decide what the disciplinary policies for your school should be. And I know whether this thing goes on or off, it's not going to change the world. But we just can't legislate for every contingency. We can't do that). We either need to believe in local control, we either need to trust our school districts to do the job, and trust families and parents or not. But -- but this is just way beyond what limited government and local control's all about. Telling from this day we're going to pass a state law that decides whether or not in Weatherford School District they get to paddle children, instead of leaving that up to the patients and teachers and the school boards. And I'm just thinking it's a bad idea. And I'll certainly yield. And thank you for the time.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Representative King, you know, the same people elect our county commissioners and our city council and our school board members elect us. Where did we get the idea that they were smarter than us than they were when we elected them

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Well, you know, I just have a lot of confidence in mine. I get mad at them sometimes, I disagree with them, with my school board members and others, but I do trust them to develop policy (inaudible) spanking, paddling.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: (Inaudible) Do that job or this job, and they are the same folks, and they're just as smart when they elected them as they were when they elected me. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Villareal, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Mr. King, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Of course.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Phil, you stunned me. You took to the front mike and you said you trust local government over parents in making this decision. What happened?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: (inaudible) Across that way. I did not intend to say that. What I said was (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: What did you eat for breakfast this morning?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: School board and (inaudible) (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: This is the most hypocritical decision I've ever seen you make. You have consistently come to this floor and always argued to allow individuals to make -- .

THE CHAIR: Members, members, let's define the base to the subject of the bill, please.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: I'm sorry, what is your question?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And so is it not inconsistent to take this position you're taking and say that elected officials of this local government body are better positioned to make a decision on how to raise these children, and to allow their decision to supercede the parent's decision?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: No, you're misstating my statement. What I said was on issues of a simple disciplinary policy I trust our school boards and our teachers and parents of kids who are in those schools to participate and develop their own local disciplinary policy.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Mr. Speaker? Mr. King, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Yes, of course.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Mr. King , do you support the democratic republic that we have as a nation and as a state?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: I support the representative and republican form of government that we have, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Yes. And do you believe that you are elected and trusted by your constituents, and the control, and the people are the boss in your district to your decisions?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: I believe in limited goverment and local control. I do.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Do you believe you can be fired by your constituents?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Do you not believe that the local constituents also control their local elections on school boards?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Are there not parents that are represented at the local school level, closer to the problem in the school than we would be in Austin, Texas?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Absolutely. You know, I've never had a parent, a teacher or a superintendent or school board member ask us, ask me to do anything about their local disciplinary policies. I haven't had a --

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Do you believe that misrepresents the idea that parents have no control when we do not recognize the form of government at the local levels that these are, the elected will of the parents and school boards?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: I think we should follow the local, independent school district model that has served Texas very well on things like disciplinary policy. You know, everybody's hearts are in the right place on a this, and I'm not trying to (inaudible) to be a big fight. I just this is a really bad slippery slope that we go down when we just legislating at this at this tiny, tiny mini level. Thank you very much. Thank you to the authors, I know their really -- hearts are very, very very much in the right place on this bill.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Patrick to speak for the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: Mr. Speaker, members, as a former school board member and president, what I appreciate about this bill is that it does, in fact, allow for local control. It does, in fact, allow for school boards to determine if indeed they wish to use corporal punishment. All it simply says is that if they choose to do that, that they will give parents the information and the ability to opt out of their child incurring corporal punishment. Therefore, I would urge you to vote yes because this is a vote for both local control and parental rights.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Zedler to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL ZEDLER: Mr. Speaker, members, I stand against this bill and I'll tell you why: Once we decide that this type of punishment is inappropriate, why don't we decide no other punishment is? In other words, why don't we just take all ability for them to discipline children in the schools? Why don't we say instead of saying corporal punishment, oh, you can't do squats, you can't make them do wind sprints, you can't make them do anything. You know what, when you talk to teachers, the number one problem they talk about is the inability to maintain discipline in the classroom. And you know what they all say? You've taken every tool away from me to maintain discipline. And then we say oh, we don't care. Just teach the children anyhow, they can just run around, keep talking. You know what, if you go back 30 years ago every one of us who were there 30 years ago we got probably got swat. In fact, I can still remember they caught me skipping class, I go into the principal's office and what did they say? You know, well, we're going to give you three swats. I said okay. By the end of the second squat I already decided I wasn't going to cut class anymore, I'll tell you that right now. And the thing about it is, the thing about it is is that what we're doing is taking away the abilities for them to maintain discipline in the classroom --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL ZEDLER: I'll yield.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Mr. Zedl er, do you like getting spanked?

THE CHAIR: Members, let's have order for the debate.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL ZEDLER: Mr. Speaker, members, what I encourage you to do is help the teachers to maintain discipline in the classroom. Let's go back to putting this back in the hands of the school boards and the parents. Vote no.

THE CHAIR: Members, let's have a little order. The Chair recognizes Mr. Hochberg to speak for the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I will try to be brief, if I don't pick up too much back mic traffic. We have in the education code a very important set of provisions called the parents bill of rights and responsibilities. And that was put in there by this legislature. Conservatives and liberals, democrats and republicans, to make sure that ultimately a parent could control aspects of things that were going on at that school that were important to them about how the way their child was being treated. That includes things like your child can't have a psychological test that you object to. Your child doesn't even have to sit through instruction that offends your religion or offends your morals. You have the ultimate right of control, as a parent, of what happens to your child; not the whole group of children, but your child in the classroom. This is very consistent with that. What could be more essential than whether your kid gets hit by the teacher, or by the principal, or by the dean, or whomever? And so I am voting for this and I'm voting for it, most importantly, because of what my dad used to say when I was in school more than 30 years ago, Mr. Zedler. My dad used to say if any teacher lays a hand on you I want to hear about it because they're going to have to answer to me. And then when I find out what you did, you're going to have to answer to me. And if somebody's laying a hand on you it's going to be me. He wasn't against corporal punishment, I can assure you. He just wanted to be the one to administer it. And that's not too much of a right to give a parent in Texas today. So, I urge you to vote for this bill.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Simpson to speak for the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I would just like to ditto Representative Hochberg's remarks. I support this bill. Parents ultimately are responsible for their children. They need to be involved, they need to be in touch with their children and the school board. I support this bill.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Nash to close.

REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA NASH: Thank you, this --

THE CHAIR: Wait one minute, please. Chair recognizes Representative Nash to close, members.

REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA NASH: As you can tell, this is a very, very important bill for some of us. And this bill is not about whether you believe in corporal punishment or not. Under this bill, school districts can still use corporal punishment as a form of discipline.

THE CHAIR: Members, please have some order to listen to the debate.

REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA NASH: Thank you. This bill is strictly a parental rights issue. Parents have the right to which prohibit the use of corporal punishment on their child. I know this wording of this bill has been confusing, and I am sorry for that. But as a former school board trustee myself, I believe local control is very, very important. However, parental rights are central to our core conservative values. Personally, it doesn't matter if you're for or against corporal punishment. This is a vote for or against parental rights in Texas schools. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Members, the question occurs on the passage to engrossment of House Bill 359. A record vote has been requested. A record voted is granted. All those in favor vote aye, those opposed, nay. The clerk will ring the bell. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Show Ms. Carter voting aye. Have all members voted? There being 87 ayes and 56 nays, House Bill 359 is passed to engrossment.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Keffer?

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Parliamentar y inquiry.

THE CHAIR: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: With all due respect to any other bills that we're going to try to resurrect today, to what day of the calendar is this -- of the session is this? Is this the last day of House Bills to be heard?

THE CHAIR: This is the last day for House Bills to be heard on second reading.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Are we down to third readings yet?

THE CHAIR: No, sir, we're not.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Well, don't you think we need -- Again, in all due respect, we need to go forward, don't you think?

THE CHAIR: I'm not advised.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Can we put the rest of these that might come up again at the bottom of the calendar?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Keffer, are you making a motion?

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: I will make a motion.

THE CHAIR: Well, bring your motion down front, brother. Mr. Bonnen, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DENNIS BONNEN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to just make sure that the Keffer motion doesn't take longer than reconsidering some of these bills.

THE CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Bonnen. Chair lays out for third reading and final passage, House Bill 3341. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3341 by Anchia. Relating to the rebate, refund, or payment of tax proceeds to a qualified hotel project.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Anchia.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you. This is the bill we passed yesterday relating to the separate trust account for projects in the Comptrollers Office. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3341? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 3341. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Chisum voting aye. Show Mr. Sheets voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being a 142 ayes and 1 nay, House Bill 3341 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 351 for third reading and final passage. Clerk, please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 351 by Veasey. Relating to the expunction of records and files relating to a persons' arrest.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Veasey.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Members, this is an expunction bill that we passed yesterday that we worked with with the DA's and local communities, so people can get on with their lives. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 351? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 351. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 141 ayes and 2 nays, House Bill 351 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 2006 on final passage and third reading. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2006 by Bonnen. Relating to the release of a photograph of a police officer and access to records maintained by internal investigative divisions in certain municipalities.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Bonnen.

REPRESENTATIVE DENNIS BONNEN: This is the bill to protect police officers and their families. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2006? Members, the question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2006. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 144 ayes and 0 nays, House Bill 2006 is finally passed. Chair lays out for third reading and final passage House Bill 2382. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2382 by Murphy. Relating to notice required upon nonrenewal of property and casualty insurance policies.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Murphy to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker members, this is a bill about renewal of insurance policy and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3282? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 3282. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Murphy voting aye. Show Ms. Carter voting aye. Show Ms. Riddle voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 145 ayes, no nays, House Bill 3282 finally passed. Chair lays out for third reading and final passage House Bill 738. Clerk, please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 738 by Otto. Relating to the authority of the Teacher Retirement System of Texas to investigate hedge funds.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Otto.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN OTTO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This is the bill we passed yesterday that sets a 10 percent cap on hedge funds investments for the Teachers Retirement System.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 738? Members, the question occurs on final passage of House Bill 738. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 144 ayes and 0 nays, House Bill 738 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading and final passage House Bill 14. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 14 by Murphy. Relating to the qualifications for unemployment benefits of a person receiving severance pay.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Murphy.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: Thank you Madam Speaker. Members, this is the bill about severance pay. It's a great bill, and I'll appreciate your votes as we move to passage.

THE CHAIR: The question occurs on the final passage of House Bill 14. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Farrar.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar. Is Representative Farrar on the floor of the House? Chair recognizes Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Ms. Speaker and members, there's some concern that the bill ad drafted only addresses a very narrow complaint, and that will be if there was a complaint on -- on civil rights of a federal law. And so what one of the things that this amendment does is it says that it would also recognize state law in those complaints. And another thing that's interesting about the legislation is that it says that a person would have to have filed a complaint. And so one of the things that -- Sometimes when folks are dismissed, they are dismissed, say you had a situation that you had a sexual harassment complaint, and they just were trying to get rid of it quietly. In that situation -- Thank you -- In that situation they would basically have to have filed a complaint. And so if this is something that's a private matter, and they're trying to -- the employer and the employee are trying to make it go away; if you just decided that you just leave and here's a severance passage, that individual would not be eligible for their UI benefits. So the other thing that this amendment does, is it allows that individual to just -- and the employer, to be able to have their deal, and the person would still be able to collect their UI benefits. The person wouldn't have had file some sort of complaint. Because it's sort of perverse in the way that -- the way the legislation is drafted, you would have to -- it would encourage a lawsuit, basically. And so that's the second thing that it does. And I referenced earlier state law. We've actually passed a law here and it is called the Texas Commission on Humans Rights Act. And so that, a violation of that would be exempt under the legislation, but you would have to -- it only recognizes the federal law, which is -- Let me see here. The Civil Rights Act of 1991. So these were some concerns that I had about the legislation. It broadens it, and it allows for employers -- it provides a bit more flexibility for employers and employees. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Murphy to speak against the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: Yeah, members I'm going to ask y'all to table this amendment. We had these conversations in committee and, I'm sorry, Representative Farrar wasn't there. We decided not to proceed with them because it would create another cause of action in unemployment claims. That's not going to help keep the integrity of the unemployment insurance fund. And we actually negotiated this bill with the folks at AFLCIL. And so, with that, I would move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Ms. Farrar?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Does the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: Sure, Jessica. Go ahead.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: You stated earlier that -- I believe you said that you'd have to the a to after lawsuit basically, right?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: A lawsuit for what?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: When someone had a complaint, they'd have to have a lawsuit. Did I misspeak or did I misunderstand that?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: No, what I said was that we talked about this giving arise to more lawsuits, with the change -- with the potential that that was, instead of the agenda that was what that was about.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. I see it just the opposite. I think that, as currently drafted, you have to have filed -- you have to have had a cause of action.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: I understand what you are saying, Jessica. We went through this in committee and we got the folks together, and we agreed this is a good bill to move forward. So we're going to have to agree to disagree.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. Mr. Murphy. The thing is we have a process called second and third readings, and all this to vet legislation. It doesn't just end at the committee, and so that's why we're here today.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM MURPHEY: Sure, sure. And the body will get the consider the amendment, and is pleased to learn about it, and so we'll have a vote. Move to table.

THE CHAIR: Representative Farrar sends up an amendment. Representative Murphy moves to table. The question occurs on the motion to table. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Representative voting aye. Show Representative Farrar voting nay. Show Representative Davis, John Davis, voting aye. Have all people -- Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 99 ayes, 43 nays, 2 present not voting; the motion to table prevails. Chair recognizes Representative Murphy.

REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: Thank you members, and I appreciate your vote in support of House Bill 14. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 14? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 14. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 144 ayes, 0 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 14 has finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 2460 on third reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2460 by Truitt. Relating to confidentiality of information held by a public retirement system.

THE CHAIR: The Chair recognizes Representative Truitt to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this is the bill that passed yesterday, it brings transparency to pension funds while protecting private information. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 2460? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2460. The clerk will ring the bill. This is a record vote? Have all members voted? Have all members voted. There being 143 ayes, 0 nays, 3 present not voting; House Bill 2460 has finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 2233 on third reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2233 by Huberty. Relating to certain contracts entered into by a school district to, or another entity, to provide food services at one or more district schools.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Huberty to lay out the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this is a bill we passed yesterday. House Bill 2233 requires a food service management company provider to adhere to Section 44031A when to provide foods and supply the school district when the cost of foods is being directly build to the school districts, reimbursable contract

(inaudible) the food service provider must publicly bid the contract. There are some (inaudible) based contracts, that are (inaudible) into the deal, and we want to make sure that that those are also being bid. But the food part is a component of that already, so it is satisfies the requirement. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for, on, or against of House Bill 2233? The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2233. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Representative Lozano voting aye. Show Representative Torres voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all voted? There being 134 ayes, 12 nays, 2 present not voting; HB 2233 has finally passed. Chair recognizes Representative Chisum for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Ms. Speaker, members, I'd like to have give one hour notice under Rule 7, Section 37, to -- that we have -- might reconsider the vote by which 2748 failed to pass, as Mr. Martinez's Fisher's bill. And there was some confusion about where the policy county committee -- the republican party opposed that bill or not. We did not oppose that bill. So I'm giving one hour notice. And since I society on the prevailing side, I will not be able to make a motion to reconsider. It'll have to be someone else.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Ms. Riddle?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: I'm sorry, Representative Riddle. This is just a notification. There is no --

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Well, I need to ask a question. I thought that we had discussed, Madam Speaker, that the bills that are on the calendar that are dying and languishing, and those of us that have had a very difficult time getting through this morass, are we really going to be shoved to the back of the fence and into the back of the room, back so far that those who have been reconsidered and reconsidered and are just going to kill everything? I just need to know what's going on.

THE CHAIR: Representative Riddle, this was just a notification. Whether Representative Chisum actually makes a motion to reconsider, we don't know at this time. He's the just giving you a notification. Thank you. Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Members, I would like to have make a motion to recommit Senate Bill 1766 to committee.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection?

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Defense Veterans' Affairs.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 1776 on third reading and the clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1776 by Lozano. Relating to contracts between dentists and health maintenance organizations or insurers.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Lozano.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE LOZANO: Thank you Madam Speaker, members, this is the bill we passed yesterday that helps our dentists in Texas. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 1776? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1776. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Representative Phillips voting aye. Have all members voted? All members voted? There being 141 ayes, 4 nays, 2 present not voting and House Bill 1776 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 1728 on third reading. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1728 by Keffer. Relating to energy saving performance contracts.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Keffer.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. House Bill 1728 proposes to give Polk Entities, more options, greater flexibility, (inaudible) to perform a contracting program. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 1728? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1728. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Representative Sheffield voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 143 eyes, 2 nays; house Bill 1748 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 3326 on third reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: House Bill 3326 by Woolley. Relating to the classification of certain entities as primarily engaged in retail trade for purposes of the franchise tax.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Speaker Woolley to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: HB 2336 clarifies the margin tax treatment of (inaudible) rental companies. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 2336? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 3326. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 144 ayes, no nays, 2 present not voting; house Bill 3326 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 748. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 748 by Menendez. Relating to a criminal defendant's incompetency to stand trial to a certain related time credits, and to the maximum period allowed for restoration of the defendant's competency.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Menendez.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, House Bill 748 will just ensure that someone who is being held for a misdemeanor crime would not spend more time waiting for restoration than they would in jail. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: May I ask the author a question?

THE CHAIR: Does the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Of course.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Representative Menendez, I didn't really understand you. What is the competency issue here before standing trial?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Let me explain the situation. Although the legislature has granted the courts the discretion to dismiss such cases before a trial on the merits of the lack of competence restoration bed, the state's current budget shortfall has created a situation where the weight for the competency restoration bed can actually take longer than someone who is being held, or the sentence for a misdemeanor crime. So what we're talking about, for many, many of our counties, the courts cannot take into consideration the amount of time spent waiting. So many individuals who suffer from mental illnesses, or who are incompetent to stand trial would have actually spent more time waiting for a bed in jail, than those who are not, who don't suffer from mental illness. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 748? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 748. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted. There being 143 eyes, 0 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 748 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 1994 on third reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1994 by Weber. Relating to the creation of a first offender prostitution prevention program.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Weber to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. House Bill 1994 allows for the creation of (inaudible) prostitution provision programs aimed at educating those (inaudible) negative consequences

(inaudible) (inaudible) (inaudible) (inaudible) I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 1994?

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M adam Chair?

THE CHAIR: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: W ould you ask Representative Gallego to come back up and tell us about his bill?

THE CHAIR: Representative Gallego Weber, would you please come back to the microphone?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Charlie, House Bill 1994 allows for the first offender prostitution prevention program aimed at educating those arrested for solicitation on the negative consequences of the commercial sex trade and human trafficking. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Carter, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Yes, ma'am. I will yield for a question.

THE CHAIR: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Thank you, Representative Weber, we had a lot of fun with this bill yesterday. We were talking about johns, and I believe that when you and I spoke about this bill you mentioned that this is a bill that was designed to protect those who solicit prostitutes, in other words. And I think those are the words.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: I don't believe that I said that this bill is designed to protect those who solicit prostitutes.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Did you say that this bill -- under this bill that the idea was to help men have education so that we could work on issues related to human trafficking?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Well, I think, Stefani, that our discussion was along the lines of men don't understand that prostitution is not a victimless crime. And this is to educate them about the horrors of prostitution. And, thereby, go at the demands, try to eradicate this blight by going right at the demand.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Right. So, In other words, this bill is designed to help give men an education on prostitution; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: I think it's more accurate to say that it's aimed at eliminating the demand for prostitution, and part of that process will be by educating men as to the horrors of prostitution.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Okay. So what happens under your bill to the female, to the prostitute herself? They both get picked up for prostitution, the man and the woman. What happens to the woman under your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Current law still applies. My bill is aimed at educating the -- what I will -- the men who are, for the most part, who are going to be uneducated about the evils of prostitution. The current law, my law doesn't change any of protections or the laws already in place for women who, a lot of times, are pressed into prostitution. That's why I'm such a big proponent of the anti human trafficking legislation. But my bill doesn't change any of that in place, this goes at educating the johns.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Okay. So, In other words, if a man and a woman both get picked up for prostitution, let's say you go get a prostitute tonight.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: I'm sorry? Will you repeat that last sentence?

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Somebody in the House picks up a prostitute tonight and --

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Stefani, I can tell you that nobody in this House would pick up a prostitute.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Okay. Nobody in this house. I'm sorry, lets say some man out there on the street picks up a prostitute. They both are busted in their hotel room.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: The man, under your bill, would be eligible for deferred adjudication. The woman, under your bill, has current law -- by the way, deferred adjudication is not an option for the woman under current law; did you know that?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: I did not.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: So, the man would be the eligible for deferred, the woman would not be eligible for deferred. How is that fair?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Well, let me say --

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Why can't the woman be involved in the education?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Okay. Let me make sure I understand your question. Of course, you understand that House Bill 1994 doesn't address current law as far as the woman goes, but that is addressed in some other legislation. But we're discussing 1994 in front of us. Under my bill, it wouldn't change. You ask how is it fair? My personal opinion is until men understand that prostitution is not a victimless crime it's not going to change. So I think that we're aiming at that one side.

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone wishing to speak --

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Okay. Thank you very much. May I speak against this bill?

THE CHAIR: Please come down front. Chair recognizes Representative Carter to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Members, we had a lot of fun with this bill yesterday, and I laughed about the johns that we are helping under this legislation, but the reality is this bill -- what it does, it says if you are a man and you are picking up a prostitute then you are eligible for deferred adjudication. You pay a thousand dollar fee, you get educated about the harms of prostitution. If you're a woman, under this bill, you're not affected. I don't agree with deferred in general, but if you're going to give deferred give deferred to anybody who's charged with prostitution. For those reasons, I do not support this bill.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Weber to close. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson in support of the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Madam Speaker, members, let me just tell you a situation why this bill is here. It might sound funny when we talk about a john, but what we're actually talking about is trying to take pimps off the street, and these are the people who normally run prostitutes at -- free money, who don't pay income tax, and who ruin the lives of young women and young boys within our society. When we arrest those people and they get out of jail, they normally return back to the same activity that they have been doing thus far. What we want to do is spend some time with them, or make them spend some time and learn the consequences that they are placing upon society. It's not funny. But let me just tell you something, if we don't do something about crime to get a handle upon this problem, you and I are going to be able -- unable to pay the social cost that it is going to take for the psychological problems that is going to be created in these women and men's minds. The problems of them being unable to work because they are not able to handle a situation. The inability for them to work, and the trauma, the long lasting trauma that they're going to be enduring. This is something that we have been trying to get done within our state. It is a necessary bill. It is something that is going help society but, more importantly, it's going to help the people in which -- are victims to this crime. And I ask you to really pass this bill because it is actually needed. Texas is one of the key states that -- where we are having trafficked -- 20 percent of the people across the country through this state every year, because of Interstate 10. And we spend millions of dollars in costs trying to be able to handle that problem throughout the police department and through the federal assistance that are allowed us within this state, in order to try to correct these problems. This is a needed situation. This is not a conservative, democrat or republican, this is a human issue that we need to get a handle on and we need to start getting a handle on now. And I ask you to vote aye with Mr. Weber.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Weber.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Thank you, Ms. T. What she said. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1994. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 126 ayes, 13 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 1994 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 177 on third reading. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1872 by Giddings. Relating to requirements regarding information to be provided to employees covered by workers' compensation health care networks.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Giddings to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you very much, Madam Chair and members. There exists in statute today a requirement that employers notify their employees if they are in a health care system for Worker's Comp. Nothing in this will changes that. There is also in law today a provision for a dispute, that dispute today is handled by the Insurance Department. This bill does nothing more than put the dispute in the Worker's Comp division where it should be, where all other Worker's Comp issues are disputed. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 1872? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1872. The clerk will ring the bell. There being 101 ayes, 37 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 1872 has finally passed. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Madam Speaker and members, I would like to suspend all necessary rules, every rule there is, so that I would be able to set a Local, Consent and Resolution Calendar for May the 13th at 10:00 a.m. I would like to meet to ask you for permission for the Committee on Local, Consent and Resolution calendar to meet at 1:45 p.m. today, in room 3W15, to set a Local, Consent and Regular Calendar. And I would like to ask for permission to postpone my bill, House Bill 2728, until I come back. And I'd like to ask for permission to put that on the calendar at 2:00 p.m. 2:30 p.m.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. The following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

THE CLERK: The Committee on Local and Consent Calendars will meet at 1:45 p.m. today. May 12, 2011, at 3W.15. This will be a formal meeting to consider a Local and Consent calendar.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out House Bill 335 on third reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 335 by Shelton. Relating to implementation of certain requirements of certain healthcare reform laws.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Shelton explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, House Bill 335 requires state agencies to purport financial impact to federal health care reform. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 335? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 335. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Representative Miller voting aye. Show Representative Deshotel voting aye. Show Representative Allen voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 129 ayes, 11 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 335 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 1043 on third reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: House Bill 1043 by Christian. Relating to creating an offense for engaging in certain conduct related to cock fighting and to the criminal and civil consequences of committing that offense.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Christian.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN : Please let my chickens go. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for, on, or against House Bill 1043? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1043. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 121 ayes, 23 nays and 2 present not voting; House Bill 1043 is finally passed. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Madam Speaker, members, if there are any rules left to be suspended I'd like to suspend them and request that while the House is in session, that the Local, Consent and Resolution Calendar be permitted to meet while the House is in session at 1:45 p.m. today. Now, don't -- I don't want to force you all and I'm making you all make me -- I am making you y'all, make me -- I'm forcing you all to let me make this calendar. I'm going to force you to let me set this calendar for tomorrow at 1:45 p.m, May the 12th, 2011, at 3W15; so we can consider a Local and Consent Calendar. And I'm going to me force y'all to make me set it.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Clerk will read the announcement.

THE CLERK: The committee on Local and consent Calendars will meet at 1:45 p.m. today, May the 12th, 2011, at 3W.15. This will be a formal meeting to consider a local and consent calendar.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out House Bill 2728 on third reading. And the clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2728 by Thompson. Relating to the operation and regulation of charitable bingo.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Members , if you remember last night we talked about this. This was a bill that was passed in 1995. We already can do this. Technology is catching up. Only thing we're doing is that we're making sure that we are keeping up with the money, keeping people from stealing. We're giving a definition of moral turpitude in this bill, and that's it. Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M adam Chair, would the lady pause for a question?

THE CHAIR: Do you --

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: I will.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M adam Chair, I'd like to have some legislative intent. And my understanding is the intent of House Bill 2728 is not to allow a new type of gaming device which has the look and feel of a slot machine; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: That's correct. Because if you remember, Representative Howard, in 1995 the legislature already approved the slot bill -- the (inaudible) technology we talking about today. That was done back in 1995.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M adam Chair, I'd like our conversation put in the journal, please.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Thank you very much.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 2728? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2728. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Show Representative Allen voting aye. Have all members voted? There being 94 ayes, 46 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 2728 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 2649. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2649 by Allen. Relating to the award of diligent participation credits that defendants can find in the state jail facility.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Allen.

REPRESENTATIVE ALMA ALLEN: 2649, members and Mr. Speaker, is related to the award of diligent participation credits for defendants confined to a state jail felony facility.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or for or against House Bill 2649? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2649. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted. There being 138 ayes, 7 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 2649 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading. House Bill 2975. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 25 by Hunter. Relating to the treatment of tick borne diseases.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Madam Speaker, members, move passage. This is the agreed upon regarding Lyme disease.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2975? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2975. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 145 ayes, 0 nays, 3 present not voting; House Bill 2955 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 1580. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1580 by Brown. Relating to the training and certification of state agency employees or contractors performing service work on pressure vessels.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Brown.

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: Thank you members. This just requires that our state employees be trained on work on sterilizers, if they work on sterilizers.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Yes, Mr. Burnam. For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'd like to ask Representative Brown a question.

THE CHAIR: Do you yield for a question, representative Brown? He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: This is really a simple question. I'm just now catching this pressure vessels, what kind of pressure vessels are you talking about?

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: Sterilizers and autoclaves.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Say that again.

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: Sterilizers and autoclaves.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: You're welcome.

THE CHAIR: Is anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 1580? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1580. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 144 ayes, 1 nay, 2 present not voting; House Bill 1580 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 1871. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1871 by Giddings. Relating to the amount and payment of attorney's fees in certain workers' compensation cases.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Giddings.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you very much. Madam Speaker, as you all know, the statutes cap the amount of an attorney's fees in a Workers' Compensation case to 25 percent of the injured worker's income benefits. In other words, if the injured worker hires an attorney it does not come from the employer or the carrier, it comes from the employee -- employee's income benefits. If they're getting $400 a week, they can assign a hundred dollars of that to an attorney. It's already the law. The only thing that this bill does is allow an injured worker to have the attorneys share in that in a proportionate kind of way. Particularly in a case if they get an attorney that they're not on the same page. That 25 percent cap still stays in place and it comes from the injured employee's benefit. But with this bill it allows for the employee to perhaps hire a second attorney, and they would share proportionately in the 25 percent of that employee's income benefits. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1871? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1871. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 134 ayes, 10 nays, 2 not present; house Bill 1871 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 36. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 36 by Menendez. Relating to the punishment for and certain civil consequences of committing the offense of prostitution.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Menendez.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Thank you, Madam Speaker, members, House Bill 36 is a deterrent bill that would enhance penalties for those who are solicitors or promoters of prostitution with children. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 36? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 36. It's a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 145 yeas, 0 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 36 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 242. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 242 by Craddick. Relating to the authority of certain retired peace officers to carry certain firearms.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Craddick.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill brings federal and state law in compliance on retired peace officers. Thank you. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 242? Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 242. It's a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 143 ayes, 0 nays, 2 present not voting; house Bill 242 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 1689. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1689 by Brown. Relating to the monitoring and enhancement of health and human services information technology.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Brown.

REPRESENTATIVE FRED BROWN: Thank you Madam Speaker, members. What this bill does is it -- is keep the joint (inaudible) committee of Health and Human Services in operation. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1689? Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1689. It's a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 143 ayes, 0 nays, 2 present not voting. House Bill 1689 is finally passed. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 1576. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1576 by Garza. Relating to the monitoring of compliance with low-income and moderate-income housing ad valorem tax exemptions.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Garza.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Members, this bill has uniformity to guidelines for property valuations and tax exemptions (inaudible) affordable housing. I move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1576? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1576. It's a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 144 ayes, 0 nays, 2 present not voting, House Bill 1576 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 1886 on third reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1886 by Morrison. Referring to be unclaimed property.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Morrison.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you, Madam Speaker, members. House Bill 1866 is the bill we passed yesterday that at the recommendation of the Attorney General, clarifies that property that is unclaimed resulting from a class action should go to the Comptroller, and it also clarifies who is eligible to claim the unclaimed property. Madam Speaker, I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1886? The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1886. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted. There being 143 ayes, 0 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 1886 is finally passed. Chair recognizes Representative Hilderbran for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Thank you Madam Speaker, members, I move that -- to request permission for the Committee on Ways and Means to meet while the House is in session at a time certain, 2:30 p.m. today, May 12th, 2011, the place being 3W9, to consider committee business.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Deshotel for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: I request permission for the for the Committee on Business and Industry to meet while the House is in session today, at 2:46, May 12th, 2011, in room 3W15 to consider pending business.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. The clerk will read the motions.

THE CLERK: The Committee on Ways and Means will meet at 2:30 p.m. on May 12, 2011, in room 3W.19. This will be a formal meeting to consider SB 327, SB 426, SB 422, SB 520, SB 540, SB 752, SB 915, SB 916, SB 1070, SB 1120, SB 1130, SB 1185, SB 1404 and SB 1413. The Committee on Business and Industry will meet at 2:46 p.m. on May the 12th, 2011, at 3W.15. This will be a meeting to consider pending business.

THE CHAIR: The Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 3055, and recognizes Representative Pena to explain the bill. I'm sorry, first we have to let the clerk read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3055 by Pena. Relating to the penalty for providing false information on an application for a ballot to be voted by mail.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Aliseda.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: I move to postpone House Bill 3055 until 10:00 p.m. tonight.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 804.

THE CLERK: HB 804 by Lewis. Relating to the offense of illegal voting by a person who's not a United States citizen.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Lewis. Representative Alonzo raises a point of order against further consideration of House Bill 804. Under Rule 4, Section 32, and if the bill analysis makes incorrect statements in its background and purpose section, are that the statement or subsection differences between the committee subject and the original is in error. The Chair has reviewed the introduced bill, the committee substitute and the bill analysis, and finds that it does comply with Rule 4, Section 32, and is not substantially or materially misleading. Accordingly, a point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Lewis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you Madam Speaker and members, this members, this bill is a bill which makes a particular offense if a person is not a citizen of the United States and that person votes or attempts to vote in a an election in this state. It also creates an affirmative defense to prosecution, if the person charged believes, in good faith, that that person was a citizen of the United States. We do have an amendment, which is -- Representative Aliseda has.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Yes, for what purpose, Representative Alonzo?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I'm trying to move the calendar along. I'd like to raise a point of order on the Rule 8, section 5D.

THE CHAIR: Bring your point of order down front, please. The point of order is temporarily withdrawn. Chair recognizes Representative Lewis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I move to -- Madam Speaker, I move to postpone further consideration of House Bill 804 until 2:10. 2:10 this afternoon.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out as matter of postponed business House Bill 2360 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2380 by Shelton. Relating to employment by school districts of certain persons under probationary contracts.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Shelton.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This concerns probationary contacts from school districts, and we have an amendment.

THE CHAIR: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Reynolds.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Reynolds.

REPRESENTATIVE RON REYNOLDS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this amendment eliminates the bill's mandate for school districts to put employees on a probationary contract any time they move into a professional capacity in which they were not previously employed by the district and that requires a different class of a certificate. With this use of the word shall, it gives the districts no flexibility to offer a perm contract in those situations. This amendment changes the word to shall to allow the district some flexibility.

THE CHAIR: Members, the amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Hearing none. Amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Shelton.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to thank Mr. Reynolds for helping get this bill through. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2380? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2380. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed say nay. The ayes have and House Bill 2380 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 2594 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2594 by Truitt. Relating to the licensing and regulation of certain credit services organizations and the regulation of certain extensions of consumer credit obtained by those organizations or with regard to which the organizations provide assistance; providing an administrative penalty.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Truitt to lay out her bill. Ms. Laubenberg, if you'd come down front? Chair recognizes Representative Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move to postpone consideration of House Bill 2594 until 2:10 p.m.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Ritter with a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, I request permission for the Committee on Natural Resources to meet while the House in session at 3:00 p.m. May 12th, today, 2011, in room 1W14, to consider SB 609, SB 609, SCR2 and other pending business.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. The clerk will read the announcement.

THE CLERK: The Committee on Natural Resources will meet at 3:00 p.m. on May the 12th, 2011, at 1W.14. This will be a formal meeting to consider SB 609, SB 1895, SCR2 and pending business.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 189 on second reading, clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 189 by Smith of Tarrant. Relating to the punishment of certain offenses.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Smith.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to postpone consideration of House Bill 189 until 4:00 o'clock p.m.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 3517 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 5. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 5 by Zaffirini. Relating to public institutions of higher education, including the administration and operation and financial management and reporting requirements of those institutions.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Branch. Chair recognizes Representative Creighton. Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Mr. Speaker, Madam Speaker, members, I move to -- Since this is now a Senate Bill, and we have a lot of time for House Bills today, I'm going o move to postpone today until 10:00 a.m. on Friday, March 13th, 2011.

THE CHAIR: Members --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: May. May. Oh, that it was March.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. The motion is adopted. Representative Branch moves to lay House Bill 3517 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 3131 on second reading. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3131 by Geren. Relating to providing that certain travel vouchers submitted by peace officers and the protected details are confidential.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Geren.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, there's a point of order pending on 3131 at the present time.

THE CHAIR: Members, Representative Walle raises a point of order on House Bill 3131. The point of order is sustained. Members, the Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 32 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 32 by Creighton. Relating to a prohibition of required health insurance coverage.

THE CHAIR: Members, at the time we left this bill last night, there was a point of order on the bill. Members, the House is going to stand at ease for five minutes to allow the two gentlemen to discuss the bill.

(The House stands at ease.)

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Sheets for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE KENNETH SHEETS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, if you would just -- if you would join me in welcoming my honorary page for the day, Elizabeth Moreland, and today is a also Elizabeth's birthday, correct? Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Representative Coleman temporarily withdraws his point of order. Chair recognizes Representative Creighton.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to postpone HB 32 for 15 minutes.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business HB 3282 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3282 by Guillen. Relating to the operation and regulation of bingo games.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen. Mr. Howard? Mr. Howard, could you come to the front, please?

THE CHAIR: Representative? Representative Howard of Fort Bend raises a point of order. Under Rule 4, Section 32 is that the bill analysis is in error. The Chair has reviewed the bill analysis and the bill and finds that the BA is not materially or substantially misleading. The point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this is the charities bill that we talked about yesterday, and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to -- Chair recognizes Representative Howard to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M embers, what this bill does, it plays another game in here with these card minding machines. If you don't know what a card minding machine is, it's one of these machines that plays multiple cards at a time, then it brings up the one that's got best probability. And what it does, it allows the players to play faster and faster and faster, is what it does. Right now there's a limit on how much can be paid out in a given day of $2,500. And what this is doing, it's just allowing them to play faster and faster and faster, and so people running the bingo parlors, they can't keep up with these machines because they don't have them. Before, you had to go down and keep up -- the bingo operators kept up with that amount of money. We already have a problem. The statesman came out the other day, and I have it at my desk back there, that we've got a situation where there's lots of money being played here and very little regulation. We've got auditors that go out there and every time they go out they find these bingo parlors. They had a bingo that was supposed to giving out the money, all the money was supposed to go out to scholarship. They had given out $54,000 in scholarships and they had $360,000 in the bank that nobody knew about. I oppose this bill, I think it's just leading into further gambling, and I just had Chairman Thompson on her bill with her intent that this was not to feel like a slot machine and look like a slot machine, but they do. And I would oppose this bill and ask you to vote no.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Members, this is not expanding gambling. This is the same bingo game that is being played across the state in bingo halls everywhere. It's just -- this is allowing it to be electronic, instead of paper. The same exact game. It's just electronic. The reason we think it's a good thing is because when you move to an electronic format you now give the Texas Lottery Commission the opportunity to better regulate the game with the data that they'll be collecting. And those opportunities will actually improve accountability, if there's an issue of accountability out there. This is being played today in all of our -- it's a very widely played bingo game, by our military's morale, welfare and recreation program. It's used to raise funds to cover the morale, welfare and recreation programs around the world already, through the electronic format. House Bill 3282 would allow charities to follow that same model used by the military to benefit their charitable programs in your communities across this state. These are -- The only charities that qualify are charities that are well established charities that have been around for years. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 3282. A record vote has been requested. A record vote is granted. All those in favor vote, aye. Those opposed, nay. This is a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 67 ayes, 75 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 3282 fails to pass. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 1244 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1244 by Castro. Relating to developmental education courses and the assessment of student readiness under the Texas Success Initiative for public institutions of higher education.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN REPRESENTATIVE CASTRO: T hank you Madam Speaker. Members, this bill helps with reform developmental education, which, as many of you know, is the graveyard of higher education. It makes sure that institutions are using technology, are using best practices, and it gives the coordinating authority the -- the ability to move us closer toward a single assessment. Right now we've got four or five of them out there the (inaudible) the compass, and a few others. And I have one amendment that makes the bill better and I'll do that.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Castro.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN REPRESENTATIVE CASTRO: T he amendment to makes sure that institutions -- that the higher education coordinating board doesn't just make decisions on its own on developmental Ed. It makes sure that they communicate with all the institutions of higher Ed. And I move adoption. It's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Representative Castro puts up an amendment that's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Hearing none. The amendment is adopted.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN REPRESENTATIVE CASTRO: I move passage.

THE CHAIR: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1244. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have and it House Bill 1244 passes to engrossment. Members, the Senate Bill 3790 is over and eligible. Members, Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 3790. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3790 by Pitts. Relating to state fiscal matters.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Pitts.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Madam Speaker, members, I move to postpone House Bill 3790 until July the 11th of 2011, at 10:00 a.m.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 3640 on second reading. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3640 by Pitts. Relating to the remittance and allocation of certain taxes and fees.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Pitts.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Madam Speaker, members, I move to postpone House Bill 3650 until July 11th, 2011, until 10:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: M adam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Yes, Ms. Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: M ay I ask a question, please?

THE CHAIR: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: I sure do.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hank you, Chairman Pitts. I appreciate you doing this, postponing it until July 11th. What does this do to our fiscal matters bill?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Well, it's -- I -- I'd like to visit with the membership about this, but I hate to take up the time today. But if you'd ask me the question let's talk about it.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Members, we're going to ask permission to postpone all of the fiscal matters bills. Mr. Otto and Mr. Darby will be doing the same thing. First, if we try to take these bills up today we would kill the calendar. And all the House Bills that are on the calendar today wouldn't have a chance to pass, would not -- we would not get to it. Because there's 133 amendments on House Bill 3790 and there's probably similar -- will be a lot of other amendments that were not prefiled on the other fiscal matters bills. Second, Yvonne, we don't have to take up these bills today. There's companion bills to House Bill 3790, which is Senate Bill 1811. And that bill is in calendars and we're pushing to get that bill on the calendar for next week. Earlier of next week. And there's companion bills for all the other fiscal matters bills that are over from the Senate that the Appropriations Committee hopefully will be able to meet tomorrow and kick those bills out. And so we can have all the Senate Bills, the fiscal matters Senate Bills, on the floor next week. So let me make something really clear. We may not have -- we may not have to take these bills up today, but we have to take up these bills next week. The smaller fiscal matters bills makes statutory changes that we've already assumed in our budget. We've already debated and voted on the Appropriations Bill that includes the savings of the statutory changes. These bills finish the process. Not passing them means that the Conference Committee has to go back and make further cuts beyond the House Bills that left this floor about a month and a half ago. House Bill 3790 and House Bill 3640 provide additional revenue to fill some critical holes in our House budget. More than a month ago we passed a very lean and conservative budget that cut general revenue spending by over four billion dollars. But as I said then, and I've said before, since then, that there's a lot of holes in that budget that we need to fill. Let me talk to you about one. Medicaid case load and case growth is underfunded in the House Bill by over five to six billion dollars. The House Bill cuts the rates for nursing homes by more than 30 percent. In reality -- And, members, I think this is a real important date, the House Bill only funds Medicaid through March of 2013. So when you come back next session, there will be no more funds, as of March, to fund Medicaid. And that is not -- this funding for medical services to people that need Medicaid services but it will stop funding -- it will stop funding to your local nursing homes, to your local doctors and other medical providers of Medicaid services. And I think members need to realize that that is why we are bringing up House Bill 3790 and its companion bill of 1811. But I think a lot of members are concerned maybe more about our public education. So let me -- Let's talk about public education. Under the current law we have underfunded public education by $8 billion, which is an entitlement to our school districts that if we don't have a school finance bill we will be -- the school districts will be entitled to receive $8 billion. Our budget that we passed assumes a school finance bill. If we don't, our level of public education funding will cease on February of 2013. So we do not pass House Bill 3790 and other related bills. Your public bills in your district will not receive funding starting in February of 2013, or maybe even earlier. That means not the schools cannot operate, the teachers will not be paid. But the school finance bills being considered on both sides, both in the House and the Senate, assume we will -- still need to add more money to education. You know, today in the press I read that the Conference Committee is almost done with the budget. We made a lot of progress so far, members, the last few days. But, as you know, the Senate did not appoint their top threes for us to begin our work until this week. But I say we are far from being over. The only way we're going to be able to finish the budget is by addressing some of these critical needs. We need a school finance bill, we need to work on our Medicaid funding and our school funding, our nursing homes, our Texas grants. There are many needs, and we are far apart from the Senate with our current House Bill 1

(inaudible). And our only way that we can address some of these needs so our schools won't close, our providers won't get paid, is to pass some of these bills early next week. We need to debate these bills when we bring them up and today I feel is not the right day today to do that because of the other bills that are on the calendar. So, members, I'm going to ask -- I've asked that we postpone these bills. And Representative Darby and Representative Otto will be up here to do the same thing. And that's why -- not to postpone these bills, but to take up and consider the Senate Bills when they come up.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A nd, Mr. Foreman, I appreciate that. That was kind of the question we asked earlier with regard to the postponement of House Bills, what would be really essentially waiting on the Senate Bill so that we would have a longer time to look at what our needs would be, and I assume that's what you're talking about today. The question for us, as members, or for me, as a member, is we're trying to figure out, and you've identified it, how much the gaps are in some instances. We are trying to figure out ways to align or organize our -- our amendments, if you will, and our suggestions in terms of the what the priorities ought to be on these various bills, because we want to make sure we don't get caught. I haven't had time to adequately review and/or make suggestions accordingly, so my question was based on us -- and I recognize today is probably not that time. I respect that. I know members have been trying to get the second readings. But from a premeditation standpoint we expect that there would be some rules (inaudible) we would have to prefile amendments, and we just didn't want to get caught without being privy to where the conference committee is. We are just left to kind of waiting to see. And so that's why the questions and the need to have more information with regard to the process, so that those of us who are not on conference committee would have some idea of what we can expect, and what we can try to put together in terms of what when we receive, priorities that are coming from our district. So I really appreciate your kind of going through that, and if it's available, since it will be helpful for members to actually get your earlier notes, so that we can kind of assess what they mean in terms of the overall budgeting process, and how we might counter amendments to help -- to perfect upon and build what that difference is possible.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: And, you know, my goal is to get this taken up as soon as we can. House Bill 1811. I think that when the Calendars Committee meets they will probably set up a calendar rule, so that -- you know, we have an opportunity. But time is moving, and since today is our last day to take up House Bills, the Conference Committee needs to get out of conference. Our LBB says we need to get out by next Tuesday or Wednesday, so time is moving on.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Madam Chair, will the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Does the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Yes, I will.

THE CHAIR: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Chairman, the timeline that you just outlined, when we would run out of money to fund Medicaid and our public schools under current law; is that under House Bill 1 as is, or is that with -- with the assumption that we are going pass Senate Bill 1811?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Under House Bill 1, as it stands today, those are the numbers that I have given you. On schools.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Well, let's back up.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: On Medicaid, if we can put in a number of -- I mean if we can put in some money in Medicaid, we can probably extend it until March of 2013.

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Can I ask to extend time?

THE CHAIR: Representative Pitts will be glad to speak to you offline.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out as postponed business House Bill 3655 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3655 by Otto. Relating to state fiscal matters related to federal government.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Otto.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN OTTO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I move to postpone consideration of House Bill 3665 until 10:00 a.m. on July 11th.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed bill House Bill 3648 on second reading. Clerk will read the bill. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed bill House Bill 3639 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3639 by Pitts. Relating to state fiscal matters and public and higher education.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Pitts.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Members, I move to postpone House Bill 369 to July the 11th, 2011, at 10:00 a.m.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Yes, I would.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you. So if we pass the fiscal matters Senate Bill, your estimate is that we could extend Medicaid to March 2013?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Is it also your estimate that we would extend public education under current statutes till February 2013?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Yes, if we do not have a (inaudible) finance bill, that is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: So if we do not have a school finance bill --

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Before that.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: If we do not have a school finance bill under our best estimate of the fiscal matters Senate Bill, we could extend -- we could cover our bills on Medicaid till March, 2013, and maybe -- maybe push school finance till February 2013? Put another way, we fall short of funding a two year budget under the best circumstances of these fiscal matters?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: We are working -- We are working on that. As you were there with me today, we are working on it, to extend it at least until June.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: This sounds like a -- And I'm not being judgmental, and this may be the best thing to do, and I believe Representative Gallego had an amendment earlier in our discussion to fund an 18 month budget. It sounds like that's what we're doing.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: In certain areas, it might be.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: In the big areas, Medicaid and public education?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you, Chairman.

THE CHAIR: Representative Gallego, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: W ill the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Yes.

THE CHAIR: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: M r. Pitts, let me follow up on Mr. Villarreal's question, because that's essentially the debate we had during the Appropriations Process, was the amendment that would have done for public schools what we currently do on Medicaid, where we allow people to which spend forward and we come in at the end and supplement.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: A supplemental bill.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: A nd it was the committee's position that was not an appropriate way to fund public schools, so that view has changed.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: With the current money that we have right now, we are looking at all options that we have.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: W ell, the other issue is if -- what level -- the schools will run out of money in February of 2013, at what level of funding? Because does that mean that they can keep doing what they're doing today with the number of positions that they have and so forth? Or will that mean we've read, for example, that there will be over a hundred thousand layoffs in different positions in other schools. So in terms of the level of funding are you funneling them so they won't have to get rid of their hundred thousand employees or so?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: We have not met on public Ed in the conference committee yet, so I cannot tell you what level of funding we are anticipating.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: W ell then how do you know that we'll run out of money by February of 2013?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: We would --

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: W hat assumptions are you making --

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: If we don't do a school finance bill --

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: R ight.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: -- and if we use the current money in our budget, we will run out of funds for our schools.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: I f we keep spending what we're --

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chairman Pitts sends up a motion to postpone House Bill 3639. Is there objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 3648.

THE CLERK: HB 3648 by Otto. Relate to state fiscal matters related to the judiciary.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Otto.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN OTTO: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I move to postpone consideration of House Bill 3648 until 10:00 a.m. on July 11th.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 3418. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3418 by Darby. Relating to fiscal matters related to natural resources and the environment.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Members, I move to postpone House Bill 3418 until a time certain at 10:00 o'clock a.m. on July the 11th, 2011.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 1250 on second reading. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1251 by Frullo. Relating to the use of facsimile signatures for certain documents involving certain municipalities.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Frullo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Members, HB 1250 allows the city of Lubbock and other similar size and larger cities to uses facsimile signatures on environmental lien documents. It will help reduce our paperwork. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Madam Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Yes, Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Yes, I will.

THE CHAIR: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Frullo , can you explain what a sanitation lien is and what the environmental consequences are?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: What a environmental lien is, it's for weeds and things like that in unkempt yards. Currently, right now our mayor signs anywhere from fifteen hundred to two thousand of these per year, and he has to sign them by hand. This bill simply -- this bill will simply allow it to where that can be a facsimile signature.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I understand that. But can you explain what the issue -- what's causing the lien? What is the sanitation --

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Could be having like weeds growing up, weeds or things like that.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: All right. But is it anything that affects the water or -- was wondering in this dealt with wells or it dealt with --

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: No. It just purely deals with the yards.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Does it deal with septic tanks?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: No, it deals with the weeds and things like that that are growing up in the backyard.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. I was reading through the HR railroad report, and maybe you can clarify this. Because in the report it says that public security, such as liens are not -- they're exempt from what are eligible contracts to this facsimile provision. Do you -- Can you explain that?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Well, this bill would be so that the facsimile could be used for that purpose.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I understand that. But the HR roadside report says that public securities, which liens are under, correct, would not be eligible for what are considered eligible contracts?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Oh, I'm not advised on that.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: All right. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1250? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1250. All those in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it and House Bill 1250 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out as a matter o of postponed business HJR 135 on second reading. The clerk will read the resolution.

THE CLERK: HJR 135 by Phillips. Proposing a constitutional amendment relating to an individual's or a religious organization's freedom of religion.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the bill we spent some lengthy debate on. I have an amendment to offer.

THE CHAIR: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I have an amendment that Mr. Hochberg and I have worked on. Many of you had some questions and said well, I kind of like Scott's language. And so we have worked on this and what we've done is tried to make sure that the protection that -- or the hard negotiation that Mr. Hochberg did many years ago is put into this amendment. And we've done that, we've worked with a drafter. And I have committed to Mr. Hochberg that we are not going to have it going to the Senate, have it get changed up and come back and say well, you need to take a change. Some of the groups I have been working with on this have committed the same thing, to support this through. There is going to probably be a little clean up as we go through the process, through leg counsel, that will work with Mr. Hochberg on. And I think this makes it a good amendment, and will make the constitutional amendment even better. And I will move adoption of this amendment to the proposed constitutional amendment.

THE CHAIR: Members, the -- Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg to speak on the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you to Chairman Phillips. Members, thank you for your attention last night at a very spirited debate. I got up this morning and came into this chamber and it was storming, and I sort of got the feeling that someone was trying to tell us up there that no matter what Phillips and I did, he was still in charge. So as long as we remember that, I think we'll be okay. Mr. Phillips has worked very hard to meet all of my objections to the specific language, and I will tell the body that to the best of my knowledge the amendment -- the bill as it would be amended by Mr. Phillips' language, certainly doesn't do any harm. The objections I had last night have been cleaned up. I will also tell you that I have not had an opportunity to vest this with a dozen lawyers or anything like that. So I guess we're going to have to do that if this constitutional amendment moves forward.

THE CHAIR: Representative Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: W ill the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Does the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hank you, Scott, and I appreciate it. And I know that you and Chairman Phillips have been working on this. My concern and what my question is why do we need this? What are we trying to do that we would need this HJR?

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Well, I think you would have to direct that to Mr. Phillips, because he brought it. I will tell you, as I said last night, that putting these protections in the constitution prevents the legislature from changing them. There have been no movements to change them within the legislature, that I've been aware of, since '99. But, as you know, any time you put anything in the constitution it's a higher threshold to make a change. It also, and my one caution about this, and Larry and I have discussed this, so it's not a surprise; is that any time you put language in the constitution from a different language that was there that any time you pick up language, even if you try to conform with the statutory language, you're going to have folks who are going to bring litigation and try to reestablish why the legislature did it, what they were trying to do that they hadn't already done, and what any difference in wording means. So we were changing down to commas and parentheses to try to get it identical. But I can't stand here and tell you that it is, so that someone won't question that. That's always part of the process.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A nd so my question has to be to, Chairman Phillips, so when he gets back I'll ask him, because I'm still trying to wrestle with what it is we are trying to fix, or what we're doing with regard to this issue, other than putting language into the constitution. And my question is what are we trying to get? I mean what are we doing, what are we fixing? Why is this necessary for the general public and so on?

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Right. There is -- there is one change and that's the change that was in my amendment last night, which does make clear what the courts have said repeatedly, but it does make clear that whether the the burden the governmental act places on religion was intentional or incidental, that doesn't mean anything as to how it's evaluate in terms of the its impact on whether it was legal or not. We discussed last night that the courts pretty clearly said that in the HEB seminary's case, this echos that language, as it's been revised. I don't think it creates new law. But then my best constitutional lawyering was last night, that's as far as I go. So members. I will -- I am not going to object to Mr. Phillips putting this on. I am not going to move to table and so I'm speaking on the amendment.

THE CHAIR: Representative Phillips sends up an amendment and it is acceptable to the author. The -- it is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Hearing none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I would close, subject to any questions.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hank you. So my question was to Mr. Hochberg, I guess I need to ask you. What is it, Larry, Chairman Phillips, that we're trying to fix or protect or do that warrants us to do this?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Ms. Davis, many times when, as lawyers, when you have a constitutional provision that clearly says what this says, it's going to support with a we do, whenever any of us feels like -- that our religious rights are being violated, and this being in the constitution is going to help us in court, it's going to help -- gives us protection, it's going heighten the scrutiny. It's going make sure that as it's written, that it's written in 1999, that ten years from now or twenty years from now that it's going to take a record vote to change it instead of what it takes as the majority vote.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: B ut based on what our law is today, and based on where we are today, have we had some reason that we think we should change and put something in our constitution that --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: It took us -- it took us years to go through. We just

(inaudible) nine years to litigate that that hopefully we won't have to go through nine years to litigate that particular case to protect what the Supreme Court ultimately, found the right decision. That's my -- That's my opinion and I think it's best for us to heighten and protect -- protect our religious liberties.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: Madam Speaker? Madam Speaker? I'd like to raise a point of order, under further consideration of the bill under Rule 4, Section 32C.

THE CHAIR: Bring your point of order down front, please. Representative Martinez Fischer temporarily withdraws his point of order. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Move to postpone HJR 135 until 3:15.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Hearing none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1089. The clerk will read the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: HB 1089 by Martinez Fischer. Relating to the authority of a county or municipality to require the removal of graffiti by a property owner.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Martinez Fischer.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: Mr. Mart inez Fischer?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Martinez Fischer.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I move to lay this bill on the table subject to the call by Chair.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2593. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2593 by Truitt. Relating to certain restrictions on deferred presentment transactions and motor vehicle certificate of title loans that a credit services organization obtains for a consumer or assists a consumer in obtaining.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr. Speaker, members, consumers making payday loans or auto title loans using credit access businesses (inaudible) have too often been caught up in a cycle of debt resulting in exorbitant amounts of money being charged for a single loan renewed multiple times. This bill would end the cycle of debt by requiring cabs to accept partial payment of principal, placing limits on their ability to charge fees other than renewal fees, limiting the number of renewals a cab can make on a single loan, requiring a seven-day cooling off period as the loan renewal limit is reached and allowing customers to have an extended repayment plan with no fees to get out of debt. Additionally, loans are only allowed in two-week or one month increments. No distinction is made between single pay loans versus incrementally paid down loans. Incrementally paid down loans are simply considered prepackaged refinancing arrangements. The bill does not limit the fees the cab can charge. I'll repeat that: The bill does not limit the fees that crabs can charge. It does not affect their interest rate. It leaves them in Chapter 93 of the finance code where they are now, but it creates a new subchapter for cabs making title and payday loans. And there are two perfecting amendments.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Laubenberg, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: I raise a point of order against further consideration of committee substitute House Bill 2593, because the bill analysis is substantially and materially misleading in violation of Rule 4, Section 32C-4.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. Chair recognizes Representative Thompson for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker, members, I'd like to recognize some wonderful persons here in our top galleries. Some nurses here from Houston, Texas, with the Texas National Organization here visiting with us, and welcome them to our Capitol and their Capitol, and thanking them so much for coming down here. We have a resolution here in their honor, Resolution No. 1883.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Following resolution. The clerk will read the resolution.

THE CLERK: HR 1883 by Thompson. Recognizing May 12, 2011, as International Nurse's Day, and welcoming the Texas National Nurses Organizing Committee to the State Capitol.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker, members, I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Dutton, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: I move to add all members' names to the resolution.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Parliamenta ry inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Well, from time to time I've seen members get up and ask that their comments be reduced to writing and placed in the journal. Do you know why we do that?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Well, Mr. Dutton, I think you are about to tell me your version of why they do that.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: No, I was going to tell you -- Actually, I was going to tell you the Texas Supreme Court's version, if I might, Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Please.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: This is the case where -- Well, I won't tell you the facts of the case, but let me just read you what the Texas Supreme Court said. They say they said statements made during the legislative process by individual legislators, or even a unanimous legislative chamber are not evidence of the collective intent of the majority that vote for legislative chambers that enact the statute. Moreover, the legislature expresses intent by the words of an act and declares it to be the law. So it sounds like to me, Mr. Speaker, that Texas Supreme Court gives no deference to recognition to us putting statements of legislative intent in the record. And that's my -- that's my statement, which I'd like to have on the record.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Hearing none. So ordered. House will stand at ease for five minutes.

(The House stands at ease.)

THE CHAIR: Excuse Representative Workman because of important business in the district, on the motion of Representative Kuempel. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading the House Bill. Clerk will read the bill. Back up, members. Chair recognizes Representative Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I move to postpone further consideration of House Bill 2593 until 5:00 p.m. today.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 9. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 9 by Branch. Relating to student's success based funding for public institutions of higher education.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Branch to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is our higher ed outcome based funding legislation. And what this does is encourages our coordinating board to give recommendations to the legislature the next time we take up a budget. So two years from now, the next budget cycle, that they would make certain recommendations to the legislature and the appropriations process. Basically does two things. One, with respect to our four-year institutions it will recommend that we look at certain outcome that we already consider in our performance incentive funding program. Graduation -- graduation rates -- at risk graduations, and also a metric to see predicted graduations. And this was the result our interim work this past summer. And for community colleges, it recommends outside the formula, above the formula, as an incentive funding, a certain set of metrics, a momentum point, that they can get additional funding. And I have two perfecting amendments.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Branch.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Chairman Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: And this is -- This amendment perfects -- does what I had mentioned it, was it makes sure it is clear that the momentum point for community colleges will, in addition to their regular funding, incentive funding, and so they are incentive funding and over and above the current funding approach.

THE CHAIR: Representative Branch sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none The Chair hears none. So ordered. The Chair lays out the amendment. The clerk will please read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Branch.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: This is the second amendment asking the coordinating board on best practices for transparency and governance. And it's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Representative Branch sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the thorough: Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone else -- Mr. Garza. Is there anyone else wishing to speak for or against? I'm sorry.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Gentleman will yield for a question.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Do you want Mr. Garza or do you want --

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I am talking to Chairman Branch?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: You want some of me, Sly?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: On HB 9.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: On HB 9. I'm looking at the analysis on HB 9.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Excuse me, excuse me. You're looking at some of the analysis?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Yes, sir. And some of this says that some colleges and universities could lose some of their funding. Is that --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Well, I don't know if you're looking at the original bill or the substitute in this amendment. But what we've done with the amendment is -- Let's take the community colleges first, if we could, and then we'll go to the four years. With respect to the community colleges as amended, you couldn't lose any funding because this is incentive over and above for the various momentum points. And you see all the metrics laid out there. So for getting an Associates Degree, extra funding for passing a certain amount of 30 hours, extra funding. So with respect to community colleges, not so. And with respect to four years, there's no lost of funding, there's no -- it threatens the -- the four years are not threatened in terms of loss of funding, because this is a recommendation from the co-board; the next time we do the budget cycle, to the Appropriations process. And as you know, and as Chairman Hochberg knows, the recommendations of the co-board with respect to the formulas, whether they be based formulas or incentive formulas, can either be accepted or not accepted.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. So I certainly don't take issue with trying to encourage students' success.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And with that being the outcome.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: But in terms of how funding will be awarded to these colleges and universities, is this -- they are getting points for meeting certain criteria?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Graduation, at risk graduations, right. Graduation rates, predicted graduation rates.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: So is this like a new formula that we are devising?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: We are asking the coordinating board to consider these outcomes when they make recommendations the next time to the legislature.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And will this be like ten percent of their funding or --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: There's not an amount set on that.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: So could it be more than ten percent of the funding?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: It's their recommendation with consultation of institutions. But, ultimately, it's our decision.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: So it's up to the Appropriations Committee to decide?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: So, for example, you look at a university and its graduation rate may be -- let's say 65 percent. And then another university's graduation --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Oh, that it was so.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And another university's graduation's rate may be let's say 25 percent. Then the how will the appropriation be determined to those respective institutions?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Well, there's four metrics, so you'd look at -- they do -- would take the normal -- the normal formulas, and they have discretion and they meet in the interim like we do, and they would come up with the formulas. What we're asking the coordinating board to do is consider metrics, outcome type metrics. And those metrics, graduation from that particular institution, graduation rates from that institution, at risk graduations and then a predicted graduation, based on their students, a predicted model. And this is something Chairman Hochberg and I worked together on in the interim. His Appropriations Article 3 Committee, our Higher Ed Committee. At one point the coordinating board, which was focused on outcomes an completions, which is the national concern that we had more people complete, save taxpayer money, get people with credentials. Well, there's four metrics so you'd look at -- that -- take into account normal formulas and they have discretion and they meet in the interim, like we do, and they would come up with the formulas. His appropriations Article 4 committee our higher ed committee. At one point the coordinating board was focused on outcomes and completions, which is the national concern, that we have more people complete, save taxpayer money, get people with credentials. They were looking at course completion, which is -- which turned out to be really a throughput, and it also turned out to not are a correlation to actual completion and getting a credential. We, Chairman Hochberg and I, working together, feared the coordinating board in this direction. And, ultimately, this is a first step where, instead of trying to put something in statute, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Speaker, we wanted to get something to the coordinating board, giving them the sense that outcomes are important to us and, ultimately, the appropriations committee, next session, if you were on the appropriations again next year, then you all would take that advice and recommendation and move in that direction.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: So this bill is asking the coordinating board to set up the metrics?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yeah.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay, thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yes, sir.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Villarreal?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY TAYLOR: Gentleman yields?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I'd be happy to yield and I thank Mr. Villarreal for not only the anticipated question, but also your support on this legislation as one of the joint officers.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: I'm glad to be on board and working with you on these issues. It's very important to me that we take serious, getting everybody on board of graduating more students. And so this is a part of a comprehensive approach to getting all of our institutions to improve their focus on that goal. I have a couple of questions, though. You are making some changes with one of your amendments to the junior college momentum program, and I heard you describe something -- you're -- going to be -- there are going to be incentivized on reaching certain markers?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yes. Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Can you describe what those markers are?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yes absolutely. With respect to our community colleges, it's a set of metrics known as momentum points. This has been, I guess, piloted, I guess, in a couple of states with some earlier success. As you know, some developmental education in math or English, a completion of that is one. The first college level math or science course with at least a C average. Thirty credit hours at the institution. They would get funding for that. A transfer to a four-year college or university after 15 hours. Additional funding for that. Associates degrees awarded, the total number of associates degrees awarded. Funding for that. In some cases, very limited. We have, as you know some limited Bachelor's programs at those schools, they would also get funding for that. And certificate programs. As you know, the country -- I guess the international focus is on not just Bachelors but Associates and certificate programs to prove up that our adult population 25 and older has the credentials and --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And I'm glad you mentioned that. I'm glad you mentioned that, because it seems to me that what we really care about is those three things: Transfer students to four-year colleges, associate degrees and certificate programs. And so when thinking about what the real outcomes are, it's really those three thing that we should be focused on.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: But you know the acronym is now back, you know, Bachelors, Associates and certificates. All those are being counted internationally as to whether or not you have a skilled workforce.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And my only concern is -- and we'll talk offline. But what I want to highlight now is that by also giving credit to these process points that aren't outcomes --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: -- we may be shifting the focus away from the outcome.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I hear what you are saying, and here, this is something again that the co-board, as some of us, yourself included, redirected them from remembrance of course completion, and prior to working with our community colleges, and this is something that our community colleges --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: I'm not suggesting that we make any changes at this moment, but I just want to ask that you be open to having this conversation after we get past second reading.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Absolutely. Yes. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: (Inaudible) for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Ask a couple of questions.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Representat ive Branch, I applaud the idea of outcomes based measurements for our higher Ed as well as public Ed, and I think you've done a good job on outlining that. One thing I'd clarify is as we go through this process and incentivize outcomes, we may get outcomes and the quality of those outcomes may be sacrificed, I guess, in a zeal to get more funding. So as we incentivize with funding I think the balance with how much we incentivize will determine the quality of the outcomes that we get. And I've had that expressed to me that as we go through this process of trying to put those benchmarks into place, that we don't want to lower the standards where we get more kids out, but they are not being better prepared than when they went in.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: I know we'll get that opportunity to balance that, and as we learn through this model and processes. But just keep that in mind, I think --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Absolutely, you raise a good point. The qualitative aspects of our credentials are as important, maybe more so, ultimately, than the than the quantitative aspects. So we have faculty that guards that, we have a fierce independence, as you know, among our faculty members that won't be pushed, that will require rigor, and will require someone to earn their grades. And so we're watching that --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Just cognitive of that.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: While we're creating, this is I would say the first step. This is just the initial step. But to send a signal to our universities that a completions are really important to us. We want to get our students out and in as quick a way, as rapid as possible, with the credentials so that they can enter the workforce.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Well, I know you're going to do a really good job of working with the faculty in those institutions. But that would be my one concern, that what we incentivize is what we get. I just want to make sure that we're on top of that. I know you will be. I appreciate your efforts in this.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you, Mr. Perry.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Giddings, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Will the gentleman yield for some questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Branch, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I always yield to Ms. Giddings.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you very much, Chairman Branch. We had a lot of discussion around what is contained here in House Bill 9 in Appropriations. And I had a concern then about the so-called C students, the student that is not at the very top of their game. Are they going to be sort of -- Who's going to be interested? I mean, what university is going to be interested in taking these C students, if you will?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Well, you'll be happy to know, Ms. Giddings, that they get extra funding for a college level math or English course with a C average, so, the C student is actually the very first metric. So whether you would think that's a good or a bad thing, the very first metric on our community colleges is if someone passes out of math, college level math or English with a C average, the community college will get -- would get rewarded for that. And this is additional funding. So I guess we could call this the Helen Giddings momentum point.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Well, I like that, Chairman Branch. Except, I'm really not focusing for the sake of this conversation on two-year or community colleges, I'm focusing on the four-year colleges. I had a concern in Appropriations that, in fact, if -- if universities are going to receive some funding based on the outcome, and all of us believe that the students should be graduating in six years, do we not?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: I believe that, too. But I think that if universities see sort of a, you know, a bucket, some gold at the end there, they're not going to be as apt to bring in these students who are not the A/B students.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Oh, you're talking about on the entry level --

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: I'm talking about --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Are you saying once the student is matriculated at the university, will they not be as incentivized to bring that student to -- to completion in a graduation?

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Yes. Let me tell you what I spoke to in Appropriations. Interestingly or not, enough, someone who evaluated this came to the same conclusion that I did. Would you mind if I share this with you? Their thinking was that universities who serve a large population of so-called at risk students, and universities that have a lot of the top ten percent of the class students will see less funding under House Bill 9.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Yeah, and that was based on the metric, the comparative metric which is under review. And we leave enough fluidity in there for the coordinating board. They're going to go back to the drawing board and take a look at that. And it's really couple of institutions, it was UT and A&M. And it was a very modest amount. And, also, remember, this won't go into effect for two years.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Uh-huh.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: So, actually, the good news I think is the foreshadowing of this will cause institutions to start working toward more graduations, more at risk graduations, more high needs graduations. And also, depending on the student they allow into their institutions, they now know that there's an expectation that a certain of number of them should be graduating within six years. And I think we have been successful sort of getting the word out that completions, whether you're at a national research university, or whether you're at a liberal arts public university, the completions are really, really important to the legislature.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Well, thank you very much for that information, Chairman Branch. But we want to be sure that these --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 9. All in favor say aye. All those opposed say nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 9 has passed to engrossment. Chair lays out HB 400 the clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 400 by Eissler relating to

(inaudible) (inaudible) primary or secondary

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Eissler.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker members like to postpone House Bill 400 until 6:00 o'clock.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Postpone it until 12:01.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Postpone it until December.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading HJR 48. The clerk will read the bill -- resolution.

THE CLERK: HJR 48 by Anderson of McClendon. Proposing a constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to exempt from ad valorem taxation the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of a 100 percent or totally disabled veteran in an amount equal to the amount of the residence homestead exemption to which the disabled veteran was entitled on the same property.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Anderson.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This is a resolution that helps extend a tax exemption to the surviving spouse of a hundred percent disabled veterans. And I'd like to thank our joint authors, and there's actually six authors that were involved. Chairman McClendon and Chairman Pickett and Phil King and Representative Kleinschmidt, Representative Lozano and Representative Fletcher. And, members, in 2007 this body passed a an exemption of a hundred percent disabled veterans who are service connected disabled. Ms. T says wrap it up. We want to say that this is a very important, when those -- the surviving spouse, once they lose their -- the hundred percent disabled veteran then they get hit with a -- with a tax on their home, and this would kind of extend that exemption to them.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: M r. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Berman, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: D oes the gentleman yield for two questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: T his spouse is allowed to move one time; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES ANDERSON: As this bill is written currently, the property -- as long as they stay at that property?

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: O h, they have to stay at that property?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES ANDERSON: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: O kay/and if they pass away they can't move it on to anyone else?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES ANDERSON: That's correct. The deal's off.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: T his is vitally needed and thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against HJR 48? Question occurs on passage of HJR 48. It's a record vote. Clerk, ring the bell. Have all voted? Show Representative Villareal voting aye. There being 145 ayes and 0 nays, the resolution passes. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 882. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 882 by Alvarado. Relating to the creation of an offense prohibiting certain transactions involving malt liquor containing certain stimulants.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Alvarado.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill gives the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission the authority to prohibit manufacture, import or sale of certain caffeinated malt beverages, also known as blackout in a can. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 882? The question occurs on passage of House Bill 882 to engrossment. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. Ayes have it. HB882 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out House Bill 31. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 31 by Guillen. Relating to the period of license suspension after moving violations for a holder of a provisional driver's license.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, each year newly licensed teenagers are more likely to be involved in auto accidents due to lack of judgment or reckless driving. House Bill 31 singles out drivers that are younger than 18 years of age, who exhibit a lack of maturity through their driving records and are holders of a provisional license who have been involved in three moving violations over a 12 month period. This bill is beneficial for both the general driving public and the young drivers who we do not want to see in the headlines after a terrible wreck, and their parents who want only the best for them. And I think we've got an amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. Clerk, read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Riddle.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Riddle.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This amendment makes it a Class C misdemeanor if an unlicensed person causes a serious accident. And is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Does the lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry, I just could not hear you. I was concerned about the bill in committee. What are you planning on doing to it?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Okay. What this amendment is, it makes it a class B misdemeanor if someone has an accident and they have no license now. That does not mean that they left it on the night stand on in another purse. It doesn't mean that it's suspended. It also doesn't mean if they have a license in another state. It means that if they're behind the wheel of a car and they cause a serious accident, and they have no license, none whatsoever, then it is a Class C misdemeanor.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Do you realize this is probably not eligible to be added to this bill? Well, you can question that if you'd like. But yes, I have checked and I do believe it is eligible.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well then, you better explain it to me. Because I'm not getting the transition from Mr. Guillen's bill, that we had a lot of concerns about in committee. Exactly what are you adding to the bill? Or trying to add?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: This is -- I will repeat on what I told you. If there is an individual who is in a serious accident, and has no license. Again, that doesn't mean, Representative, that he left it on the night stand, or she left it in her purse.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Okay. Well, but the amendment says that the driver doesn't have a license at all, and the driver can't prove that they have a license, then what happens?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: It is a Class C misdemeanor.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And the penalty is?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And the penalty for a class B misdemeanor can be?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I'm trying to think on this. Let me look and see. Okay it's up to a 180 days in jail and up to $2,000 fine.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Thank you. I appreciate your questions.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Riddle sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker? Could I ask a question real quick?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Lozano, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Could I ask a question of the author of this amendment real quick?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: For Representative Riddle? Ms. Riddle, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Ms. Riddle, your -- Are you increasing a penalty if there's an accident for a person who does not have a driver's license; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Yes, sir but let me clarify. If there is a serious accident and there is an accident and the individual has no driver's license. That does not include that they left it on the night stand or they left it in another purse, or if the license has been suspended, or if they have it in another state. It means zero driver's license. None whatsoever.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: What about if they cannot get a driver's license?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Well --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: If it's impossible for them to get a driver's license?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Well, then I would suggest that you give a piece of legislation that would address those issues.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Okay. Could I get an amendment to your amendment that says that?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: No, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well then how are they going to be punished for what they can't do? I mean you are saying that we punish if you don't have a license, but what about if you can't get a license?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Would you mind telling me an example of one? You can't think of one either, can you?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: No, I can't. But if (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Obviously, it's not a problem.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I understand. But we're talking about legislation here. And my question is what about if that person cannot get a license? For example, for example, right now I'm going to give you an example: There's a rule, I think you're familiar with, and DPS that says if you are here legally under one year, you cannot get a driver's license; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: That -- I'm not advised.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Do you remember that conversation?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I know that children -- I know that children can't -- there's a certain age. And might I remind you, driving is not a privilege, it is a right. And I might also add, sir, if one gets behind the wheel of a car that can be a deadly weapon.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I understand.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: And we have laws, we have laws that say (inaudible) (inaudible)

(inaudible) (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I hear you. I hear you. I hear you. I hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: -- state by reason.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: But let me ask again.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: (inaudible)

(inaudible)

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: You're kind of helping me out, so let's go with the help that you just gave. Let's say you need to be 15 years old to get a license, but you're not 15 years old, and you get -- and you're in an accident and you're in an accident, you're going to punish that kid for that?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Let me share with you, I think what you're trying to say is that -- we have no driving laws and no rules

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Let me ask this question. If you have to be 16 and let's say you're 15 and you have an accident, you're going to punish that kid?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I think -- we have laws for a reason. And, yes, sir, if it would comply with this, if there was someone who was driving -- And, let me tell you, I'm glad you asked that question. Because let me tell you a very quick story, a very personal story. My daughter has four children, and my little grandson, when he was somewhere around 12, a friend of his, who was also the same age, in the middle of the night got up; he took his parents' car and took it for a joyride. Thankfully, my little grandson wasn't involved. That child wrapped that car around a tree, and his parents had to go identify him at the morgue. That child died. You are trying to say, sir, that it is okay for that to happen (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: No, I'm not. No, I'm not. No, I'm not (inaudible) (inaudible) I'm just asking you a question. Ma'am, let's say it like this: Let's say somebody's in an accident, does that mean all kids are bad?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Does that mean all 12 year olds are bad? Because that one child did that, does that mean all 12 years old are bad?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I didn't say that 12 years old are bad. But at that age they do not have the maturity to make the decisions.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order. The lady's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to have the lady's time extended, please. Then I raise a point of order on the germaneness of the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. Representative Burnam temporarily withdraws his point of order. Representative Guillen moves to postpone his bill until 4:30 p.m. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Dutton, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: My man is at the door.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Admit the man.

MESSENGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm directed by the Senate to inform the House that the Senate has taken the following action --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 51. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 51 by Lucio. Relating to energy efficiency standards for certain buildings and to high-performance design, construction, and renovation standards for certain governmental buildings and facilities of institutions of higher education.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Lucio.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Thank you, members. HB 51 calls for the adoption of energy efficiency standards for certain single buildings and to ally those high-performance design, construction and renovation standards. And there is an amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The clerk read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Lucio.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Lucio.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, this amendment is essentially bringing the language from Senator Corona's bill into this bill, that has been worked on a much grander scale, with a lot more stakeholders, and a lot more state agencies. It's an agreed to bill. I'm very happy to be working with Senator Corona on this, and it accomplishes the same goal, which is basically energy efficiency standards and construction standards in our state facilities. And I move passage. Amendment is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Lucio sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Lucio.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I appreciate your time and I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 51? The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 51. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 51 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 121. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 121 by Castro. Relating to standing for certain individuals to file a suit affecting the parent-child relationship.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN REPRESENTATIVE CASTRO: M r. Speaker, members, in 2007 this legislature passed a bill that gave -- that gives relatives extra time when -- Let me give you an example: You have parents and they lose parental rights of a kid, and their relatives, because of the legislation we passed in 2007, now have 90 days after that parental termination to seek either foster care or adoption of that relative child. And so in 2007 the legislation specified that we would give relatives to the third degree upon sanguinity that right. My legislation in 2011 is taking to it the fourth degree, which is first cousins. So that's what my bill does. So I believe that Representative Parker has an amendment that ultimately I'm going to move to table. I think we're going to have a little bit of debate about it and so let's get his amendment now.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The clerk, read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. My good friend, Representative Castro, have talked a good deal today dealing with consanguinity to the fourth degree, you've heard about it. I admire his intent of what this is doing in this regard, but I'd like to add something in addition. My amendment is one that went to the committee process successfully, but it was not actually placed on the calendar. Let me take a moment to tell you briefly what it does. A TPS typically takes 12 to 18 months to conclude, and termination of parental rights. And after termination, Texas law, that Joaquim referenced earlier that passed in 2007, grants an additional 90 days to relatives to file a suit for custody of the child. My amendment reduces the number of days from 90 to 30, after parental rights have been terminated. And the relative who files this suit during the time period must show that their lack of involvement in the case was not due to a lack of interest. Let me explain, members, why I'm doing this and why I believe so passionately that this is an appropriate policy for Texas. Three major points. The first one is in 2008 the federal government passed a law referred to as the fostering connections act. It specifically focused the energy of CPS on going after finding ten, be it a first-degree, second-degree, third degree a consanguinity at the beginning of the process, not at the tail end of process. It's also very important that I think Texas policy be updated to reflect what was done in 2008. Furthermore, I'll tell you that from a preliminary perspective, the courts today, their preliminary power only lasts for 30 days, so I believe that the alignment for 30 days is appropriate. But most importantly, members, and I want to flush this out for a moment, I here have before me in my mind a letter, if you will, based on the study of the parent's -- commission of the Texas Supreme Court that specifically told judges all across Texas about this very issue, and their opinions. They believe overwhelmingly, they believe moving from 90 days to 30 is appropriate policy for Texas. And I think we all need to step back for a moment and recognize what's happening. For every day that we delay in finding a way to get these kids into permanency, it's another day away from them having a chance to live a normal life. That's what this is all about.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Dukes, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: I yield, Representative Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Representati ve Parker, are you aware that I carry the fostering connections to success bill in the legislature?

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: I am.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Are you aware that I've worked very closely with the Department of Family and Protective Services over the past eight years on appropriations and through policy, as is related not only to children in foster care but the removals, but also to ensure that kinship care placements would be a priority?

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: I understand.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Are you aware that statistics show that a child that is the placed with a family member has a much greater level of success, and is far less likely run away from that home or to have that placement terminated, if they are placed with a kinship care giver, or a (inaudible) care giver, one that is blood relative, as opposed to a placement with an adopted family or foster family?

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Representative Dukes, listen, I support obviously keeping families together. I support finding ways to find kin. What I'm trying to do is to move the process forward in a way that the experts that deal with these issues every day, the judges across Texas, the folks at CASA, the Court Appointed Special Advocates from position on this amendment (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: But to the contrary (inaudible) (inaudible) you're short-circuiting one, the mission of the agency, which is first and foremost to reunite families. Second you are short-circuiting the process of the agency that is required by not only federal law, but by state law, that you supported and this body supported unanimously, attempts to place those children in kinship care. And third, because this legislature has chosen to underfund the Department of Family and Protective Services they do not have enough hands on board to be able to react in a timely fashion within that 90 day time period to be able to find a father who may not know that child has been taken, a grandparent or a cousin or an aunt or an uncle. And we have numerous cases, numerous cases, where family members were not informed that a child that was related to them was taken and removed. And if you take that from 90 days to 30 days, you're going to reduce the rights and the abilities of family members to be able to request the placement of that child into a loving kinship care provision.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Representative Dukes, I respectfully disagree. You and I are both very passionate on this issue, finding homes for these children. I want to support every opportunity, the chance for a child to be reunited with a member of their family --

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: There was an interim study, an interim study that was done just this past interim about the adoption review process, and the foster care review process. In that adoption review process, they tried to shorten that time period from 90 days to 30 days, and to give families that were not related, foster families, a standing over and above a relative. That was not -- That was not approved by this body. It was not even recommended, because it's not a good recommendation.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Representative , respectfully, I disagree. That adoption review committee did a good job. They worked very diligently. They brought together stakeholders from all across Texas to study this --

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: (inaudible)

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Let me finish my statement.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: (inaudible)

(inaudible) (inaudible) adoption review committee's report. We could not find a single piece of legislation that came out of that report. We only --

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: That's not true (inaudible) (inaudible) (inaudible). I did file legislation that came out of that report (inaudible)

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: You made

(inaudible) (inaudible) but it was such a report, as it related to the rights of children that no one else, no one else brought that forward. And we certainly didn't fund any measure of it in the appropriation process.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Representative Dukes, you're my friend and I disagree with you on this. Our hearts are in the right place with regard to how we hand this. But the experts across Texas, overwhelmingly, the Children's Commission right here --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order. That the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Castro in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE JOAQUIN REPRESENTATIVE CASTRO: M r. Speaker, members, this bill extends to the fourth-degre consanguinity, and we did have the debate that Representative Parker was talking about. And the reason -- and I do think he's of good intention. I disagree with him on the policy and this is the reason why. And I believe, you know, if you look at the recommendations, I believe that Conservative Coalition and Homeschool Coalition are in favor of my bill. And the reason I disagree from dropping it from 90 to 30, as Representative Dukes mentioned, is often because in the CPS process, sometimes, you know, the rules aren't quite followed exactly right. Sometimes family members can't be found right away, and I think that giving them three months to intervene after termination has occurred, three months can affect a child's entire lifetime. And the legislature, not only in 2007, but before that, has made very clear that we prefer that kids, when possible, end up with family members. And so that's why I would respectfully -- Okay. I'm not going to table because Representative Dukes wants to speak against the amendment. So I'm going to let her do that and I'm going to be right back up.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Dukes.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. As many of you, all of you know, the Department of Family and Protective Services in the placement of children has a very, very dear place in my heart. As you well know, I adopted my daughter from the Department of Family and Protective Services. And, clearly, the provision that could short circuit the system, truncate it down, may have facilitated the movement of my child to my home more rapidly. But it's not fair. It's not right. And even though I love my child dearly, I care about the other children who are in the system just as strongly. And I think family members should have every right, every chance, every ability possible under the sun and under the moon to be able to go and ask for a -- request for a child that is related to them to be placed in their home. What we do know from statistical studies is that a child that is placed with a family member thrives much better. A child that is placed with a family member, their cases are much less likely to be disrupted. Their placement is much less likely to be -- to end in a run away situation. What we do know is that there's a dis-proportionality of certain youths in the foster care system. They're far less likely to be adopted, they're far more likely to stay in the system, never to have am loving, caring environment. And to have someone that once they turn 18 years old and they're on their own, and the State a no longer their caregiver, they have no one to turn to. They end up, usually homeless. They usually end up on the streets with no place to turn but, so they turn to either drugs or prostitution or they -- they end up in some type of crime. But we know, if we can place them, and the statistics show that, with a family member, even if it's a permanency care managership, they are far more likely to be successful. There were two reports that were done over the interim. One was a foster care redesign, which you will be able to hear the debate on Senate Bill 218 in the next week. The other was an adoption review redesign. The committee came out with the report that was so draconian, made up of individuals all that were about removing children from their family, who got paid every single day, of the Department of Family and Protective Services to find places, but they weren't finding placements. They don't find placements for the older kids. They find them quite rapidly for the babies, for the newborns, but they don't find them for the older children. Everyone in the system, including the Supreme Court Justices, did not like the recommendations that an adoption review committee (inaudible) as it related to terminating the time period and the standing of family members to be able to asses kinship care. I ask you to please vote against this amendment. It is not good for the children who, by no fault of their own, end up in a situation where they are taken by the state and moved to another family. These kids, all they want is a chance at life. All they want is love. All they want is care. And statistics show the more we can do to place them with their families, the better off they are. The agency is trying, through the provisions that were placed into statute by the Fostering Connections To Success, however, we didn't fung the agency properly to give them the manpower to really go out and rapidly find each of the family members they are required to find, to notify by law. Taking it from 90 days to 30 days is not going to help the agency at all, or that child, in the long run. So please vote against the Parker amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Parker to close.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Well, again, Mr. Speaker, members, thanks for your patience this afternoon. I appreciate it very much. I think the world of Representative Castro and Representative Dukes, they're both good friends and very passionate about this issue, as I am. You know, I, last session, worked to do a lot of things to address adoption and foster care. I wasn't able to get a consensus, and so this body with all of your assistance, created the adoption review committee and studied these issues extensively during the interim. I was very coverable with those representations and what they were. And one of them which has been referenced here, which is the core of my amendment, is to go from 90 days to 30 days. I wanted everyone to understand that the federal statute, the federal rules that were passed in 2008, focused the attention on these processing these cases at the beginning, so we're looking for grandparents and aunts and uncles and cousins earlier on in the process, and not at the end of the process. My fundamental belief, looking at the big time clock, is that every day, every month that we delay, more and more children will not have the chance to have permanency. Will not have the chance to have a normal, loving home. That's why I'm fighting for this. That's why I'm passionate about it. It is also the reason why -- Look at the experts, the focus from the Children's Commission, as I said earlier, they did a paper that they polled judges all across Texas, and in doing so they overwhelmingly supported this amendment of mine. Take a look at it. Again, the Children's Commission of the Supreme Court of Texas. I also, members, want y'all to know that this bill, this amendment, rather, of mine; has the support of CASA, it has the support of the Council on Adoptable Children of Texas, it has the support of the Texas Alliance for Child and Family Services. And I want y'all to understand, it is with great time and energy and resources that we have studied these issues thoroughly. This is a well vetted concept and I believe passionately, members, it is the in the best interest of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Branch, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Would the gentleman yield for two quick questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Parker, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: I yield, Mr. Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Mr. Parker, isn't it true that virtually all of the stakeholders in this process were in support of your amendment moving to the different time frame?

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Absolutely right, Representative Branch. And, as I mentioned, you've got the CASA organization, the Adoption Review Committee itself, the Adoptable Children of Texas, the Alliance for Child and Family Services. (Inaudible)

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: And wasn't there a polling of judges in this case about moving from 90 to 30?

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Absolutely. And that, from the Children's Commission report, that that speaks to that as well. Yes, Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: So you try to find the consensus, this is a lot of work done in the interim, a lot of stakeholders. And this is what they think the best practice is. I know, as somebody who used to chair an adoption agency, chair of the board of one, that moving kids quicker into permanent settings was generally considered an axiomatic, a good thing for long-term outcome.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: That's exactly right. And that's why we're passionate about this issue and bringing forth the amendment today on Representative Castro's bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you. I think you have a good amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: I might simply close, members, just by telling you that, again, you've heard a lot of discussion, you've heard a lot of debate the last ten minutes, and I appreciate your patience on this very, very important issue that's facing children in Texas. But I want you to know at the end of day this is not about the parent's rights, it's not about the relatives' rights, it's not about the foster parent's rights; it's about what's in the best interest of the child, and I urge you to vote with me on this amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Parker sends up an amendment. The question occurs on the adoption of the Parker amendment. Vote aye, vote nay. Show Representative Parker voting aye. Show Representative Castro voting no. Have all voted? Being 88 ayes and 56 nays, the amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Guillen for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I request permission for the Committee on Culture, Recreation and Tourism to meet while the House is in session at 4:15 p.m. today, May 12, 2011, at 3W1.9 to consider SCR11, SCR16, SCR18, SCR39, HCR144.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Smithee for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SMITHEE: Mr. Speaker, members, I request permission of the House for the Committee on Insurance to meet this afternoon, May 12, 2011, at 5:00 p.m. in room 1W149, the Ag Museum, to consider Senate Bills 554, 859, 1213, 735, 1806 and 1656.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcements. The clerk will read the announcements.

THE CLERK: The Committee on Culture, Recreation and Tourism will meet at 4:15 p.m. May 12, 2011, at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider SCR11, SCR15, SCR18, SCR39, HCR144 and SB1841. The Committee on Insurance will meet at 5:00 p.m. on May 12, 2011, at 1W.14, the Ag Museum. This will be a formal meeting to consider SB 545, SB 859, SB 1213, SB75, SB 1806 and SB 1556.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Castro.

REPRESENTATIVE CASTRO: Mr. Speaker, members, I make a motion to postpone House Bill 121 until 11:59 p.m. this evening.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 230. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 230 by Phillips. Relating to authority of the county to regulating the location of halfway houses in the unicorporated areas of the county; providing a penalty.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill allows for those in incorporated areas of the counties and unincorporated areas to have protection whenever we have halfway house move in there. And I would move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Be glad to.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Philli ps, I have -- Excuse me, I have some questions because --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Oh, I do have an amendment. I just wanted to say, so nobody gets upset. Okay. Go ahead.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Sure. I've dealt with this issue in my district. Does your bill give the authority to counties to completely ban halfway houses?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Not at all.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Then how will they be regulating them?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: It's kind of set up like the (inaudible). They can make sure that they post notice so the committee knows they're coming, number one. And number two, they allow them to -- can require them to get a license. And they can say certain areas is it's acceptable, in certain areas it's not. Like certain distances from schools, distances from churches. And we've tried kind of -- we've worked pretty hard this session, last session, to make sure

(inaudible) that we're not talking about substance abuse treatment facilities, we're not talking about those that PJDAC (inaudible). I mean there's certain things that we have emptied out to make sure. Mainly these are out of state organizations coming in and they are finding these are where they weren't any regulations, like there are in the city, and bringing out of state parolees in and having them, many times or often, and like a three bedroom house with bunk beds, six to eight bunk beds per room. And those folks have to sit there and pay a weekly rent to be there, and there's really no supervision. So it's a health and safety thing. This protects our citizens.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: When you were drafting this legislation -- Here is my concern, because I have a part of my district just east of downtown, and it's kind of the repository for everything. For half way houses, for soup kitchens. A lot of actually very worthy services. The problem is, they're highly indicated. And so my concern is, as you were saying earlier, where the legislation will allow the certain areas to be kind of -- these things will be run off from. My concern is, and I don't know if you thought about this when you were drafting this legislation, is that some of the effects might be that it's kind of sort of an envy thing, and you pass it on to the next neighborhood and -- I just hate for it (inaudible)

(inaudible) other neighborhoods would bear the brunt when one neighborhood didn't want it.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And I guess the thing about this is that currently, cities can do this. They can set these -- This is not a denial. It's just saying in this certain area, if there are housing (inaudible) around, that's not a place that you need to put them. Communities don't -- Some of the counties want them. There is a facility like this not too far from my house and, in fact, my son did his Eagle Scout project doing landscaping there. And so we're committed to this. Now on the other end of the street there's one of these groups that are coming in. Now, this is city related. They put a notice in the paper. They followed the requirements locally and it worked pretty well. They had to change their model, they're still doing it. But there's some protections there that wouldn't have been there otherwise. And that's kind of where this came from the. This was one of the most heated issues that came about in my district. A few years ago someone came in and bought the land or bought a house, bought the land and this was the business model that they were bringing. And, quite frankly, you had -- you had neighborhoods all around there of young children, and you're having these out of state parolees without supervision, without transportation. And so I don't think this is really -- there is. (inaudible) if it was anymore by you couldn't say you have anymore, by anywhere (inaudible) but I think we've got a good framework to establish where they can where they can have these, and I think you'll see them in counties. But if you put them too far -- The problem is if you put them too far from the cities they don't work, and that's part of the -- they have to work to pay these, to pay the money.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I understand. And I've grappled with this legislation that somehow prevents the concentration of facilities so that --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And that --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: These places tend to go to areas of least resistance, and I can't say that this neighborhood that I represent doesn't put up a resistance. But the thing is I know exactly what you're talking about, the six to eight bunk beds per room. We've had situations where you've got a living room, they'll take an old bungalow from in the second ward and rent out the living room, rent out the dining room as units in themselves. So these are some things that we've really had some difficulty with.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And I think we need to find out what the ultimate solution may be, because that's not -- that's not fair to your citizens, either. But at least the City of Houston can regulate that to make sure there's not health and safety standards. And post notices so the community knows. And that's kind of the difference. The city does have protections, whereas in these unincorporated areas they don't.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: No, I understand that. When I saw the bill my concern was that if you -- were basically talking about suburbs and so suburbs would you say well, we don't want this here. And so they've got to go somewhere else. And in this particular case, this neighborhood actually, I think the situation's being resolved in another way that's not as -- this detrimental as well, with (inaudible) that's running the people off from a different motive. But my concern is that -- is that one of the affects might be that some other neighborhoods, whether it's this one or another one, you would send with unintended consequences. And I completely understand what you were talking about. I know that we have to have these services, and you're exactly right, they do need to be close in to have the transportation, jobs, educational opportunities and so on. But, of course, I'm sure you've experienced this in drafting this legislation, but it's a difficult balance.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes, it is. And that's why we worked for two sessions to try to get that language correct. Work with those -- We had to make sure that TJAC parolees -- this doesn't apply to them, this doesn't affect them. This doesn't affect the substance abuse treatment centers, this doesn't apply to the apartment (inaudible) house other non-offenders. It doesn't apply to private facilities not contracted by TJDC that operated for the purpose of housing parolees. Those that are not TDJC. Cities have this grant, and we're just trying to make sure that we can have this authority within the unincorporated areas, and I think there's several members who probably have been impacted or have had to deal with these issues.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Sure. Sure. Well, I suspect we're probably going to have to visit this again next session, because I mean you're right, it's a very -- it's a very narrow part of the problem that this addresses. But, overall, it's a greater problem.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And the density is something we might want to look at. Because it's not right to have those in the communities, because I happen to live on the east side of my community and I guarantee you -- no, I guarantee you they can't -- they're not going to show up on the west side of the community, they're going to show up in my community over and over. And again, we already have one which we support and we work hard at. We already all had concerns, and they fixed the problems that we had.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. And that's the unfortunate part of the this problem, is that it's really up to citizens being involved and those that -- they say -- they say the squeaky wheel gets the attention.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And I do have an amendment I need put on real quick.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Excuse Representative Kuempel, Price and Larson because of committee meeting, on the motion of Representative Raymond. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following amendment. The clerk read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you. This amendment kind of follows the TJC, that's if they're placed by an agency, the federal government. It does not apply to them, either. It's acceptable to the author and I would move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Phillips sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: We have not gotten to the amendment yet. Could you explain it again?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yeah, it just adds the federal -- bureau -- It adds -- or an agency, the federal government. That's all it does. Or an agency like TJAC. It identifies a state agency placing them, this bill would not apply to those facilities that have -- that are placed by the agency or the federal government.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Phillips, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I just had a chance to glance at the amendment. So are you saying that would that be a federal prison, or is that a federal prison parolee?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: No, that -- Yes. You've got it.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Phillips sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to raise a point of order.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips. The point of order is temporarily withdrawn.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I move to temporarily postpone this bill until 4:00, I mean until 5:00 o'clock this evening.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 278. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 278 by Alonzo. Relating to pretrial hearings in criminal cases.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Lozano.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill states that there should be a pretrial hearing before the trial. And I have an amendment that was put together by Chairman Gallego, that follows from the agreement that was made that does not apply to Class C misdemeanors and (inaudible) will rule on as quick as possible. To the (inaudible) (inaudible) pretrial motion from the case, so you can't use this as

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Gallego.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Alonzo.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: As you can see, members, this has the language that was asked for at the committee hearings. That it doesn't involve

(inaudible) rulings, in the second part argument

(inaudible) (inaudible) at the hearing a pretrial motion. Move adoption. It's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Members, the amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Alonzo.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye. Opposed no. The ayes have it. The Chair lays out House Bill 550. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 550 by Dutton. Relating to general fishing license fees to residents 75 years or older.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Chair recognizes Mr. Dutton. Mr. Speaker and members, thank you. House Bill 550 changes the existing laws regarding who is eligible for a fishing license in Texas without having to pay for it. Under the current law, you have to be 81 years of age in order to get a fishing license for free in Texas. This bill changes it so that you have to be only 80.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: (Inaudible) the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Dutton.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Dutton.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Mr. Speaker, members, this amendment is acceptable because it just changes the age so that if you are 75 years old, and a resident of the State of Texas, you can get a free fishing license in Texas.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Dutton.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Members, this is the time where -- We haven't done a whole lot for seniors this session, but this is an opportunity for us to do for a group of seniors who love to fish --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Deshotel, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: I have a question.

THE CHAIR: Will you yield, Mr. Dutton?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Yes.

THE CHAIR: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Mr. Dutton, would you accept for the amendment tomorrow to name this after the gentleman that brought this here for several years?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Well, yeah. He -- What happened, members, the law says you have to be -- you had to be older. And it establishes a date of a September 1st, 1930. Everybody born before September 1st 1930 was eliminated for getting a free license. He didn't get one, because he was born November 1st, 1930. So he called my office and was complaining about the fact that we needed to change the laws. The committee was kind enough to change it for me, but they changed it so that it went back to January. So that's why it goes from being 81 today, under the current laws --

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. The ayes have it.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE CHAIR: Members, the Senate Companion to HB 597 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 331. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB331 by Shapiro. Relating to designating certain synthetic cannabinoids as controlled substances under the Texas Controlled Substances Act; providing penalties and establishing certain criminal consequences or procedures.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Mr. Madden.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Speaker, K2. Is this the K2 bill? K2 is marketed as an incense, but it is actually a product that is sprayed with a chemical compound that mimics the effect of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, being smoked to produce intoxicating effects, despite not being labeled not for human consumption. Members, this creates several criminal levels without penalties both for production of, manufacturing of, the sale of and also it sets a separate level for those who are young people who are in possession. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay. Ayes have it. Representative Madden moves to lay House Bill 597 on the table subject to call. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 631. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 631 by Chisum. Relating to possessing certain early voting ballots before election day.

THE CHAIR: Representative Chisum wishes to withdraw House Bill 631 from the calendar. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 680. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 680 by Schwertner. Relating to a physician's response to a complaint filed to the Texas Medical Board.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Dr. Schwertner.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House Bill 660 will extend the time period from 30 to 45 days for the Texas Medical Board to complete a preliminary investigation. This bill also extends from 30 to 45 days the timeframe for the Texas Medical Board to notify a licensed physician of a scheduled informal hearing by the board. This is an agreed to bill by all parties, including the Texas Medical Association and the Texas Medical Board. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 940. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 940 by Dukes. Relating to persons subject to prosecution for improper relationship between educator and student.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Dukes.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This bill was brought to me by the school district and it's to ensure that we make it very clear in our penal code the nature of an inappropriate sexual relationship between a school district employee and a student. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay. Or excuse me, the following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Dukes.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Dukes.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: This amendment is to further clarify that they knowingly know that this individual, the student, is a student within the school district. And it's acceptable.

THE CHAIR: The amendment's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Ms. Dukes. Members, we're waiting on an amendment to be filed.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Dukes.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: We'll put on the -- discuss the Davis amendment on third reading. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, all in favor -- You've heard the motion. All in favor say aye, all opposed nay. The ayes have it. Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 19 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the chair lays out Senate Bill 356. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 356 by Watson. Relating to awards for certain members of the state military forces inducted into federal service in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom, New Dawn, and Enduring Freedom.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Kleinschmidt.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM KLEINSCHMIDT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Senate Bill 356 establishes the Texas Campaign Medal in -- (inaudible) Afghanistan in

(inaudible) the Texas National Guard.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. Representative Kleinschmidt moves to lay House Bill 973 on the table subject to call. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 159. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 159 by Raymond. Relating to the resumption of employment by certain retirees within the Texas Municipal Retirement System.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD RAYMOND: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, the committee substitute to House Bill 159 allows an individual who reassumes employment with their former municipal employer to receive the benefits they would have received during the freeze when they retire again. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 1122. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1122 by Weber. Relating to the trafficking of persons.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Weber.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is House Bill 1122, which seeks to roll in the number of task force victims of human trafficking. Task force recommendation st to better facilitate investigations and prosecutions. It provides additional protections for minor victims, and increases penalties and extends the statute for both criminal and civil limitations. And I do have a perfecting amendment to correct a drafting error.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Weber.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Weber.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And the amendment is acceptable to the author and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Oh, sorry, Mr. Weber. Chair recognizes Mr. Weber.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I said, House Bill 1122 seeks to roll in a number of task force recommendations to better facilitate a number of (inaudible) investigations and prosecutions, and to help aid the victims of human trafficking. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion on House Bill 1122. All in favor say aye. The opposed, nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 119. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HC1129 by Kolkhorst. Relating to a study by the attorney general of the effects on state law and authority of certain international and other agreements and bodies.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a bill that we've passed a couple times in the House. It's made to the governor's desk once. It's related to a study by the Attorney General on the effects of the state law and how they're impacted by international laws. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. All in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair recognizes Mr. Eissler.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I extend the following rules, five day posting rule, to allow the Committee on Public Education to consider Senate Bill 1383 at 8:00 a.m. May 13th, 2011, in E2036. E2036.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following -- Chair lays out House Bill 1476. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1476 by Riddle. Relating to the grounds for application of an emergency medical services personnel certification.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Riddle.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, this bill changes two words. It changes has been or is to has been. This refers to paramedics that we have discovered have a criminal background with repeat offenses, that are quite serious. This gives the emergency medical services the ability to revoke their licenses.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Martinez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Would the gentle lady yield?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield, Ms. Riddle?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Yes Ms. Riddle, if you could, please just describe a couple of those offenses just for clarification.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Yes. Repeat offenses would include murder, capital murder, indecency with a child, aggravated kidnapping, aggravated sexual assault, aggravated robbery. Using a child's for manufacturing or delivery of a controlled substance of marijuana, or delivering it to a child. Second offense of possession of a controlled substance, other than marijuana in a school zone or a school bus and sexual assault.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Thank you very much. Ms. Riddle.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Thank you. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, Representative riddle Moves passage of House Bill 1476. All in favor say aye. Those -- Excuse. Back up, members. Ms. Riddle moves passage of House Bill 1476. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 1608. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1608 by Strama. Relating to participation in and contributions to the state employee charitable campaign by retired state employees.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Strama.

REPRESENTATIVE STRAMA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, we, as state employees, such as we are, with the pay checks that we get, such as they are, are allowed to participate in the voluntary charitable giving program administered by the United Way that allows us to have a monthly deduction from our paycheck donated to the charity of our choice. Just like private employers at places like Exxon and Ford and all the big private employers. This bill simply allows ERS retired state employees to have that same opportunity for a charitable deduction from their monthly annuity. It's voluntary, it's private sector. And I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Strama moves passage of House Bill 1608 to third reading. All in favor say aye, opposed no. Ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 1677. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1677 by Rodriguez. Relating to the state administration and funding of retirement systems for firefighters in certain municipalities.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Rodriguez.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This is -- The purpose of this legislation is to amend the (inaudible) federal release of (inaudible) governing statute at -- both at the city and the Austin Firefighters Association, and contribution in lieu of salary increases for Austin firefighters. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Rodriguez moves passage of 1677 passed to third reading. All in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 1793. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1793 by Gutierrez. Relating to the practice of cosmetology.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Gutierrez. Chair recognizes Mr. Hilderbran. Chair recognizes Mr. Gutierrez.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Mr. Speaker, members, HB 1793 amends the occupational code to allow the cosmetologist to use a safety razor to shave the back of the neck.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Gutierrez moves that House Bill 1793 be passed to third reading. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out HB 1856 the clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1886 by Woolley. Relating to the prosecution of and punishment for the offense of tampering with a witness.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Woolley.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, house Bill 1856 creates a punishment for witness tampering in criminal case. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Woolley moves House Bill 1856 for passage to third reading. All in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 2120. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2120 by Miller of Comal. Relating to the composition of a board of trustees for the teacher retirement system of Texas.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Mr. Speaker, members, thank you. This is a bill similar to the one we passed last session and sent to the governor's desk, except for this bill, 2120, changes the current higher education (inaudible) proceeds position (inaudible) boards and an open --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Miller moves that House Bill 2120 be passed to third reading. All those a favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 2435. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2435 by Deshotel. Relating to rate adjustments by gas utilities.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Deshotel.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House Bill 2435, I think is a -- one of the biggest representations of the -- misrepresentation of facts by the lobbyists, therefore I move remove this bill to August 9th.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none -- Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Postponed until when?

THE CHAIR: August.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out House Bill 2496. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2496 by Gonzales of El Paso. Relating to creating at teen dating violence court program.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Gonzales.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. What this bill does is create a teen dating violence court for those counties that want to have one. It is at permissive bill. It does not have any fees attached to it, so fees are permissive. And it just provides a framework for counties that want to have a teen dating violence court in their county. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Gonzales moves passage to third reading of House Bill 2496. All in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 2835 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 1431. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 1431 by Corona. Relating to the function of the insurance holding company system.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Smithee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SMITHEE: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill will help our Department of Insurance better monitor and protect it from insurance holding companies. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Smithee moves passage to third reading of Senate Bill 1341. All in favor say aye, opposed nay. Ayes have it. Representative Smithee moves to lay House Bill 2537 on the table subject to call. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 308. The the clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 308 by Menendez. Relating to life preserving devices on recreational vessels.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Isaac.

REPRESENTATIVE JASON ISAAC: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I move to postpone until today at 5:00 p.m.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 3268. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3268 by Lyne. Relating to permits for air contaminant emissions of stationary natural gas engines used in combined heating and power systems.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Lyne.

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: Members, this bill is on heat and power systems that allow them to -- instruct the TCQ to set a standard permanent or a permanent by rule for these small gas engines in place so they don't have to go through the whole electrical plant process of doing it. And it saves energy and emissions and --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I don't mean to interrupt. I did have a couple of questions.

THE CHAIR: Would you yield, sir?

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you. You know, I'm very interested in the activities of the TCQ. How does it change the permitting process?

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: Under the current system, because these combined heat and power systems generate electricity, they qualify under an electrical generating plant, which would be like your large gas fired or coal plants or things like that, where these systems are in place using the heat and the process that's escaping out that generates electricity. So they are stationary gas engines that may be at a gas plant during compression or pumping water, and they are using heat off of those items to then generate more electricity.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So it's a type of cogeneration?

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: It is a cogeneration process, yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And can you explain more, the combined heating and power system, how that works?

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: I probably can't. But what I can tell you is that it catches all the heat coming off the engines, and then using that to then turn turbines. Or coming off of a turbine engine and then turning more turbines for heating and cooling in that process. So it really takes the energy that is being lost now, the heat energy is being lost, and converting it.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So you're capturing wasted energy --

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: -- and converting it to useable energy?

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And that benefits the state, obviously.

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: Well, only if you want to reduce emissions and have more electricity.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Exactly. I think you have a good bill.

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: All right. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Lyne moves passage to third reading of House Bill 3268. All in favor say aye, all opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 3431. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3431 by Olivera. Relating to the designation of a segment of U.S. Highway 77/83 and State Highway 4 as Jaime Zapata Memorial Boulevard.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. -- Who's doing it? Mr. Lozano.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE LOZANO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to have postpone this bill until July 1st, to 2:24 p.m.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 3477. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3477 by Carter. Relating to the suspension of a person's driver's license or permit on conviction of a fifth offense relating to the operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Carter. Is Ms. Carter on the floor of the House? Chair moves to postpone House Bill 477 until 6:30 p.m. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 3542. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3542 by Gonzales. Relating to a supplemental payment for retirees of the Teacher Retirement System of Texas and the unfunded actuarial liabilities allowed under that system.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Gonzales.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY GONZALES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members this bill would allow border trustees to authorize and approve a one time supplemental payment to (inaudible) retirees, contingent upon investment earnings of 8 percent and a funding level of 80 percent or above.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Huberty, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN HUBERTY: I want to let him lay out his bill. You set?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Gonzales moves passage to third reading of House Bill 3542. All those a favor say aye, I mean those opposed, nay. Thank you, Mr. Huberty. Chair lays out House Bill 3064. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3064 by King of Parker. Relating to preventing the fraudulent issuance and use of disabled parking placards; providing a civil penalty.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. King.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Thank you, members. This there's a few things. One, it allows the Texas Medical Board to discipline doctors if they issue a disabled parking placard outside of the parameters for which the statute allows. It requires one-hour of education on the issue of these prescriptive disabled parking meters or parking placards. It enhances the criminal penalties for people who are multiple offenders, parking in these disabled parking spots. And I'll be happy to yield.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. King, does this apply only to individuals that have the placard assigned to them, or also individuals who use the placard without the person that it's assigned to?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Well, it's a violation of the law to use a placard that's issued to someone else. And that's a big problem. And one of the things this bill initially tried to address was people pulling into maybe a sporting event or something and using someone's placard illegally. If they're caught, they will be fined a higher offense under this than they currently are. But that's a real hard thing to catch people at, we learned through the committee process.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. When that person is caught will using that placard, will it affect that person that it is assigned to that placard? In other words, say an example a grandmother allows her grandchild to use their card, their placard. Or does it? Can you describe what happens in the each of those situations?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Whatever the law is today, it would not change that. If a -- if someone intentionally or knowingly uses a placard that is not issued to them, they are subject to a civil fine. Whether or not -- There's some kind of penalty for the -- the actual person that has it issued to them. I don't know. This wouldn't change that any. My bet is that is a violation. I'm just not sure.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: And then at the end of study what's going to happen? What will be done with the recommendations?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Well, I'm hoping that plaque would -- What we learned through the committee process is that these things are being commonly abused. There are, for example, some people with some placards are in wheelchairs, others just need disabled parking. And you've got people with a lesser need, parking in the sized parking spaces that really need to be reserved for someone in a wheelchair. There are problems at some of the major sporting events, frankly, that commonly occurs. Someone -- one person testified that he pulled up to a Cowboy game and there was someone getting out of their car and running to the stadium parked in a disabled parking, and he had no disabled parking to park in and he had a wheelchair. So it's trying to look at it again, taking a fresh look and saying how we make this situation really work where it takes care of our disabled folks and where it can't abused, and apparently just a lot of problems with it right now.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: And I would --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Coleman, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: W ould the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield, Mr. King?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: T hank you Representative King. It's really good that you are continuing to work on this issue, except when I got here I worked on this a lot. I think that the training part on the providers' side is really good. And, you know -- do you know now where it is in terms of the fine on the -- the fraudulent issuance of both temporary and permanent --

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: There's actually no fine for that. The Texas Medical Board, if there's no ability within the statute to discipline a doctor or a chiropractor that's issuing these fraudulently, and this would allow them to be able to take some type of punitive action against a doctor or a chiropractor that was just issuing these without really it being a need.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: T hat's good. You have a good bill.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Thank you. And I would move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mr. King moves passage to third reading of House Bill 3064. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair lays out House Bill 25. The clerk will raid the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 25 by Guillen. Relating to the carrying of the certain weapons in a water craft.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, protecting the safety of Texans is imperative to personal security. HB 25 expand the Texas gun laws to allow the freedom to carry a weapon on a water craft. In 2007 the Texas legislature legalized the carrying of a hand gun in a vehicle without needing a concealed handgun license. House Bill 25 would extend that same privilege to your boat or your personal water craft.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: M r. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Yes.

THE CHAIR: He will, Ms. Davis.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hank you. Representative Guillen, water craft means what?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: A water craft --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: W hat does it include?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Means a vessel, one or more water skis, an aquaplane or a another device used for transporting or carrying a person on water, other than a device propelled only by the current of water.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: R epresentative Guillen, are you aware that 13 years old can drive these vessels, these water craft?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yeah. But I don't think a 13 year-old would be allowed to carry a handgun on their vehicle or, in this case, water craft.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: W ell, but you don't have a provision that prohibits it. Your -- you're -- Your amendment does not say that. It just says a person who's doing a --

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: I'm pretty sure the law already does not allow it for -- to be carried in a vehicle by a 13 year-old, which means -- And we're extending to water craft.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: S o I guess what my question is, based on the fact that you are now allowing folks to carry a handgun on a water craft, 13 year old don't drive vehicles either, but they -- And I'm just wanting to make sure that your bill doesn't, by virtue of the fact that they are in control in driving these water craft that they don't also have the opportunity to do -- to carry a handgun on the --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: We're not changing who can lawfully carry a handgun, we're just changing -- we're just extending the vehicle law to --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A nd so if a 13 year-old is driving the boat, if a 13 year-old is driving it and there is a handgun that his parent or something had in there, whose responsibility is that?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: The same --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I don't know. I'm not a handgun person. So I'm just asking, because I really don't know about it as it relates to --

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: You mean -- You mean whose responsibility is it to -- to enforce the fact that a 13 year-old a carrying a handgun?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: No . For example, we don't let 13 year olds drive vehicles, so therefore there's not a thought that he might be driving a vehicle with permission, and there's a handgun in it. We get that part. But to the extent that we allow 13 year olds to drive water crafts, my question is whether or not it's a gun or something that's in the water craft that belongs to the parent, tell me how we handle that. What would be the liability of who is responsible or what are we setting up in terms of a violation of the law?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: I think that it would be the same violation if they were -- if they grabbed the keys to the car and drove off with the car with their --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: E xcept this is to ask permission to drive, and they have the authority and permission to drive the water craft. So it's not -- it's not the same, because you'd taking the car without permission and they have permission and authority to drive the water craft.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: I'm pretty sure -- I don't have it in front of me, but I'm pretty sure a 13 year old cannot be carrying a handgun anywhere.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I understand that he doesn't have a CHL license. But what happens if there's a gun left in the boat by an adult, he has permission to drive the boat, what's the liability for the child --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Sheffield raises a point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Davis?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: H ow much time was that?

THE CHAIR: That was ten minutes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hat was ten minutes is what we're --

THE CHAIR: It was nine minutes and 59 seconds, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: O kay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I think there was an amendment.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment. We don't have a amendment, Ryan.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Then I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Guillen moves to the third reading of House Bill 25. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Excuse Representatives Smithee, Eiland Taylor, Hancock, Vo, Wallace, Torres, Nash and Sheets for committee on insurance, on the motion of Representative Davis. The following bill, the clerk will read the bill. House Bill 24 -- 254. Excuse me.

THE CLERK: HB 254 by Hildebran. Relating to establishing the Texas Derby.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hilderbran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is the bill that establishes the Texas Derby. It is not an expansion of gambling. It just simply sets up the frame work for

(inaudible) commission to start a Texas Derby that would begin in 2015. And I've got a couple of amendments that will clarify and make this bill accomplish my objective.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Hilderbran.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hilderbran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This first amendment -- this one simply -- this is the idea we came up with at lunch the other day discussing this with Kelly Hancock and a few other members. And we came up with the idea of if the Kentucky Derby is now sponsored by a large company, I think Young's Kentucky Derby, we're making it permissive for the commission to sell the naming rights to the Texas Derby and have that money go to the Texas Derby purse fund. Move adoption.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Hilderbran.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hilderbran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the last amendment. It is the amendment that ensures where the funding comes from and that no funding will come from the general revenue, that the funding will come from fees generated by the racing commission in terms of entry fees to enter a race and other type of industry or track fees that may be reasonable, and would be something that would make sense. And those monies and those fees that they would have the ability to establish would go into the purse fund for the Texas Derby. I move passage or move adoption of the amendment.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Hilderbran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Thank you, members. Mr. Speaker, I move passage. After three sessions we finally got it to the House.

THE CHAIR: Not yet. Mr. Hilderbran moves passage to third reading of House Bill 254. All those in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. Chair recognizes Mr. Hamilton.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: I request permission for the Committee on Licensing and Administrative Procedures to meet while the House is in session today at 6:30 p.m. today, May 12th, 2011, in 3W.1 to consider pending business.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Clerk will read the announcement.

THE CLERK: The Committee on Licensing and Administrative Procedures will meet at 6:30 p.m. today, May 12th, 2011, at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hamilton to -- correct. Back up, members.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: I request permission for the Committee on Licensing and Administrative Procedures to meet while the House is in session at 6:30 p.m. today, May 12th, 2011, in 3W.9 to consider pending business.

THE CHAIR: Members, you heard the corrected motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Clerk will read the announcement.

THE CLERK: The Committee on Licensing and Administrative Procedures will meet at 6:30 p.m. today, May 12, 2011, at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out House Bill 2119. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2119 by Madden. Relating to the requirement that the Texas Correctional Office on Offenders with Medical or Mental Impairments provide certain services and programs.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Madden.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: The Texas Correctional Office on offenders with medical and mental impairments in House Bill 2119 simply allows, but does not require, them to provide services if the funds are not appropriated.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Madden moves passage of House Bill 2119 to third reading. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. Ayes have it. Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 2177 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 1352. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 1352 by Watson. Relating to certain claims against a persons real estate license and real estate persons and

(inaudible) persons.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill amends the DPPA involving professional services and exemptions as it deals with real estate licensees. It's an agreed to bill and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Do you have an amendment? The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm sorry.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Solomons.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I forgot we have changed the caption and that's all the amendment does. And the amendment is acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to adoption of amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Solomons moves passage of Senate Bill 1353 to third reading. All those in favor say aye, opposed nay. The ayes have it. Representative Solomons moves to lay House Bill 2777 on the table subject to call. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 2357. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2357 by Pickett. Relating to motor vehicles, providing penalties.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pickett.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, you might want to thank Chairman Hunter for setting this bill. I think it's going to be a Christmas tree as soon as we're done. So I'm going to give a few minutes to those who are filing amendments. I think there's about 20 so far. This bill has to do with our new Department of Motor Vehicles that was taken out of TexDOT, set up as a new tenant agency. This bill is the vehicle title registration portion. This kind of brings us into the 21st century on the ability to do electronic titling, registration. It covers chapters 501, 02, 04 and 520 in the motor vehicle statutes. It's going to correct definitions regarding salvage vehicle dealers vehicles, alias titles, vin numbers. As you've seen it, it's quite large. With that, move passage.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Pickett.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pickett.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, with anything this large we do have a perfecting amendment. There was some drafting errors. We moved the subsection and combined them into three. It applies only to a self-insured motor vehicle. This also has the ability for all of our military plates to carry the term honorably discharged on there as well. And it allows the agency to make any needed changes to any of the license plates to make all the logos fit. It's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Pickett.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pickett.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members.

THE CHAIR: We're backing up, members.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Mr. Speaker, members. As I said, there's lots of amendments on the bill. Let me back up and explain the -- What the amendment is before us, is the one they just explained. The amendment that was before us, could I move to call the first amendment?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Pickett moves to reconsider the amendment. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Pickett.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pickett.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Mr. Speaker, members, currently if you go into the Department of Motor Vehicles location around the State of Texas they cannot accept your credit card. They would have to send you home, if you have a computer, and do it online. This amendment makes it clear that the agency can only accept whatever the charge that the credit card company charges and no additional fees. It also makes it clear that we have a system called Texas Online, it would mean that you could go and do this on your computer and the agency would not be able to collect any additional fees above what Texas Online charges.

THE CHAIR: The amendment's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Pickett.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pickett.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the perfecting amendment that has to do with the the way that the bill was drafted, the renumbering of sections. This puts in the ability to put the words honorably discharged in all our military plates and lets the agency make any changes to make sure all of that fits onto the license plate.

THE CHAIR: Members, the amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Pickett.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pickett.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Mr. Speaker, members, could I get your attention? I don't want anyone to think I'm sneaking anything through.

THE CHAIR: Could we have a little order, please? Mr. Pickett wants to make sure y'all don't think he's sneaking something in.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: This amendment is a big deal. I'll wait until it comes up on your screen. This amendment simply says strike section 124 and renumber accordingly. That's all this amendment says. Now, let me tell what it does. I'm going to ask a question from the back mic first off, kind of -- just to see if you know the system. Currently today, if you go register your vehicle, if it's a brand new car you pay $58.75 cents. Once that vehicle becomes three years old that fee drops to $50.75 cents. If you hold on your automobile for six years or more, that fee drops to $40.75 cents. That's currently today. Last session, at the end, when we were about to sign and die, there's an amendment that came over from the Senate that changed those three fees. It consolidated them into one, so there's no longer a three -- differential. And that single fee has not gone into effect. It goes into effect September 1st of this year. And that fee for all three classes will be $50.75 cents. So if you're driving a new car you can consider we're reducing your fee by $8. If you own a six-year-old vehicle or more, your fee is going to go up from $40 to $50. So let's stop right there. You're clear about that? Starting September 1st there'll be one fee right in the middle, 50 bucks. The problem with that, and that late amendment that was not debated, those of you who were interested in funding transportation, this is going to be a 38 million-dollar law to Fund 6 and the Highway Fund. This is cash. This isn't borrowed money, this is cash. $38 million. The amendment that I have before you would leave the current structure for a new car, three year-old car and six-year-old and older. It would leave the current structure that's in place today, so it's going to be clear. But this amendment means $38 million in the biennium for the State of Texas. 38 million.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Phillips, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Mr. Pickett , I just want to make clear, that's -- the language you're doing is striking an amendment because someone came in late in the session, liked to put an amendment on, and did you know it was going on?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: No, sir. No, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: As Chairman of Transportation? I didn't know it was going on. We had other legislation we've been working on like that, the one you've got today that would have been an appropriate place to do that. It didn't get through; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: That is absolutely correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And so as a result of this -- We're just going to -- Your amendment just keeps it status quo -- I'm proposing that what the public knows today, what the public would go ask if their taxes

(inaudible) what the public would ask at the car dealership is exactly today as what I'm proposing it stay. And if this amendment goes on and the body is okay with that, this means $38 million cash to Fund 8 that will stay in that for transportation.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: It's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Truitt.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Speaker, members, this amendment is essentially the same thing as House Bill 1422, which we already passed, having to do with the disposition of certain car titles under certain circumstances. And it is acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Members, the amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to adoption of the amendment? Ms. Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: M ay I ask her a question, please?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, would you yield to Ms. Davis?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I 'm sorry, Representative Truitt. Which bill is this?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: It was House Bill 1422.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: And it did what?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: It has to do with this disposition of automobiles of wrecks, totaled automobiles, that when the salvage yard can't get a title or a title to it -- And I don't have the bill itself with me, but it's --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A fter we heard your bill in Transportation, we heard

(inaudible). I'm just concerned that we're putting full bills on the floor without people knowing what it is, so I just wanted to make sure I understood what you were putting on it because --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: It's identical to what came through the committee and was passed.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A ll right. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: The amendment's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to the amendment? The Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Larson.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Larson.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Yes, sir. Thank you very much. This amendment allows a county to block vehicle registration if the owner of the vehicle failed to appear in court in connection with a complaint, citation, information or indictment.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Davis, for what purpose.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: W ould you tell me --

THE CHAIR: Ms. Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I 'm sorry. I have a question. I apologize.

THE CHAIR: Would you yield, Mr. Larson?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Yes, I will.

THE CHAIR: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hank you. Mr. Larson, is this a bill you had in Transportation also?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: No, it sure was not.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A nd so you're doing what now?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: I'm sorry, cities and counties both that can withhold registration of a vehicle if they owe the county money. The cities can block registration is the owner fails to appear in court, municipal court. This simply allows counties to do the same if they fail to appear in court dealing with the complaint, citation or indictment. So it's basically extending the same privilege that we have for cities to the county.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: (Inaudible) so that I was so what kind of what kind of citations would it be as they get their registration?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Well, there's a whole host of citations that the county issues. One of them is through your constable through the sheriff's office, or if there was something cited from -- from a co-compliance officer; all of those would be part of that process --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A co-compliance officer giving you a ticket to cut your yard and you couldn't register your car?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Well, if they -- if it went to court, if they went to court. And the same thing happens in the municipalities throughout the state, that if you don't show up to court they'll hold your vehicle registration. This is basically giving the same allowance to the counties.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: O kay. And so constable tickets, like traffic tickets; is that what we're talking about?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Yeah. If they fail to show up to court. If they pay it, obviously, there's not a problem. But if they do not go to the JPs and they don't go to the county courts, and they would be subject to withholding the vehicle registration until they pay the fine.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: S o for those people who get tickets from those red light cameras, would they not get their registration as well?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: If it goes to court and they fail to appear in court, that's the condition.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: W ell, I thought the red light -- if right now people who get tickets through red light cameras, you know, what I'm talking about?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Most of those are in municipalities. The counties that I'm aware of, none of the counties actually have those. Those are within the jurisdictions of the cities. And right now, if you fail to show up in court to pay the fine, or to be tried, then you will have your vehicle registration withheld.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I know. But I'm trying to understand what cases go. You are saying that red light cameras don't sit under this. And I know that Chairman Geren had that bill. I understand that. Which ones -- I mean I don't want us to just open it up --

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Well, my understanding is there's a previous bill that was passed that would eliminate --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hat's right, on the red light cameras. But when you tell me code enforcement, that means that the person gets a ticket from not mowing his lawn or something --

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Well there is -- Those are civil matters, not criminal matters.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I appreciate what you are saying, and you-all are telling him to hurry up while he's putting these bills on here that we've never heard before. I mean I just think it's important that we know what we're doing here.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Sure. I know -- I can appreciate that. This is allowed in all of the cities across Texas right now. It's just an extension to the counties.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Solomons, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: May I ask the gentleman a couple of questions?

THE CHAIR: Will you yield, Mr. Larson?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Sure.

THE CHAIR: He will.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Since I've got some city background, and city attorney work, and municipal judge work, and I just thought I'd make sure of what you're doing.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I understand the amendment will probably be agreeable, but if -- if someone owes money to the city or to a county and then your amendment goes to the counties, right?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: It does.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: So if you get a ticket and it's in JP court and you haven't paid it yet, but it hasn't gone to a warrant situation, will this apply?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: My understanding is it will not. It will only, when you fail to appear in court, that's when they'll withhold the --

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: May I extend the gentleman's time for really -- just a couple minutes? That's it.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Sure.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion for a first extension. Extension granted.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm going to be okay, I think, with the amendment. But I want to make sure that, for example, when you, you know, when you fail to come to court it may take a few days, it may take two weeks, it may take a month; depends on when you actually sign a warrant for someone's arrest for failing to appear in court. When they can't get their registration because of that, their title, right, are you contemplating that the timeframe between the actual signing of a warrant for failing to appear, or just the idea that they have -- they failed to come to court and somehow it's noted -- how do they do -- how is the county going to do that?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Well, right now, the way I understand the process is the city notifies the county assessor, at least in Bexar County, the county assessor (inaudible) the vehicle registration if these folks fail to show up, and they will withhold it. And that's for any fine and at the city. Now the county, it's going to be a lot simpler since they're in the same building, they'll withhold the vehicle registration until they clear out the matter.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: So, the person would then go over to the applicable office there in the county building, or county facility, and they wouldn't necessarily -- The JP courts are not necessarily all in the same area, though.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Right. The tax assessor in most counties are the ones selling the vehicle registrations.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Right. But the JP courts are usually -- they don't have a tax assessor office there where the JP is in that building, but not in all cases.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: We've got Satellites in Bexar County where both exist.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, be that as it may. Go over there and see if they can resolve that issue. Now, if they decide that out there, if they post bond and they do whatever they need to do, can they get a note or something so that they can get their registration?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Well, I think that's a reasonable approach. The way that we looked at this is a process right now, if the city notifies the county. What we're doing right now is extend the same privilege as the city has right now.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I do not want to amend your amendment to, if we can just do some legislative intent. It's not your intent than if, in fact, someone goes over to the JP office and gets it cleaned up at least by posting bond or pleading not guilty or whatever they need to do --

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- so they can go back. Usually they'll pay the fines but sometimes they'll say no, I had a reason I couldn't be in court, whatever, they want to plead not guilty, they want to post whatever bond there is. But if your intent that that person would then be able to go back and get something from that office that they're no longer in violation and don't owe any money at this point, because they posted bond anyway, and come back and they will get their registration.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Yeah. This is -- Our primary focus is just for whatever reason the decision not to (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Is that your intent, that when they clean that up at the JP office, and at least post bond or do whatever they need to do, that they can go ahead and get cleared to get their registration? Because then they will have appeared, posted bond, or done whatever they need to do to get them to not withhold this, to force them to pay something they may not feel they need to pay?

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: That's exactly right.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Mr. Speaker, would you mind putting those comments in the journal, please?

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Mr. Larson sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to adoption of the amendment? Are you objecting, Ms. Davis? Ms. Davis is objecting, so this will be a division vote. All those in favor vote aye, opposed vote no. It's a division vote, members. All those in favor vote yea, those opposed vote no. Have all members voted? All members voted? Show Mr. Taylor voting aye. The ayes have it. Excuse Representative Otto and Representative Turner for conference committee on House Bill 1, by a motion of Tracy King. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Orr.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Orr.

REPRESENTATIVE ORR: Mr. Speaker, members, I will tell you this has gone through the administration committee and has actually gone through this body. This will allow quoting a price on an RV or a tow truck at a trade show, and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: The amendment's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Mr. Doorkeeper, for what purpose?

DOORKEEPER: Mr. Speaker, I have a messenger from the Senate.

THE CHAIR: Admit the messenger.

MESSENGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm directed by the Senate --

THE CHAIR: Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Gallego.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, if you all would look with me on page 149 of the bill. There's a section of the bill that's entitled optional fee for transportations project. That's applicable to counties that bordering the Mexico states, that's having populations of more than three hundred thousand. The largest municipality has the population of less than three thousand. And what this does is adds language that has a population of less than 50,000, and borders the United Mexican States and has at least one federal military base. The issue here is allowing that additional -- that optional fee for transportation project to -- allowing that section to apply to Valverde County. It will be for the county of Valverde in Del Rio who has asked for this. So, Mr. Pickett has indicated that since there is a fee that he will leave it to the will of the House. And I'll accept the amendment. So I ask for adoption of the amendment. And I'm only adding one county, I'm adding one county to the list of three counties. -- I have no idea who these other three counties are, but I'm just trying to add the -- Mr. Pickett tells me that it's Cameron, Hidalgo, and it may be -- the third one may be Webb. So, according to Mr. Pickett, so the one that has the federal military base in it would be Valverde.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pickett to speak on the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I told Representative Gallego, I'm on the amendment in my community they would like the ability to do this. So it would go against me to say that I'm objecting. But I asked Mr. Gallego if he would be forthright with the body, as he was, so I'm speaking on the amendment and it's the will of the House.

THE CHAIR: Representative Gallego sends up an amendment. Mr. Pickett is leaving it to the will of the House. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment's adopted. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Phillips.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Phillips to explain his amendment quickly. The Chair recognizes Mr. Phillips to explain his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. All this is is it's regarding a license plate program, and it's just like 2806 that we passed earlier. And it's acceptable to the author and I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'd like to have a broader explanation of what kind of license plates --

THE CHAIR: Would you yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Yes, I'd be happy to.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you, you know, we have had extent conversations on this session on license plates --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: This has nothing to do with that kind of license plate. This is strictly dealing with -- You know, we had a created this new department of motor vehicles out of TexDOT, and this is (inaudible) language related to the specialty license plate program, which has nothing to do with my favorite license plate and probably not yours, that you've applied for. So, that's it. And I move adoption.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Phillips.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Phillips to explain his amendment quickly again.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Okay. This is a -- The -- This is the same bill as the HB 2575 the electronic lien bill that we passed to allow them to have electronic liens, it's got the --

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to the amendment? The Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Phillips.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you Mr. Speaker. What this does is it this will allow to all of the toll agencies that have similar rights that like Hector does, to allow them not to register golf balls, or allow them to register vehicles if there's golf balls and tolls. It's what allowed us to reduce the fines and penalties related to that -- Ms. -- Ms. Patrick had a bill so that we can reduce the fees down so they are not accepted.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Hartnett, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Will the gentleman yield for a quick question?

THE CHAIR: Will you yield, Mr. Phillips?

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Larry, when I heard scuff laws, is there a time period on this? Because Dallas county has been collecting -- they are posting scuff laws on their website that go back like 15 years. And so I'll ask you off the mic.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: (inaudible) .

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Smith, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Will the gentleman --

THE CHAIR: Will you yield, Mr. Phillips?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I will.

THE CHAIR: He will.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: It's my understanding that Harris county toll road authority already has this authority and this won't affect them at all; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: That's exactly correct.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Move adoption.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there anyone objecting to the adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Sheffield.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Sheffield.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Members, this amendment here seeks to (inaudible) transportation safety code to allow the registered vehicles to get a license plate -- Okay it's the same as House Bill 2357, which I've already passed (inaudible) and basically what it does is it speaks to change the safety transportation code to allow registered vehicles to get a new license plate for a period of no less -- of a period of every eight years instead of five. It's going to be fiscal impact of over -- not having an impact, a fiscal plus to the state of roughly about $6 million. And I believe it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheffield sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment's adopted. Following amendment. The clerk read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Frullo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Frullo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Members, this amendment language was heard and passed out of committee. It creates a license plates for spouses of disabled veterans, and I believe it is acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Frullo sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: M r. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I 'd like to raise a point of order against further consideration of House Bill 2357, and that it violates every rule and that it puts everything on one bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, Representative Callegari's amendment is withdrawn. Representative Davis raises point of order pursuant to Rule 11, Section 2. Point of order is respectfully overruled. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Lyne.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Lyne.

REPRESENTATIVE LANHAM LYNE: Members, this amendment is the House Bill 2237 that we passed the other day on changing the (inaudible) tax on ATVs and motorcycles to motor vehicle tax (inaudible) 2237.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Lyne sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment's adopted. Members, there's one more amendment. Following amendment. The clerk read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment is the same thing as House Bill 2929 that passed committee. It deals with salvage dealers. It's acceptable to the author. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Elkins sends up an amendment. The amendment's acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. Amendment's adopted. Chair recognizes recognize Representative Pickett.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I knew it looked like (inaudible) there for a little bit and Ms. Davis is always keeping us on track. But I want you to know that all of you that came to me over the last couple days ask I said no to, I appreciate you letting us run those down. There were a lot more amendments that were here. I worked with you on those. We try to keep those germane. The ones that were not I asked you to pull them down, or we were going to take them one at a time and let the body know that they were not germane. So I appreciate that. This bill will help your constituents. It's going to be efficient for Texas. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2357. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2357 is passed engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2507. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2507 by Chisum. Relating to the offense of installation of an irrigation system without a license.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Chisum.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN KUEMPEL: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill just says that you need to be a licensed installer to install an irrigation system or it's a Class C misdemeanor.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Chisum, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: I yield, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Is this your first bill?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: It's the first one that we haven't ever amended or anything but there's a lot of them on other bills you hadn't voted on. This is one you have an opportunity to talk about.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Mr. Chis um.

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: It's not a very long bill.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Mr. Chis um, a couple of questions. Something very, very simple. Someone who would do this on his own, if I'm at my house and I want to install an irrigation system, and my -- do I fall under this restriction? Would I get in trouble if doing that?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: You know, if you read on line 8A it says unless exempted under 1903. 002, that is a home owner. So I put it in there. So it's also an engineers, architects, other people who have professional license. This is just doesn't affect any of those. There's actually 14 different occupations under there, plus home owners, that are exempt.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Okay, thank you, Mr. Chisum.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Solomons, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: May I ask the gentleman a couple questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Chisum, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: I yield, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Chisum. I understand under the exceptions if I want to put my own irrigation system in I'd be certainly eligible to do that?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Yes, you would.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And I could hire anybody that I would want to to help me to do that?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: You can. The main person who would be exempt from that, just the person that would go out and advertise they are installers without having an installers license or the one --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Do I have to hire a licensed person, or can I put it in and have you come down and help me and, you know, a couple members here, and help me dig trenches and --

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: You certainly could do it at your own house, you could dig the trenches and you and me could put it in and I it would probably work just fine. But you couldn't hire somebody, a non-licensed installer to do it.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: So is there a reason for that to have only those specialties?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: There is. You are looking on to a public water supply, and most of the time in the city codes, you know, they would say you couldn't do that, because there's certain things that can contaminate through the water and get into the public water supply. You know, there's some fertilizers and things you would not want --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: But you would anticipate a city not denying me and you a permit to go do this?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Absolutely. Even in the city you might have to have a permit to hook on to your water supply, but I'm not dealing with that that's an individual city.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Simpson, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Ask a question or two.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Chisum, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: I yield, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Mr. Chisum, how would this affect timber owners in east Texas or orchard owners there that might be using lake water and other things to irrigate their crops?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Not at all, if you're not hooked on a public water supply then it doesn't affect it at all.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Workman, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: For a question or two.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Chisum, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: I yield, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: Mr. Chisum, I'm still not sure why we need this. To what public safety and health does this apply?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Well, we've had incidents where -- that -- people who are untrained come knock on the door and they see one of them water trackers going across, and see water going out in the road, and say I can put you a irrigation system in for $2,500. They have no license. They have, you know, you're just allowing some person to do it that might hook on -- back on a to a water line and contaminate your drinking water. And this just says it's a Class C misdemeanor if someone does that is not licensed. We have licensed irrigators in this state.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: We already have that?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Yes, we do.

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL WORKMAN: So what does this bill do?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: It makes it a Class C misdemeanor to use someone who is not a licensed -- who holds -- it's against the one who put it in, not against the one who hired him. But if someone holds themselves out to be a licensed irrigator and they're not licensed, to make it a Class C misdemeanor. Five hundred-dollar fine. No jail time. I move passage. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Weber, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Warren, I've just got a chance to look at the bill. It's licensed through the TCQ, the license would be?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Was there a reason for not doing it through TDLR?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: Yeah. Yeah.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Would you share that reason with us?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: They didn't need to know about this.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: You didn't want TDLR to know about it?

REPRESENTATIVE WARREN CHISUM: No, I didn't. It's a secret bill.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: It's a secret bill? Okay. Okay. I think Representative Riddle wants to have a word with you. Thank you, Warren.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2507. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say nay. They ayes have it. House Bill 2507 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3167. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3167 by Callegari. Relating to the abolishment of the state regulation of talent agencies and personnel services.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill basically eliminates the regulation of the talent agencies and personnel service providers.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Walle, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Would Representative Callegari just yield for one or two questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Callegari, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Representat ive Callegari, how much does the State of Texas currently spend regulating talent agents and personnel employment services?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: How much does the what?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: How much does the State of Texas currently spend regulating the talent agents?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: I'm not sure.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Okay. What exactly does the bill do again?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: It basically eliminates the regulation of those few agencies. The TDLR came to us and said that they really don't to be regulated. There are very few members and they just don't see the need anymore. And it does save some money. I don't have the numbers of -- numbers on how much it saves, but we have in many cases more occupation licenses for the protection of license, not for the protection of people.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Oh, okay thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: This is not protection for resident, if you will.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Caligari, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Yes, I will yield.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry. I missed the answer. I was out in the hall for a second. And I am a little bit concerned about not having these people licensing anymore, what are the safeguards if we dismantle this?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Well, there are safeguards in the state if somebody does something they're not supposed to. But TDLR came to us and said they didn't think these people needed to be licensed, because they're very, very few and they never have any complaints. So they don't have any problems. They're just agencies that really don't have much activity, and it was suggested that they be eliminated.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: And we do -- Okay. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 3167. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3167 is passed to engrossment. Chair recognizes Representative Geren for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Members, Mr. Hamilton and I would like to invite you-all to dinner. The buffet is set up in the back hall. You can kind of wander in and out, but it is ready.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3461. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3461 by Margo. Relating to transferring adult education and literacy programs to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board from the Texas Education Agency.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Margo.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Thank you Mr. Chair. Members, this is a bill on adult basic education. And I emphasize the word adult. Currently our adult basic education is handled by a partnership with the CEA, the Texas Workforce Commission and the Higher Ed Coordinating Board. What we're talking about is shifting a responsibility from the TEA to the be the (inaudible) to be the coordinating board. That's it in the changes. Some of you I know have been receiving the emails and the phone calls. There are no changes in personnel or FTE's involved. The simple thing is adult basic education. Right now, we're not talking about just the kids that -- who drop out of high school who need to come back and get their GED's, we are talking about two million functionally illiterate adults over the age of 21 in the State of Texas. The TEA can carry them up to their GED, but beyond that, for career and technology training, for the ability to have a Pell Grant to go after outside grants requires a higher level of coordination through the coordinating board. So, the simple purpose of this bill is to simply transfer the overall oversight of adult basic education to the Coordinating Board. All grants, management functions, program assistance and other statewide support services, are contacted right now out the Texas Learns in Houston. It's a component within the Harris County Department of Education. Not recommending any changes there. As a part of the eligibility criteria, states must submit a state wide plan for the adult basic education services and provide at least a 25 percent match for the federal allotment. And, unlike a lot of other states, Texas only provides the minimum amount of matching funds. Other states like California and New York and Florida match the federal allotment at much higher rates, such as --

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Christian, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Margo, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: One second. Let me just finish the end of it. California spends ten times what Texas does. The point is we're trying to get these -- these functionally illiterate Texans educated, trained to perform a tax paying job, and -- or a tax paying job. And that's the purpose of this, to carry them beyond the TEA.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Margo, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Yes, I will.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Mr. Margo , I'm going to raise this. One part of this I see where you're moving the function of -- from the state department -- the State Board of Education to our Higher Education Coordinating Board regarding this. My concern is in moving those functions from an elected body, the State Board of Education, you are moving that function to the Higher Education Coordinating Board, which is an appointed body. Is that what we're doing here, is moving from elected to appointed in the Board of Education?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Representative Christian, the partnership is intended to remain the same between the TEA, the Coordinating Board and the Texas Workforce Commission. The overall functional responsibilities coordinating oversight for this would fall under the coordinating board. But, remember, you get no credit for the GED and the TEA anyway. The State Board of Education is beyond the GED, that's it. And we're also dealing with beyond age 21, in most cases, the individuals that we're serving. To it doesn't really fall under secondary ed to begin with.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Okay. But it is moving this from the State Board --

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: It would be under the Coordinating Board.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Coordinating board. Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Gonzales, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Would the gentleman yield for some questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Margo, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: I will yield.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Represe ntative Margo, is this going to lead to any change in jobs, because I know that was a rumor that was circulating?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Representative Gonzales, there is no change in personnel or FTE's or anything else. The bulk of the -- the bulk of the employees fall under the Texas Learn Partnership through Houston.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: And you mentioned earlier, I think you said TEA only has jurisdiction up until the age of 21. Many of the people that are going to be help (inaudible) with this basic education are beyond the age of 21; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: So this is a way to assure that people with very limited skills can be -- can get some access to education beyond that age?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: And what about grants? Can TEA apply for all the grants, can they have access to that?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Well, they have access to some grants -- opportunities. But they have -- the Coordinating Board, I think, has, from my analysis, has the ability to go after more grants and leverage the funds to a higher level, which holds our tax dollars down on what we need to apply.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: How much is the Texas funding for this right now?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: What is the Texas funding right now?

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: I probably got it here, if you'll give me a minute to dig it up. And, by the way, there is no fiscal note to --

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Now, I think you mentioned earlier, maybe this will answer the question, but the state only funds about a 25 percent of it, is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Well, according to Representative Hochberg, we're less than that.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: We're less than that -- (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Less than that. We're doing the minimum federal match.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Okay. The federal government would fund 80 percent of the state, not 20. 80/20?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Something like that.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Okay. Let me ask you, I know you live in a border community, as do I. And this doesn't -- just limited to a border community, but we've seen that Texas leads in dropouts over the age of 25 that don't get a high school education, were you aware of that?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: And we have a very serious problem with adult illiteracy, do we not?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Yes, we do.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: And your bill is attempting to address that by giving a more authority to an agency the jurisdiction to be able to handle that; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: We have a good program right now. Partnership. What this bill attempts to do is enhance it and make it better. Let's go from good to better, and better to great. We've got nothing to lose. Every time we have one of these 2 million functionally illiterate Texans get an education, get job training or career skills and get a job, they're now tax paying citizens of the state of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you, thank you Representative Margo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Margo, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Yes, I will.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Margo, we spoke a moment about ago about the 80/20 match of state and federal money. Is it your understanding that these federal funds are conditioned on their use for basic education, not workforce development, not job draining, not financial literacy but basic education; reading, writing, math and basically the English language?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Well, my understanding is that all of this, this encompasses all of this. That's why California, Illinois, Florida and others have transferred their adult basic education from just their secondary ed areas into their higher ed areas. And it falls along with what the Gate Foundation has talked about. Fourteen states have moved adult education into the Higher Ed Coordinating Board. Groups like Kellogg and the Gate Foundation are recommending that. So, you know, the bill does not strictly move adult programs to community colleges. It says that adult basic -- adult education programs must be provide by public school districts. Public junior colleges, public universities, public non profit agencies and community based organizations. The idea is that everyone work together so that we can educate Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Well, this caught people by surprise in that it made my phones light up. Is it your intention that through this bill you preserve the core mission of adult basic education as a program to promote literacy and other programs?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Absolutely. The only thing I'm trying to change, I'm not even trying to change, I'm trying to enhance it. We're trying to add value. Like I said, we're trying to go from good to better and better to great.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Are you aware that most clients of adult basic education programs function academically at an 8th grade level or below.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: From what I understand, it's below.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. And so that's my concern is that I know you were talking about age, but the fact of the matter is who knows better how to educate someone at the secondary level? You're transferring that to the Higher Education Board and so which -- I'm just wondering how you think that the Education Board has the better -- more expertise than the TEA?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Let me back up again and reiterate. We're not changing the partnership. The partnership is still with the TEA, the Texas Workforce Commission and the Coordinating Board. Each will fulfill their mission.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Riddle raises a point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. The point of order well taken and sustained. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this amendment calls on the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to allocate state and federal adult education program funds to each county, based on need, performance and efficiency. And also it calls for them to use a competitive (inaudible) process to award contracts to service providers in those regions. It is acceptable to the author and I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Guillen sends up an amendment. The amount is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Patrick.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Patrick.

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment simply says that if this bill passes that it would affect the implementation year from 2012 to 2013.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Ms. -- would the gentle lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Lady yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Now, did you sit through the committee on this? I know that you were one of the ones that voted no.

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And was there like compelling testimony that there's a real problem with what's going on?

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: No, I do not believe that there is a problem with the present system. In fact, the present system seems to be very efficiently run, but particularly with the ISD's that are running the the program. And average cost for students is about five hundred and thirty seven dollars, verses the program's community colleges which are at the cost of $592 per student.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And I understand. It sounds like we're just going to switch now for the Higher Ed Continuing Board to be the responsible party. Coordinating Board, excuse me.

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: It appears that way. My concern is that we are taking a program that has become very efficient and is doing a good job and we're going to be very disruptive to the students, because we have 96 percent of these adult basic education students below an eighth grade level.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: And I guess the question -- some -- I guess the question, so there wasn't anybody coming in saying we've got problems and we need to switch areas, or maybe El Paso has a problem. I see El Paso Community College came in and testified that is this -- Is this an opportunity of growth of responsibility of the community colleges? Do they get more money if they do this, or is this going to be an unfunded mandate?

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: Representat ive Phillips, as someone who has sat on the Public Education and the Higher Education Committees I can say to you that no one has brought to my attention that there's a problem with this. So you would have to ask Representative Margo, try to see what the El Paso area asked him to do.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I just know -- I haven't had any complaints. These type of things, it seems like you would get complaints about. And I've heard from those in my community that support leaving the program like it is, so I'm just trying to wait and see what the compelling need to change is at this time. And my last question: By you putting on this amendment on here, which I think is a good one, we don't want to change what is (inaudible) currently. I think it's a good amendment. But by you putting this on here that doesn't signal that you now approve of the switch?

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: No, in fact I preceded my remarks by saying (inaudible) purposely.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentle lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: We ran out of time earlier, and I was trying to express to Mr. Margo that my concern about moving from one group that has (inaudible) success and has dealing with a certain problem with a certain population to something that's basically unknown. And so your amendment basically would gives us some time to vet that, whether there's a need or not, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: I would hope so.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: All right I support your amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: Thank you. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Margo.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: I'd like to pass on this amendment and not accept it. The reason is we're not we're not changing anything in this program, per se, other than the responsible party to make it a better program for the Coordinating Board. And we're talking about adults, and adult dignity, and the ability to go where they want to go. We're talking about adults who need literacy training at night, when certain secondary schools may not be open. I'd rather have the Coordinating Board with the TEA and with the Texas Workforce Commission determine what changes need to be done. And we all talk about we don't want to put mandates in this, and that all we're talking about here is helping a program grow for the betterment of Texas, so we can have more literate, tax paying Texans, along with their human dignity. When they show up, they don't have to just show up at elementary schools to get their basic ed. So I would like to let them (inaudible)

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: I will yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Margo, I, obviously, in the correctional division, that has the largest adult education system in the State of Texas. It's called the Windham school. What do you do with this amendment that has any impact at all on Windham, particularly with the fact that at least currently the funding for all the Windham schools goes through Article 3 of our budget, which is the TEA portion. Does this, in fact, would you move that to Higher Education? Do you leave it alone? What impact do you have?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Chairman Madden, my understanding is it is totally left alone. There are no changes involved in that program.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: So you're taking all the other adult education out of TEA, but you're going to leave the Windham package alone in TEA?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: We'll have the Coordinating Board take the fifty-six million that we have applied to and it handle it that way. But there is no anticipation of any significant changes, structurally, to this program, other than make it better and give it an opportunity to grow.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: This is come on rather suddenly. Don't you think we should have some better information before we disrupt services potentially and spend state resources on this transfer?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Well, let me reiterate again, there's no physical transfer of people or data base -- or computer system. We're leaving things as is. All we're doing is saying the responsibility for adult basic education shifts from the TEA to the Coordinating Board. They're already working together. We're not going to dismiss that. We're not going to change all that. All we're saying is the opportunity for expansion, to have a better outcome, to make the program even better than it is, would be to put it in the Coordinating Board.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Well, would it surprise you to know that -- Well, the Harris County Department of Education has an office in my district and they're very concerned about this.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: I understand.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: And they are not convinced that there will be a change and that there will be a disruption of services. And so maybe what we should do is take a little bit more time, be a bit more deliberative about that, and then we can decide if it's a better idea or not, because right now we just really don't know. It may be a good idea, it may very well be a good idea, but unless we deliberate we won't know.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Let me tell you why I was motivate to do this, I was approached by community colleges saying that they wanted to expand and go beyond. I talked to the Coordinating Board, I talked to the TEA and I talked to the Texas Workforce Commission. And when we first talked there was absolutely, no problems with anyone at any level, on making a change. So anything that's bubbled up has occurred recently. We're not looking at any significant structural change, with the exception that the Coordinating Board can leverage these dollars to a greater return for the adults who need -- it for adults' education. They can go for grants that the TEA can't. We -- The -- and again, the TEA is limited to this GED, but it's all outsourced. We're not changing that contract. We're not undoing that contract. I think, with all due respect, that the fears that are being expressed are unfounded and unmerited.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Riddle has raised a point of order, that the gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Patrick to close.

REPRESENTATIVE DIANE PATRICK: I would urge you not to table this amendment. It is absolutely imperative that, if this bill passes, we have enough time to implement this in a smooth fashion in which our students will not lose out because of any changes that were made in the bureaucracy or the management. I would urge you not to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Patrick sends up an amendment. Representative Margo moves to table. The question is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote nay. Show Representative Margo voting aye. Show Representative Patrick voting no. Show Ms. Farrar voting no. Have all members avoided? Have all voted? Being 87 ayes and 38 nays, the motion to table prevails. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker, members, what my amendment does is basically it authors a study, so if this is a problem will find out indeed it is a problem. And we can always make things better. But the problem is, I don't have direct experience with the Harris County Department of Education. They're doing a tremendous job, and they're really concerned that we would be losing the expertise from those that know how to take care of students that are learning at an eighth grade level, to those who are dealing with a college education. So, with that, I would ask you to support the amendment and vote no on the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Margo.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Members, I would vote to table this. There's too much at stake here. You've -- This isn't starting anew. This isn't radical change. Let's move ahead. We have too many functionally illiterate Texans that we need to get employed and paying taxes. I move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Farrar sends up an amendment. Representative Margo moves to table. The question is on the motion to table. Clerk, ring the bell. Show Representative Margo voting aye. Representative Farrar voting no. Show Representative Chisum voting aye. Have all voted? Being 93 ayes and 42 nays, the motion to table prevails. Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 3461? Chair recognizes Representative Margo.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 3461.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Lucio, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Parliamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Is this Representative Margo's first bill?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: It is indeed his very first bill.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: It's his first bill? Could you tell him to be a little less of a slacker on waiting till the last day of meetings on House Bills to finally lay out his first bill?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Lucio, there's still 5 hours and 45 minutes. Chair recognizes Representative Margo.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Representative Lucio?

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: I probably would not be here had your helmet bill passed when I was in high school playing football in college.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: What is your date of birth? Good to have you. I think there's other people wanting to take their own shots.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Pena, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Well, okay, I want to use this opportunity to ask you your qualifications to be in the Hispanic Republican Conference. Tell us about that, Margo.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Well, I have the office down the hall from you. I am also across the hall from J.M. and Sergio and, you know --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: (Inaudible) across the hall from me. Come on.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: My grandfather is from Rio Grande City, Texas. And in fact Ryan Guillen and I are related, because his great grandmother was a Margo.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Oh, that's all the reason for us to vote against your bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Also, Rafael Anchia's wife, her mother was my dad's first cousin, or is my dad's first cousin.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Wow. So you must be related to nearly everybody on the floor.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: It just depends.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Is that how you're getting the votes?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Yeah. No, this is not Arkansas.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Geren, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Would you recognize me for a motion to postpone this bill until 12:01, because he'd be on El Paso's time anyways. So --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Not at this time.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 3461. All those this favor say aye. All opposed no. The ayes have it. House Bill 3461 is passed to engrossment. Chair recognizes Representative Guillen for a recognition.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I'd like to recognize some constituents of mine from Zapata County who are up here in the gallery right now. With us today are Zapata High School coach, Mike Villarreal. His wife and -- and y'all stand as I call your name. His wife, Mrs. Villareal, Coach Laredo (inaudible). Zapata High School students, and (inaudible) Erica Hernandez, who are here to compete in a track state competition. And it's also Marlena and Erica's first visit to the Capitol. Members, please help me in welcoming my friends from Zapata, my constituents from Zapata to the state Capitol.

THE CHAIR: Members, we're backing up to some postponed bills. Members, we're going start with Senate Bill 316 and House Bill 2594, House Bill 804, House Bill 32, HJR 135, House Bill 189, House Bill 31, house Bill 3082, House Bill 2593, House Bill 230, House Bill 400, House Bill 3477 will be the order we'll be taking those in. Chair lays out Senate Bill 316. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 316 by Whitmire. Relating to criminal asset forfeiture, the disposition of proceeds and property from criminal asset forfeiture, and accountability for that disposition; providing civil penalties.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: H ello members, this is the bill that we talked about earlier this morning, that some of you raised concerns about, that was raised by your local prosecutors. But let me tell you essentially what is going on. First, I'm very glad that your local prosecutors, especially those of you who are from big urban counties, that your prosecutors know who you are and have taken the time and effort to call you, that's very important. Secondly, let me tell you that the easiest way to remedy this is to withdraw the amendment that I put on yesterday, which is essentially taking care of the problem for everyone. And in lieu of the entire amendment, just put in one provision with respect to the state auditor, who has authority to -- Who already has authority to audit those accounts, and the one provision that will go in is that the auditor that will have the authority -- or rather the local prosecutor will pay the state auditors expense for auditing, so that it doesn't cost the state any money. That's the only thing that will go in there. So Mr. Hartnett and Mr. King and others have worked on some amendments that are perfectly acceptable to me, but I do think that the cleanest way to do this is to just withdraw the amendment and leave the one part in there. So everyone's prosecutor at home should be perfectly, thoroughly, totally and completely satisfied with the results. So, with that, let me -- I have an amendment that will repeal the amendment that was added yesterday, and we can go on about our business.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Gallego.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, if you all will look at your computer screens you'll see that what this amendment does is repeal the amendment from yesterday and replaced it just with a simple sentence that talks about the auditor and the travel issue. And this amendment is acceptable to the author. And so --

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to adopting the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment. Ms. Woolley? The Woolley amendment is withdrawn. The Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Fletcher.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Fletcher.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Mr. Speaker, members, a lot of the focus in terms of the the DA's office around the state, this clarifying amendment allows and applies to (inaudible) assets when they're not working in conjunction with other law enforcement agencies. DPS will continue to share in assets seized depending on their percentages when they are joining these investigations. Joint investigations are usually determined by a memorandum of understanding. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment. Mr. King? The King amendment is withdrawn. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment. There are no more amendments, members. Chair recognizes Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: I t makes it a lot easier not to have the fight. I withdraw the amendment. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Gallego moves passage on Senate Bill 316. It's a record vote, members. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Mrs. Woolley voting aye. Have all members voted? Show Mr. Keffer voting aye. Have all members voted? Being 116 ayes, 18 nays, 2 present not voting; Senate Bill 316 finally passes. Chair lays out as postponed business, House Bill 2594.

THE CLERK: HB 2594 by Truitt. Relating to the licensing and regulation of certain credit services organizations and the regulation of certain extensions of consumer credit obtained by those organizations or with regard to which the organizations provide assistance; providing an administrative penalty.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt. Members, there's a point of order. Ms. Laubenberg has raised a point of order pursuant to rule 4, Section 32C4. The point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Mrs. Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is the registration and oversight of the CABS bill, and I was in the process of laying out an amendment yesterday when it got popped with the point of order.

THE CHAIR: The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Elkins.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this amendment corrects errors made in the committee substitute. One correction is in the definition of a title loan, to better match how the market actually works --

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt? Hang on just a second, Ms. Truitt. The Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins to explain the amendment.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this amendment is something that I have never done in my 17 years in the Texas Legislature. And I would not do it unless I felt very strongly about excessive regulations.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Truitt, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield, Mr. Elkins?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Not at this time.

THE CHAIR: Not at this time. Mr. Elkins, would you mind speaking into the microphone so that the members can hear you?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: All right. What this bill does, what this amendment does is it strikes the enacting clause. And basically what the affect is is that if this amendment passes the bill will be dead. And I just want to go through this bill, because this bill is nothing more than an expansion of government.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Mr. Speaker, I'm not going yield until I finish my --

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, he's not going to yield at this time.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I'll wait.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: This bill is a bill that is still with the government growth. DPS government regulation, excessive regulation by a bureaucracy at the hands of big business. And I'm just going to go through section of the section of the bill and tell you essentially what this bill does and how this bill is -- And really, members, there's three bills that Representative Truitt filed. And you have to get the context of all three bills to really figure out the magnitude and the scope of this encroachment by government. First of all, in this bill, on page three of the committee substitute, it talks about a license required. And in -- On page 3, section 22, it talks about a person may not use a device or subterfuge or pretence to evade the application of this chapter. I can tell you from personal experience that I regret that in 1991, I was sued by the Texas Attorney General and the Consumer Credit Commissioner for language like that, at great expanse. And when it was brought to a Harris County jury an issue was resolved in less than 40 minutes, and the jury just told them you guys are nuts, it's not a loan. The problem with the Credit Commissioner agency is they see everything through their little lens as a loan. Now, I want to go on to what a CSO currently does and why she's trying to regulate it. First of all, the Texas Constitution allows everybody to charge an interest rate of ten percent. All these loans --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, for what purpose? represenative vick: Is the gentleman going to yield at all?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, he said he's not going to yield at this time.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Not till I'm finished. Currently all the consumers that get a payday loan or a car title loans gets a loan at a rate of ten percent. The rate is ten percent. That rate is not regulated by anybody, because it's a constitutional right. It means that everybody in the State of Texas has the constitutional right to make loans at ten percent. And that's exactly what's being done in the context of the consumer credit transaction that is classified as a credit service organization. Now, we're trying to go in and regulate fees and other things that have traditionally been under the business and commerce code. Now, the Texas Supreme Court has ruled on what a loan is. A loan is an advance of money, it is a charging of the interest and it is an absolute obligation to repay. A credit service organization fee is neither of those. It is not an advance of money, it is not the charging of interest, and it is not an obligation to repay. It is a fee for services rendered in securing an guaranteeing a loan to a consumer. Yes, it is part of an APR, which is governed by the Texas -- by the Federal Truth in Lending. And now, we're trying to going to go and in and regulate -- I learned that earlier today that Raphael Anchia, he made reference on his debt consolidation bill to credit repair organizations governed by Chapter 393, and he used the word that they were regulated by Chapter 393. Members, credit service organizations in Texas are regulated by Chapter 393 of the Business and Commerce Code today. Now, we go over and when we see that this bill was written by big business. I want you to notice on page five that they have raised the bond from $10,000 to $50,000. Now, why would they do that? I contacted the Secretary of State and asked the Secretary of State, to your knowledge, has any bond for a CSO ever been exercised on? The Secretary of State has not -- has no knowledge of any bond ever being exercised on by a consumer credit organization. Then they want to raise it to $50,000 per location, to two and a half million. Well, this obviously favors the multi, big billion dollars corporations. Then we go through this bill and they want to regulate and license, and then the commissioner wants to just take her time about extending and denying licenses. Folks, this bill is nothing more than just an expansion of government. It's trying to solve a problem that just doesn't exist. The -- the only people that are complaining are not the consumers, the people that are complaining are the consumers' groups that are paid. I remember what somebody told me one time, it's been a long time ago. They said listen, Gary, I want to tell you something, you cannot raise money without a cause. It just so happens that payday lending is the cause that they've picked up, because of the fraternalistic nature of our society for people looking out for people because they think they're too stupid to make a decision on their own. Folks, members, I just want to tell you, the consumers that we deal with are not --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: They are very informed.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Will the gentleman yield now?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Not at this time.

THE CHAIR: Not at this time, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: The consumers are very informed. They have already analyzed the exact cost of doing business and have already examined their alternatives. And the reason that they choose to do business with the credit service organizations is because it is less cost than the options that are available. Now, we're sitting here regulating a industry, trying to heavily regulate, even more so than it is already. And it's not even one of the top ten items at the Attorney General's top ten list. Debt collection agencies are number one. Mortgage companies are number two. Municipal federal state relations are number three and (inaudible) finance companies that are currently regulated, finance companies that are currently regulated by the finance commission, the Consumer Credit Commission has more complaints than credit service organizations. And I ask you, members, why would we want to go after and regulate even more a credit service organization? And I'm going ask you, and then I'll accept questions. I'm going to ask, you, members, to join me. Let's not talk about payday loans, let's just deal with the issue one once and for and all, just put it to vote. And I'm going to ask you to vote yes with me on this motion to strike the enabling clause.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Would the gentleman yield now?

THE CHAIR: He will.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: I will yield.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you. Thank you, Representative Elkins. Do you know that I really do appreciate your interest in standing up for small businesses?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Thank you, and I appreciate the work that you did on this.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you. I started my own little company in 1984 and I really appreciate being able to work and conduct business in an atmosphere absent oppressive government regulation. Now, yesterday, you represented yourself to this body as a struggling small businessman that was simply trying to protect your business from intrusive government interference, as you are today?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: I don't know that I said I was a struggling small business, but I was a small business owner.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: But isn't it true that you have 12 very successful payday and title loan locations across this state, and are, in fact, not running a small business but are running a fairly substantial --

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, would you keep your discussions to the amendment, please?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: I do have 12 locations and I do not do title loans.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: You're enabling --

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: It's still not about this amendment -- Your amendment strikes the enabling clause, does it not?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Yes, it does.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: So there are some very important components within this bill that your amendment eliminates, and so I'd like to ask you isn't it true that the reason you've decided (inaudible) to kill these bills is because, as the owner of these business, you are opposed to the state trying to impede the predatory lending practices and protect the good Texans who are falling prey to the industry's bad actors?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: That's not true at all, Chairwoman Truitt --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Representati ve Elkins, didn't I see you earlier this session to let you know that I would be carrying these bills. And given the enthusiastic effort that you're putting into killing these bills, you've known about the --

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises the point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I request respectfully that his time be extended.

THE CHAIR: This is the first request for extension. The extension is granted.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: And so you've known about the effort to craft these, Representative Elkins, because I came to see you earlier in the session about this. And yesterday you said you hadn't agreed to these bills, but isn't it true that you've been seeking ways, like with this amendment --

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, would you please would you please keep your -- Ms. Truitt, would you, please, keep your questions to the amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: It's on the amendment. This amendment is to strike the enabling cause.

THE CHAIR: I understand the amendment, please keep your questions to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Gut the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: It does gut the bill, I agree with that.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: And that not once did you make any attempt to participate in the process that led up to these bills having agreement by the legitimate law-abiding players in the industry? And please, I'm not accusing you of not being a law-abiding, you know -- (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Let me give you my -- I did have -- We did have a meeting, and I appreciate you coming and talking to me. I said that this was an industry that I was involved in, I had a conflict of interest. I made that clear to you. I asked would you consider putting us under the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, you had no interest in that. And I also informed you at that time I would not talk to you about this bill again. That's what my recollection of our meeting was. And I honored that, until these bills now have got to the floor and they are so now out of control.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Elkins, didn't you tell me in your office that we simply did not need the legislation?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: We do not need it, that's exactly what I'm arguing for, Ms. Truitt, that we do not need this legislation.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Can you tell me in your business -- or in the business, not yours specifically, but isn't about 700 percent annual percentage rate typical in this type of business?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Yes, that is -- That would be an ATR. But, let me explain --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: And what is the highest annual percentage rate you know of from the credit card company?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Can I please answer the question? You know, that's a very good thing, APR. Let me tell the folks here about government math and how about some real math. Do you know that if I loan you a hundred dollars and charge you ten dollars for a week, how many of you think that's ten percent? You know what, in the real world that's ten percent. But, you know what, the government makes you disclose that as 520 percent APR because the federal government makes the assumption that that person is going to come back and renew every week for 52 weekends.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: What is the highest rate that you know of on the credit cards?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: I just think the most of them the APR is 20 percent, but you ask the interest rate the interest rate is 10 percent.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I think on credit cards the highest level that I've ever heard of is somewhere between 27 and 30 percent, as opposed to the 700 percent that (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Dealing with high credit --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: And I'd like to --

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: -- that the bank will deny --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: -- about some components of the bill, and the language you are striking. Keeping customers trapped in the cycle of debt occurs, in part, because you refuse to accept partial payment on the principle. Is that a customary practice in your stores?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: I'm not aware of that. We accept any payment that the customer

(inaudible) But let me -- This is not about

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Would acceptance of partial payments be required within my bill?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: They can enter into an agreement -- You know, the wonderful thing about --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Are you opposed to that? Are you opposed to that? (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: They can do anything they want because they're not regulated. You know, yesterday the chairwoman talked about you've seen these places everywhere (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Refusing partial payment of a principle is a key component of getting customers trapped in a cycle of debt, and is that one reason why you are so opposed to my bill?

(Inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: They can pay any amount of principal at any payment they want to any of my locations. I cannot speak for what everybody in the industry does but, anybody can make any amount of principal, from five dollars on up, on any payment they want to. But this is not about my business, this is about government regulation.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Elkins, your amendment strikes, the enabling clause in my bill. And so isn't it true that you stand to add to your personal wealth considerably by killing these bills?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: You know what, that is not about the bill. And, Mr. Speaker, I'm going to ask --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Elkins, do you know the meaning of the term conflict of interest?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: (Inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, please keep your comments to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Everybody -- Representative Taylor's in the insurance business. He just laid out an insurance bill. The attorneys tell us about attorneys, the doctors tell you about doctor issues, the title company guys tell us about title issues. And on this particular issue, on this subject, I am probably as knowledgeable as anybody in this House on this particular subject. And I think the body needs to hear of the expertise. But let's talk about what this bill does, it's just not necessary folks. We're already under the Texas Credit -- Texas Finance Code Act, Chapter 393 of how we're registered now. We're under the Texas -- Let me finish my answer here. The Texas (inaudible) Practices Act that we comply with. The Texas Business Commerce Code is another act that we have to comply with. The Texas Constitution is another one. The Texas Finance Code, Chapter 302. The Texas Business Code, Chapter 5. Federal Truth in Lending. And oh, by the way, do you know what one violation, members, of the Truth and Lending Disclosure is? It is a $5,000 up to a $250,000 fine for one violation of Truth and Lending: So I can tell, you we are not violating that -- several law.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt? Mr. Elkins, would you yield to Ms. Truitt?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: (Inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Not at this time, Ms. Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: The Collections Practices Act, Chapter 342. The Fair Debt Collections, the Federal Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Federal Credit Bureau Reporting Act, The Federal Trade Commission. And oh, by the way, the Federal Trade Practices Act. Do you know what a violation (inaudible). Members, a violation today, under Chapter 392, under the existing regulations, the penalty for violating the act is triple damages, plus forfeiture of principal. Members, I just do not see why is this legislation could possibly be necessary, unless it is the big -- the big institutions trying to please the little guys. I'll answer a question.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Now, Mr. Elkins, you are referencing all of the laws under which you must comply. Is the lender that you broker your loans from an independent company, as is currently required by law?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Yes, it is. And they charge the legal rate of ten percent.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Why haven't you been willing to participate in this legislative process?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: As I told you earlier, I have an interest in this business and it was best for me to stay out. I did participate through different trade groups that I'm a member of, and got -- received updates.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Elkins, do you know that I respect you greatly and I -- but I have to say I'm a little surprised that you would so blatantly use your elected office to defend your personal business to the detriment of Texans.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: You know, I'm trying to keep this on the issue and I apologize --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Sheffield moves -- raises a point of order. That the gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Mr. Burnam, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'd like to request that the exchange between Representative Truitt and Representative Elkins be reduced to writing and place in the House Journal.

THE CHAIR: Is there any objection? Chair hears an objection. It's a division vote, members. Vote aye, vote nay. Division vote. Vote aye, vote nay. Have all members voted? Show Ms. Laubenberg voting no. Have all members voted? There being 32 ayes, 85 nays, 4 present not voting, the motion fails.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Parliamentary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Are you familiar with Rule 5, Section 42 of House rules?

THE CHAIR: I am.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Would you read that for the benefit of the members?

THE CHAIR: The clerk will read.

THE CLERK: Rule 5, Section 42: The disclosure of personal or private interests. Any member who has a personal or private interest in any measure or bill proposed or pending before the House will disclose the facts and not vote thereon.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: This is my eighth term in the Legislature, and I would observe that rule has never been enforced in the eight terms that I've served. At what time would it be appropriate to ask for strict enforcement on this rule?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam, at this point we have not voted on anything.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, I'm aware that we haven't voted on anything other than a motion to print. At what time would it be appropriate to ask for strict enforcement on this bill?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam, when a motion is made for a record vote tat would be the time that I would request it.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'll be back.

THE CHAIR: That a strict enforcement request is not enforceable on this rule.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry, could you explain that to me?

THE CHAIR: Just one second, please. According to the explanatory notes, this constitute provisions that the body and the rules of House in which each member is left to comply, according to his or her own judgment as to what constitutes a personal or private interest. That's Texas Constitution, Article 3, Section 22.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So earlier this session when I suggested that a number of my colleagues had a number of conflicts of interest when it came to voting on issues --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam, you're going to have to -- I'm sorry, I'm having trouble hearing you. Could you speak up?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry. So, as an example, in response to the explanation earlier this session when I asked that members that had a conflict of interest in voting in oil and gas interests, are you saying that --

THE CHAIR: That's up to the individual member to decide whether they do or they do not.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So on any and all occasions, it's up to the individual member to decide? What if the member --

THE CHAIR: According to the Constitution of the State of Texas, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: What if the member is actually challenged and not able to make the correct decision?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam, we've answered your parliamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Truitt to speak against the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a really uncomfortable situation to be in. But I will tell you that our committee, not just this session, not this last session, but the session before and the session before and the session before and the -- the horror stories that are happening to Texas consumers continue to grow and continue to mount, and it is irresponsible for this legislature to ignore it once again. And so I have a lot of other things to say that I hope I get the chance to, but we -- Striking the enabling clause in this bill effectively does away with any ability to tell who the people are who are in the business, there are -- there is no registration whatsoever. And they are not subject -- we cannot get to them from any law. And all this is register so that we will know who these businesses are. And I respectfully motion to table the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Laubenberg, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Will the lady yield?

THE CHAIR: Would you yield, Ms. Truitt?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Yes.

THE CHAIR: She will.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Chairman Truitt, and I want to make sure I stay on the amendment, but the reason that Representative Elkins is staying this amendment is because in your bill, your desire is to help those who use these financial services; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: This -- This particular bill, 2594, would allow licensing and oversight, and put some structure into contracts and --

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Why are you doing this? To help those who use the financial services of these businesses, is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Well, first of all, we don't know who all's doing this.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Well then why you regulating this if you don't know?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Because of all the complaints. Because --

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Well then, you would know, you would have an idea --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: From 2008 to 2010 the Office of the Consumer Credit Commissioner and the Attorney General received at least 607 complaints against payday loan and auto title lenders in Texas. This is in spite of the fact that the borrowers are not notified of the complaint to be made to either agency. In several instances borrowers are directed to make complaints to the other agency, and upon doing so are sent back to the original agency they contacted. The most common types of complaints are collections, harassment, fraud and usury.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: My question is, are you just trying to punish businesses that are serving the purpose (inaudible) are you trying to help individuals --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Heavens, no.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: (Inaudib le) (inaudible) I'm asking the.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I'd like to

(inaudible) your question. The question is, I whole heartedly embrace the businesses. As I said in my opening remarks yesterday, there is an absolutely a need for short-term -- for short-term loans. And I do not want to put reputable people out of business. We need these businesses, and -- But what but what we have are people who are not reputable, and they're being very abusive. And we have the -- the state has no way to know who they are, or how to get to them. So you (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Your purpose is a one size fit all. Because, again, I asked the question is your legislation trying to help those people that you think are being taken advantage of by businesses that provide a financial service?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: This legislation --

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: It's a simple question, yes or no.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: This legislation was (inaudible) by industry.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: So it's not going to help those who you feel are being taken advantage of by businesses (inaudible) that you don't like?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: This bill was crafted by industry and consumer advocates who recognized that is high time that Texas account for the businesses that are out there. Because many are good, and we want more of those (inaudible) (inaudible) but those that are bad --

THE CHAIR: Ladies, please keep this civil.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: I will not make personal attacks on another member of this House that I would ask to put in the record. I'm merely asking a question. I'm asking a question. Again, the purpose of your legislation, is it to help individuals that you think are being taken advantage of (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Indeed, there are people that are being taken advantage of, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Okay. But when you look at your legislation, it does nothing except expand government, increase fees, and who do you think those fees are going to get passed on to?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: What this does is document who the businesses are. Some are good and reputable, many, I would hope most, are. But there are some who are -- that are not. And with -- Absent this legislation, we have no way to deal with the bad actors. And it is -- There are many within the industry who want, who helped craft this legislation and believe it is necessary.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: But you would say that your legislation is focused on the financial institutions that you feel are taking advantage of individuals, that you don't like the way --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: (Inaudible) focused on because we don't know who they are.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Well then why are you doing this? Why don't you (inaudible)

(inaudible) finding out the what is going on in the industry?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: We have, Jodie.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Harper-Brown, for what purpose? REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Will the general lady yield for a few questions?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield, Ms. Truitt?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I will. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Ms. Truitt, I am confused and I hope you can help me with this legislation. As I understand, as I understood, when you started laying out these bills I thought that you told us up front that this was mediated by the University of Texas and that you had industry there, as well as consumers, to try to mediate the language in this bill.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: This bill and the other two bills are the product of more than one hundred hours of mediation between industry representatives and consumer representatives. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: And did you say that not everyone was completely happy, meaning that especially the industry, that they didn't particularly care for everything in the bill, but that they had at least come to an agreement that this was good, because they wanted the bad actors out of their industry?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Yes, ma'am. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: So they agree that there are bad actors. They want those people taken care of, but to try not to put too much regulation. And did you say in the beginning, too, that you were not going to put these people out of business, but you were going to protect those families, those military families whose wives that are going to come in and borrow money to -- when times are rough and their husbands are overseas, or those older individuals that need just a little bit of help to pay their utility bills? Are you trying to help people but at the same time keep the businesses --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: My concern is that if we regulate these businesses -- There is no doubt there is a need for short-term loans and there is no doubt they are high risk loans.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Sheffield calls a point of order, the lady's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I move to table the amendment.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Elkins to close.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members, and I apologize for the use of the House for so long. I do want to just clear up a couple of things that the Chairwoman said. First of all, they know who every one of us are. Everybody that's a CSO is required to register with the Secretary of State, who you are, what the ownership is, pay an annual fee every year and post a bond of $10,000. What this really comes down to, folks, members, is what we've already said, this is just an expansion of government. I'm going to say this just in closing: A friend of -- I know most of us ran on the issue that we like smaller government and less regulation. Brian Tracy, who is a business writer that I read and follow.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: He is not going to yield, Ms. Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Thank you, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Ryan Tracy, who is a business writer who I follow says this: That when -- What I was going to say is that we all, most of us ran on smaller government and less regulation. And the point that Brian Tracy makes is that when a man gets conflicted he always chooses his true nature, or he always chooses his true value. Tonight, members, you're going to get to choose and tell the world your true value. If you're for the expansion of big government and more regulation, or what if what you truly believe is for less government and less regulation. And I ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Elkins puts up an amendment. Ms. Truitt moves to table. The vote is upon the motion to table. A record vote has been requested. Record vote is granted. The clerk will ring the bell. The vote is on the motion to table. Have all members voted? Show Mr. Hochberg voting aye. Mr. Elkins voting no. Ms. Truitt voting aye. Have all members voted? Mr. Frullo voting no. There being 75 ayes, 63 nays, the motion to table prevails. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Truitt.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this amendment corrects errors and oversights made in the committee substitute. One correction is in the definition of a title loan to better match how the market actually works, another change corrects a mistake allowing remote closing agents. Another correction clarifies data to be reported to the Consumer Credit Commissioner, as well as clarifications in the consumer -- in the commissioner's enforcement authorities. And the amendment is acceptable to the author. I move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Laubenberg, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: I raise a point of order of an (inaudible) on House Bill 2594, under Rule 4, Section 18 and --

THE CHAIR: Bring your point of order forward.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Not taken as if --

THE CHAIR: Bring your point of order forward, please, ma'am. The point of order is respectfully overruled. Members, we're on the Truitt amendment. The Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt. Ms. Truitt, you'll need to lay it back out again. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, it just corrects errors and oversights, as I described, about definition of a title loan --

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Craddick, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Would the lady yield?

THE CHAIR: Would you yield, Ms. Truitt?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Sure.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: I had a -- five or six questions that I have to ask you.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I hope I have answers.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: In the bill, see if you agree this is in the bill, when they're talking about fees it says quote, "in connection with a determination of usury, the fees charged by credit access businesses do not constitute interest"; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: So the only way you can fix that is by fixing the CSO, which you refused to do in your committee; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I believe that we are taking a direct approach at --

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Did you plug the loophole in the CSO that was created in 1987, where everybody testified in your committee that needed to be done; did you do that?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I wasn't here in 1987 (inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Mr. Craddick, would you allow

(inaudible) that you adopt the amendment, then you can go back to those questions?

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Certainly. I'll wait right here.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt, is the amendment acceptable to you? The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to adoption of the amendment? The amendment is adopted. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Laubenberg, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: I got a couple more stakes in that heart. I'm raising a point of order.

THE CHAIR: Bring your point of order forward, please, ma'am. Is Mr. Christian on the floor of the House? The point of order is respectfully overruled. We're on the Truitt amendment. Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Craddick, for what purpose? Excuse me (inaudible). The Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Garza.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Garza. Is Mr. Garza on the floor of the House? The amendment is withdrawn. We're back on the bill, members. Mr. Craddick?

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker, can I ask the lady a question?

THE CHAIR: Right now, Mr. Craddick, there's no one on the mic.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Will the lady take the mic?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Craddick, there's another amendment, then we'll get into closing. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Elkins.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins. Mr. Elkins?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Okay. Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, what this amendment does is that this amendment does is that this amendment right here, on Section -- page 23, it just says that a person may not use a device, subterfuge or pretense to evade the application of this chapter. All I did was just extend it to say that including Title 1 Business and Commerce Code does not violate this subsection and may not be a considered a device, subterfuge, pretense to evade subchapter. So, all I'm saying is that -- and is that any other applicable law that exists in code does not violate this device of subterfuge section.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment. The Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Elkins.

THE CHAIR: The Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins to explain his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Okay. What this is doing -- What this is -- What this is saying is that if another company -- if a company is licensed as a money services business, then it would be precluded from obtaining a license to operate under this chapter.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Anchia, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: I'll answer a few questions.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Will the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: I will yield.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: All right. So you're creating -- you're creating an exemption here, correct, for any business, any credit access business that, as defined under 31CFR, Section 1010.100; what does that -- what does that code section --

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: That would be basically be what you would see as a check cashing business, located -- What this is saying is that a check cashing business would not be allowed to get a CSO license and operate two businesses in that location.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: And what's the reason -- what's the policy reason for that?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Because we want to eliminate -- this is about regulation. We want to eliminate confusion in the minds of the public. We don't want them to go there and cash a check and get a loan and cause confusion.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Okay. So does this put the check cashing businesses out of business?

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: No, it does not. They would continue to operate as --

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: They went outside of House Bill 2594, is that what it seeks to do, to take check cashing outside of the regulation --

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Check cashing is not -- is not a CSO.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: And it is not

(inaudible) chapter in this bill. It is a business that exists today, and a lot of them offer CSO services that we want to just eliminate the confusion in the public's mind.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: So you're saying check cashing cannot offer CSO services, bottom line?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: But there are some that do, currently that offer both products?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: I believe that's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Okay. So you would be putting a check cashing business that also offers CSO products out of the CSO business?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: And what's the reason for that again? Is that a --

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: It's to create -- to stop the confusion in the marketplace.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: And how would consumers be confused if they're at a check cashing operation that also offers CSO?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Raphael, I don't know what the purpose of this whole legislation is. That's what I've been arguing about. You all think that the consumers were all confused and don't know what they're doing, so I just want to eliminate any confusion. And if only a CSO can be a free standing operation, and it can't be involved in any other business.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: So they couldn't offer any other product lines, is what you are saying?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: So if you fall under this chapter you -- you basically do this and nothing else?

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Okay.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Truitt? Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt to speak against the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I'm going to respectfully request to table this amendment, because I think what it is possibly an end around. If they offer one type of check cash checking service -- check cashing services, it would -- they would avoid the oversights regarding the other types of business activities. And I think that defeats the purpose of what we're trying to do. So I would respectfully ask you to table this amendment.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins to close.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Please vote no on the motion to table.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Elkins sends up an amendment. Ms. Truitt moves to table. The vote is on the motion to table. A record vote has been requested. A record vote has been granted. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Elkins voting no. Ms. Truitt voting aye. Have all members voted? Being 84 ayes, 44 nays, the motion to table prevails. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Elkins.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Members, Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, what this amendment does is that we talked earlier, the current bond today to be a CSO is $10,000. What this -- what House Bill 2594 does, on page five, line two, is it raises the bond to $50,000. Oh, okay. And this is just -- it just allows you to also put up a cash deposit instead of a bond.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Elkins.

THE CHAIR: Amendment by Mr. Elkins. Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: This is just on page six of the bill, members. What this does is it just takes to it from 60 days to 30 days for the commissioner to give a say so on the licensee. After they have all the application and all the information it doesn't take 60 days, it just takes 30. I'm just going to ask you to make a decision on 30 days, after the -- all the information is received.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection to adoption of the amendment? Chair hears none. So ordered. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Elkins.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins. The amendment is withdrawn. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Garza.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Garza. Mr. Garza you've been recognized, please.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: This amendment is a technical clean up, and it is acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: The amendment's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Is there anyone that wishes to speak on for -- Please excuse Ms. Crownover on conference committee meeting, on a motion of Representative Taylor. Is there anyone that wishes to speak on, for, or against the bill? Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins to speak against the bill. Is there anyone else that wishes to speak against the bill besides Mr. Elkins? On, for, or against? Chair recognizes Mr. Elkins against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE GARY ELKINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I thank you, Madam Chairwoman, Ms. Truitt for your hard work on this. I am -- I've tried to amend this thing that I'm going to have to live under in businesses in Texas that will at least be somewhat palatable. I'm going to make the argument again that that's it's just not necessary, and I see from the first vote taken that many of you believe that more regulation is necessary. We are so heavily regulated already, and I've gone through that and I'm not going to burden you with that again. But really, what this comes down to tonight is that the regulation -- the reason that they're not happy with the regulation is because we don't have some state agency looking after us. There's a lot of businesses that operate under a body of law. Right now I'm just going to tell you, I'm going make a prediction. I've been doing this business since 1987, as a matter of fact, so a long time. I can tell you, folks, members, that in December I can already make a prediction for what the headlines in the newspaper will be. This December there will be an article in the newspapers about predatory pay day lenders, there will be another article in the story about predatory rent to own, and there will be another story about predatory check cashers. Then, if you can remember in conversation in December and you see this story, you'll remember Representative Elkins told us these stories would be here, because they're here every December. They make the statement that we prey upon the poor. We, as an industry, do not prey upon the poor. Quite frankly, we do not lend to the poor because they can't pay us back. The average client that we deal with in the industry probably makes between $40,000 to $75,000 a year, that's our typical client. It's just people that need a little helping hand for a couple of weeks. Most the people don't -- most the people don't utilize or abuse the industry. And they talk about the cycle of debt. Most of you in this room have probably multiple credit cards in your pocket. Some of you carry debt, some of you pay them off monthly, some of your have been carrying balances for a long time. So is that a cycle of debt? I understand that the -- that some industries they need -- think they have -- need to be regulated. I try my best to treat my clientele the way that I would want to be treated. I'm fair. I'm straight. I'm up front. They know exactly what it's going to cost and I would like only think that most business owners in the state that I deal in operate in the same way. I've had clients that I've been dealing with since I opened, 20 something years ago. They love me and I love them. And if we were predatory, they would not be coming back. Those of you that are in business know that if you abuse somebody they're not going to come back to you and do business with you because people are not going to be abused. People are going to do business with a business that is fair. One of the reasons -- You need to ask yourself why has the CSO model, why has it grown so much? And yet there is another lender that's regulated, that they call regulated or how about overseen by the consumer credit commissioner, it's called a loan license. Why isn't -- Why isn't it that all the customers go in there, instead of to us, where they have regulated rates and everything's regulated? Because it's so confusing to deal with them. You go into a regulated loan office, and because they did get the rate that is necessary to justify the risk, they have to go in at the regulated loan shop and they have to ask them, (inaudible) in conjunction with this loan how about buying some life insurance? Or, Doc Anderson, how about buying some other type of insurance to make this loan work? Because they have to get their fees from other methodologies and other products and services, because the law does not allow them to get a rate that is commensurate with their risk. In our business, the CSO model, we're up front. We tell you up front, no games. This is what it costs. You don't have to buy insurance, you don't have to buy disability insurance, you don't have to join any other organization or product or buy any other thing to do business with us. We just make you a loan and we tell you what it costs. And, for that, we're labeled predatory loan sharks and a disaster or a reproach to society. I am not ashamed of what I do. I help thousands and thousands of people across Texas. Yes, I charge rates that are commensurate with the risk and many, many people do not pay me back. Last year, thousands and thousands of people did not pay me back and, you know, they got the money from me and they spent it in your districts. I believe that the members and the people of Texas they are not dumb, and they do not need us to be parents and to be paternalistic and to prevent them from entering into these transactions. Members, I ask you to vote no on House Bill 2594. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Laubenberg to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JODIE LAUBENBERG: Okay. Well, it's hard to follow Representative Elkins, but I want to say that, you know some folks were joking that what interest do I have in this bill? Do I own one of these businesses? No. Have I ever been to any of these businesses? No. I really don't know that much, except that when I start looking at the legislation and realizing why am I down here? (Inaudible) fiscal responsibility. And this is -- this is the essence of what I believe that we should be doing, is not regulating to the extent that it puts a useful, needed business out of business. Do you realize that there will be fees for new licensing, fees for investigation, fees for bonding, fees, you know, costs to have a certain level of assets on hand. The question that I asked Representative Truitt earlier was was the intent of this legislation to help those consumers that she felt were being taken advantage of in her mind, or was it to punish an industry that she does not like. And I never felt like I got an answer. But if you look at the legislation, what it's doing is it's focused on the businesses. And, as we all, know the cost, the fees, the -- the financial requirements that they will be now -- that they will now have placed upon them, they're not going to absorb, they're going to pass on to those consumers who have, you know, for the fact that they have the need to go and take the short-term loan, is going to cost them even more. It's not going to help them. This is why, even in the committee, the Catholic Conference -- Catholic Conference -- Roman Catholic -- the Catholic, the Texas Catholic Conference testified against this, the Roman Catholic Bishops of Texas testified against it, the Catholic Charities testified against it. These are folks that do charity works, that help those in need. Now, why do they testify against this bill? Because they realize it is not going help those that it purports to help. We are creating another level of bureaucracy, more expansion of government, and we're actually doing the very opposite of what I think was the intent, but I never quite got that. But by voting for this bill you're going to be voting for bigger government, more fees, more costs to doing business. And I think what Representative Elkins said, at the end of the day, if you are still going to hear the negative story here or there. It's not going to help. And for this reason that was why I got involved in this. Certainly no personal interest in it at all, except we're all down here to do what we think is the best for this state, and the best to keep this economy going, and I will just tell you this is not going to do that. So I respectfully request that you also would vote no on House Bill 2494. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Harless to speak for the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE PATRICIA HARLESS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I will try to be short to respect your time. Most of you know I am an automobile dealer, second generation, I have been in the business full time for about 28 years. I sell cars and I finance them. I've been regulated by the OCCC, the agency we've talked about today since 1996. Prior to that we were a registration. We're also regulated by the Department of Motor Vehicles. It's pretty much a duplicate license we have to have. Do I like it? No. Do I wish that I wasn't regulated or licensed under the OCCC or the DMV? Of course I do. But there are bad actors out there. There are bad car dealers. Representative Elkins will talk about the newspaper articles you'll see in December about payday loans and car title loans, you will see the same articles about unscrupulous car dealers. You have to have regulation. What we do is to make sure the innocent are protected. Not all these people are -- are bad folks. They're not trying to be bad folks. In my business I have them come to me about once a week that have bought a car for me, paid it off for 24 months, owned the title free and clear, the grandmother gets in the hospital, the mother-in-law dies, they have to get their baby's braces, and they go to one of these car title loans places to get a thousand dollars. And two or three months down the line, after they pay $700 a week on this loan, they owe $8,000 and their car's been repossessed, and they want me to help them get out of that situation. That's the reason I've worked on this. For ten years, I have worked on this issue trying to put some protections in place. When they said that these industry groups or these catholic charities testified against this bill, do you know why they testified against this bill? They said it wasn't tough enough. They said we weren't capping the fees, we weren't capping the interest. If you wanted to do something, cap the fees or cap the interest. That puts these guys out of business. That puts these payday lenders out of business. It is a necessary industry for Texas. There are people that need a thousand dollar loan in a day's notice and this is the only place they can go. Representative Truitt has worked really hard. She didn't want this bill but, as the Chairman of this committee, she thought she had to do something. So she went and worked with all the parties and said I don't want to put you out of business, I want to protect your business. I'm not going to cap your fees, I'm not going to cap your interest, but I want to regulate you somewhat. Just like I am. Do I like being regulated? No. Is there dealers out there that don't take care of customers? Yes. It is important that we pass this legislation. If not now, then there will be more and more people harmed. There is facts that show that this industry is multiplying and doubled, and more consumers are coming to me every single week asking for help. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Craddick to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker, members, first of all, I don't have any interest in these types of things. They stink. But that's beside the point. They're wrong. We need to fix it. I was chair (inaudible) when you were here in 1987. We passed the CSO or the credit service organization, and we had a loophole in there. It allowed for people to get their credit fixed. These people have come in, found a loophole and abused it, you know, what they're doing is making huge loans. Two wrongs don't make a right. This bill's wrong. It doesn't fix anything. Thirteen members of this House, twelve democrats and I introduced a bill to fix it. We combined -- Eddie, we combined the one bill and we all put our name on one, said let's fix it. Worked with several groups for months to fix it. You've got to me fix the CSO and close the loophole. If you don't do it the rest (inaudible) scam. We were get. Let me tell you, I got involved in this -- real quickly, a couple years ago a man came to me from my district, said that he had given his maid a car. Her mother died. She went and borrowed money against the car to bury her mother. All of a sudden, she owed $4,000 or something like that, and by the time he found out about it, it was $12,000. I introduced this bill last session. That group came to me and said if I had withdrawn my name they'd pay off the loan, I told them no thanks. But I think you've got to fix this thing. And the way you fix it is not by passing something that doesn't work. Let me read to you a sentence that's in this bill, a quite that's in this bill. And, remember, it's not the interest rate, it's the fees, the credit fees, all these other things that pile up and they're not regulated, and they're not regulated in this bill. Here's a sentence in it. In connection with the determination of usury, which is the amount to be charged in your interest, the fees charged for credit access business do not constitute interest. So that means you can charge the maximum interest and you can charge them a fee for this and a fee for that. A fee to roll it over, a fee for a credit report. You walk in and say borrow whatever dollars it is, and say okay, so this bill still allows for 500 percent interest, I don't think we're putting anybody out of business. But anyway, you walk in and say I need to borrow a loan and say they okay, do you have a credit report? No. Well, we've got to have one of those, (inaudible) charge for that. The state of Texas says that -- this bill still preserves it, that current third party relationship between borrowers, the credit services, the credit service organization and the credit parties are third party lenders cannot coincide together. How convenient. And I'm sure they don't work together

(inaudible) they split fees. You walk in the office and they've got an outside credit source ready to make you a quick credit. Fine. This doesn't fix it. Why is it that a multiple million dollar lending industry like this, and let me tell you something interesting, if you don't believe it's a multiple billion dollar, Cash America is on the exchange. They make 60 percent of their business -- their money for their whole company in Texas, because we're the only ones that don't regulate them. They make 60 percent of all their company's business in Texas. And they're still here. And so why are they supporting this bill that's bad for them? Here's what you need to look at real quick: This is a multi billion dollar lending industry. It's being regulated under Title 5. What is that? It's a consumer protection title in our laws. Rather than under Title 4, which is for loans. We're not even covering what this is all about, loans. Like I said, I remember when we passed the CSO act it was not (inaudible) to go through the backdoor to make loans without covering of interest. This bill doesn't fix it. I'm asking you to vote no and let's go back and fix it right. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Ms. Truitt to close.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I will trying to be brief, and I very, very much appreciate your support on the amendments. I appreciate your attention. Okay, it doesn't go far enough, it goes too far. Which is it? I would not bring this legislation fee if I didn't think that it would make tremendous improvement over the situation we have now. A woman in Farmer's Branch received a car title loan in the amount of $2,938. And after paying $606 a month, none of which was applied to the principal, she paid $6,600 in fees, yet still owes the original $2,973 for her title loan. A man from Austin received a car title loan --

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker, would the gentle lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Not at this time.

THE CHAIR: Not at this time, Mr. Craddick.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: -- a title loan just under $3,000. By the time he submitted his complaint to the Attorney General's office he had made eight monthly payments for $774, for a total of $6,192 yet, according to the contract filed with his complaint, he still owed $3,750 to the CSO. More than he borrowed originally. From the testimony of Reverend Chad Dr. Chad Chadick, pastor of the Northeast Baptist Church in San Antonio, a family in his congregation came to his church for financial assistance. It was the discovered that the husband had taken out a $700 payday loan to pay the mortgage on their house. The CEO automatically took out $200 from his bank account every two weeks to roll over the loan and allow him more time to make the entire lump sum payment. This happened nine times. The result was that the father paid $1,800 for the $700 loan yet still owed the original $700. So Representative Craddick, Dean Craddick says it doesn't go far enough. And, in fact, that's why the Catholic folks who testified against the original bill, because they said it didn't go far enough. We didn't cap the interest rate, we didn't cap the fees. Well, folks, I'm a free market person. I believe that if you have a robust business climate you won't have to do that. The market will do that, the market will adjust. If there are more businesses (inaudible) the market needs to be competitive. So is it too much? Is it too little? I'm told -- Doc Anderson, I know you like to quote the story about the person that's not in the arena, but for those of us who are in the arena well, we're in the arena. We -- Y'all may have heard of Michael Quinn Sullivan published a statement today saying we oppose House Bill 2594 and House Bill 2593, because of their interference in the free market. Well, I want to -- as I told you yesterday, members, I did not want to deal with this ugly, unpleasant issue but I am the chairman of the substitute committee that deals these matters. And to ignore the glaring problems we have would be irresponsible. I believe that Texas needs these businesses, where there is clearly a need for short-term loans. And I support reasonable regulations. I do not wish to stifle free enterprise. But when the honest, free market is used as a disguise to hide corruption and financial -- and the financial weight of innocent Texans, I will stand up. And I have the (inaudible)

(inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Will the lady yield before she --

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Not at this time. And tonight, when I put my head on my pillow I'm not going to have any trouble going to sleep with a clear conscience. I will know that what I have tried to do is the right thing, rather than something that's going to look right on somebody's scorecard. This bill, I will remind you, was crafted by -- after many hours of mediated discussions between industry and consumer advocates, and they came up with guidelines they thought would be fair. There are bad things -- If you don't believe these things are happening, I encourage you to talk to your churches. These things are happening. There are bad things happening to good Texans. This bill will simply tell this -- tell us who is doing them, and I encourage you to vote for House Bill 2594. And I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Will the lady yield, Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield, Ms. Truitt?

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Mr. Speaker, can I have a parliamentary inquiry?

THE CHAIR: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Is the Chair aware that there were 13 bills introduced in this, to Ms. Truitt's committee, and she didn't let any of them out, and they all fixed the system. And she's put her bill in (inaudible) so they couldn't be fixed?

THE CHAIR: I was not aware, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE TOM CRADDICK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE CHAIR: Members, the record vote has been requested. A record vote is granted. This is a record vote, members. Vote aye, vote nay. This a vote on the bill. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? Show Ms. Kolkhorst voting aye. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? Being 85 ayes, 55 nays; house Bill 2594 passes to third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 804. The clerk will ring the bell. Excuse me, the clerk will read the bill. Members, there is a point of order pending on this bill. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 804 by Louis. Relating to the offense of illegal voting by a person who is not a United States citizen.

THE CHAIR: The point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Mr. Louis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I have previously laid this bill out, and this reminds you, it's a bill that creates a separate offense for in the (inaudible) system in which a person is not a citizen of the United States, and the person votes (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE LOZANO: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Alonzo, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE LOZANO: I'm sorry. I apologize. Trying to move the process along. I'm going to raise my point of order based on Rule 4, Section 33.

THE CHAIR: Bring your point of order forward. Point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Mr. Louis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you, members. So basically what this -- the difference in this and the present law, under the present law, it is an offense if a person votes or attempts to vote in an election if the person knows the person is not eligible to vote. There's no separate crime for a noncitizen voting in an election. And the other difference is the present law, you have to prove that the person knew they weren't eligible. In some instances of ineligibility that might be fair, but in the case of a United States citizen if they're not a citizen, certainly they should be charged with knowledge. I do have an affirmative offense, if the person believes in good faith that the person was a citizen, then that's an affirmative defense. There is an amendment which I will be --

THE CHAIR: The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Aliseda.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Aliseda.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Members, this amendment brings this section of the election code -- proposed section of the election code into line with what we did in voter ID. In voter ID we changed section 64.012, the authenticity legal voting, into a second degree and a state jail felony for an attempt. I believe the amendment is acceptable by the author.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yes, the amendment's acceptable.

THE CHAIR: Representative Anchia, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I'm waiting for Representative -- for the judge to take the mic and I --

THE CHAIR: We're still on the amendment, members. Is the amendment acceptable? The amendment is acceptable to the author. Excuse -- Representative Aliseda sends up an amendment. It's acceptable to the author. Is there objection? There is objection. Chair recognizes Representative Alonzo to speak against the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker, members, if you will notice what Mr. Aliseda is doing, in the original bill it has a third degree, which is a two to ten, and in Mr. Aliseda's amendment he ups it up to a second degree. Now, let me tell why I'm speaking for -- I'm going to be against the bill, first of all. But I'm also going to be first against this amendment. If you remember in all our debates that we had regarding all these issues, in voter ID, there has always been this talk about all these bad things that are going on. And there is no law. And, on the other hand, we talked about how a fine a job the Attorney General and the District Attorneys are doing throughout the state in prosecuting these case. So, if that's the case, why at this time -- why at this time are we increasing the penalties? Why all this time are we increasing the penalties? What this does is, okay, now that we have the votes let's do everything that we want, when we want, at the time that we want. This is going too far members. This is going too far. This is going too far. Let me tell you, we've got a personal approach to take it to a third degree. Hey, why don't we just give them the death penalty? You know, while we're at it. I mean this is taking it too far. So therefore, I ask that you vote no on this amendment.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Aliseda to close on the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Members, I did listen to the testimony in the voter ID committee hearing and there was testimony about illegal aliens voting in our elections. Whether you want to believe that or not, there was testimony about that. In fact, there was testimony from someone with the Attorney General's office saying that they'd had some convictions in Calhoun county of illegal aliens voting in our elections. All my amendment does is conform this proposed section 64.013 (inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Mr. Alonzo, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Will the gentleman answer a question, please?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Let me finish my statement first.

THE CHAIR: In a minute.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: All this amendment does is -- Now I've gotten distracted, but makes this the same as what we've done in the voter ID bill, 64.012, we bumped up illegal voting in the voter ID bill to a second-degree felony, an attempt we made into a stage (inaudible) felony. All I'm trying to do is make this particular offense the same. I'll answer questions now.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Yes.

THE CHAIR: He will.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Aliseda ,your mentioned that the testimony was that people voting illegally; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well aren't there laws right now that could put people in jail for doing that?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: I believe that in order for their -- You know, one of the things --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Aren't there laws right now that can put people in jail for committing a crime?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: I'm trying to answer your question. I believe one of the things that criminal law does is provide notice. In this particular case, we're providing notice to someone who is an illegal alien, that they cannot vote in our election.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: The answer is there are laws right now can put people in jail that commit a crime in voting?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: The answer is that you could probably fit illegal aliens voting into --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: So you're saying there is people that are voting illegally and yet

(inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Well, I didn't say in my election --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Oh, not in your election. Not -- Didn't you make some other comments before that (inaudible) there was all these bad things going on in your district? Not in your election? Not in your election?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: There were bad --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And the reason I ask you, just a minute a ago, aren't there laws right now that if people can commit a crime they can go to jail?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Yes, there are.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And don't we have a republican Attorney General that can enforce those laws?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Those particular laws are supposed to be enforced by the district attorneys and county attorneys of the counties.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Do we not are republican district attorneys that can enforce those laws right now?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Yes, we do. The problem seems to be the democrats --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well, if it's so, so bad that you don't find any citizens, why are we upping the penalties?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: The problem seems to be the democrat district attorneys that don't want to pursue these cases because they're politically charged.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: But the point is, sir, you know, you know, there's laws right now, and that's my point; there are laws right now. It's not whether you're a democrat or a republican. It's the law. It doesn't say democrat law or republican law, it says law, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: We're not here as democrats or republicans, we're here as state representatives for the whole State of Texas; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Well, I as a State Representative, do not want illegal aliens voting in our election.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: But isn't it true, sir, right now, right now there is laws right now right, now right now, that says if you commit a crime you can get punished?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Is that right now, right now, right now?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Excuse me? There are laws on the books.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Yes.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Deshotel, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: For a question. A question.

THE CHAIR: Would you yield, Mr. Aliseda?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: On the amendment? Sure.

THE CHAIR: On the amendment. He will yield for questions on the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: In reading your bill analysis if we can use your punishment, because what your amendment does is change the punishment. Currently, it's a third degree felony for a person to knowingly vote if they're ineligible to vote. You are changing it to a second-degree felony?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: There's currently no law that specifically talks about illegal aliens voting. Mr. Louis' proposed law that's what he's doing. I'm the changing the punishment in his proposed laws from a third degree to a second degree.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Is an illegal alien eligible to vote?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: No, I don't think they are.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Well, current law says that a person who is ineligible to vote is a third degree felony, so there are laws that cover illegal aliens voting, because they are ineligible.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: I believe the answer is that one of the things that criminal law does is it gives specific notice about a crime, and in this case I will leave it up to Mr. Louis to argue the issue. In this case we are giving illegal aliens notice that they are not allowed to vote in our elections.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: But what this does, Mr. Aliseda, is change the law from saying an ineligible person who votes is a crime, to a noncitizen who votes is a crime; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: It's creating a whole different offense.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: It's changing the wording from an ineligible person

(inaudible) crime to a non citizen (inaudible) a crime.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: No, sir. It's changing a whole new offense in the particular category of voting.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Rodriguez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: To ask a couple of questions on the amendment.

THE CHAIR: Would you yield, Mr. Aliseda?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: (Inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: I'm trying to understand this right. It seems that we're

(inaudible) we are missing something though, from the answer. So right now, under current lay, I want to talk about your amendment first, but right now if you are a noncitizen you cannot vote; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: So what this bill does, and I want to get back to your amendment, what this bill does, if I am reading it right, is saying that a noncitizen -- you're making --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Sheffield calls a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The gentleman's point of order is well taken and sustained. Representative Aliseda sends up an amendment. There was objection to the amendment. Excuse me, there's an amendment to the amendment. The following amendment to the amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Gutierrez.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Gutierrez.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Mr. Speaker, members, I just want to actually, right now, do a quick commercial for my very awesome district attorney, a fine republican, Susan Reed, in San Antonio, Texas. My amendment will say it is a second-degree felony to fraudulently claim to be an illegal immigrant in order to be excused from jury duty. I want to tell you why this is important. Because she investigated this so-called voter ID stuff, just as well as our Attorney General. Our Attorney General found no such incidence of any such conduct. And Susan Reed, our fine district attorney, a fine republican district attorney, who would like to go after such type conduct. She did a full investigation. The only thing she found was two American citizens claiming to be illegal immigrants to get out of jury duty. So that's why we need to go after these, these are harbinger of crime. We need to go after these people that are affecting our judicial system. And anybody that claims to be an illegal immigrant to get out of jury duty should be punished, and punished very forcefully. So I think that a second degree felony is worthwhile. What do you think, Mr. Anchia? With that, I withdraw my amendment, members, because I just want you to know how preposterous this is.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is withdrawn.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Let's vote --

THE CHAIR: The question is on the Aliseda amendment. There was objection to the Aliseda amendment. Record vote has been requested. The record vote has been granted. The clerk will ring the bell. This. Is a vote on the amendment. This is the vote on the amendment. This is a vote on the Aliseda amendment. Show Mr. Louis voting aye. Mr. Sheffield voting aye. Have all members voted? Being 97 ayes, 38 nays, the amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Judge Louis.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I'll yield to the gentleman.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Anchia?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Will the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I do yield.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Judge. We had occasion to talk a little bit about this and talked about a number of facets of this issue, including noncitizen voting, the incidence of that; examples that have actually been brought before this body. But, just to be clear, under current law, if you engage in illegal voting meaning you vote in an election you know you're not eligible to vote in, the current penalty is up to two to ten years in jail and a ten thousand dollar fine; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Under the statute as it exists. That's been raised subject to the governor signing the voter ID bill.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Right. But currently, I was just talking about current law, to illegal voting, two to ten years, ten thousand dollars in fines?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: We talked about some -- I served on the elections committee for three sessions before being granted clemency this session, and we heard cases or allegations of significant voting by noncitizens. But the only cases that were actually -- the only documented cases that were brought before us were one that was prosecuted by the Attorney General, where a nonlegal permanent resident, who were not citizens, were duped by a candidate into voting in an election. The candidate actually told them they were eligible to vote as permanent legal residents, and they, in fact, voted. The Attorney General did not believe that they had the requisite mental state to believe that they were ineligible to vote in that election and chose not to -- not to prosecute president noncitizens, but instead prosecuted the candidate who gave them the bad information. Under your proposal the noncitizens would be prosecuted, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: It would be within the discretion of the prosecutor to do it. But the prosecutor would not have to prove that the person knew that you had to be a citizen to vote. But this is almost (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: This is almost like strick liability, right? If you vote and you're a noncitizen, you are subject to prosecution, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Under my bill, yes. Under my bill people would be charged with knowing that you have -- if you're not a citizen you can't vote.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: And now, as amended, the noncitizens in the case that we have before us in the elections committee would all be looking at 20 years in jail, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: They would be subject to being prosecuted for a second degree felony, yes, sir. And prosecuted two to twenty years, yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: They could be in jail up to twenty years; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct. Depending on what the circumstances were.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Understood . Understood but --

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct. It'd be in the range of punishment.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: But under your bill, which doesn't require necessarily a mental state, it just says if you are a noncitizen and you vote you can be prosecuted and in this case you could do up to 20 years. The noncitizens in that fact pattern could go away for twenty years under your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: If that's what the judge or the jury felt was appropriate under the circumstances, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Okay. The other fact pattern that we heard in the House was in the Vo -- Hepplin election contest, and Special Master Hartnett at that time discovered that there was one noncitizen who had voted in that election contest. And it wasn't, as was alleged initially, an undocumented Vietnamese noncitizen voter. It turned out to be a legal permanent resident, who was Norwegian, who was a straight ticket republican. The reason that that person had voted was they he had submitted a voter registration card with the box checked that they were a noncitizen. They were sent by Paul Bettencourt a voter registration card, a former tax clerk in Harris County, the voter registration card that said that they were eligible to vote. So it was a clerical error. That person, believing that they were able to vote, went head and voted. Under your bill, that person could go away 20 years, for having voted, even though they fully disclosed that they were a noncitizen on their voter registration card, and then received something from the government that said well you, in fact, are eligible; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yes. Under this law, anyone who is not a citizen and who goes ahead and votes or attempts to vote has committed a crime, that's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: And what degree felony?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Second-degree felony to vote, state jail to attempt to vote. Which is the same as every other non-eligible voter voting already.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I understand. I understand. But it's certainly different than current law.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Okay. And what is the reason for -- did you believe that the current law is not working for some reason?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yes, I do think that it is not working.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: And why is that? What gives you reason to believe that it's not working?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Well, as I look at this statute, to me it's almost unenforceable. Because this statute doesn't say one who knowingly votes or attempts to vote when they're not eligible, it says one who votes or attempts to vote in an election if knows that the person is not eligible to vote. So you have to prove exactly what the person knew at the time and, unless someone confesses, it's almost impossible to prosecute anyone, because you can't say what they knew. Only they knew what they knew. So I would say it's almost an impossible case to prosecute.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Have prosecutors come to you asking for this change?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: No. I really began thinking about this --

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Has the Attorney General come to you asking for this change?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: No, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Telling you that they did not have the tools to prosecute noncitizen voting?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: No, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Are you aware of any cases, documented cases, of noncitizen voting other than the ones that we've discussed here on the front and back mic?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yes. And that's what really got me interested in --

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Documented cases?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Cases, documented cases? Oh, I'm sorry.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: I asked for documented cases. Not hearsay, not somebody calling you on the phone and saying I think my next door neighbor is illegal and I think they voted. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about cases that have been documented.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I should listen more closely to your question and answer the question. No, I'm not aware of any.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Gutierrez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Will the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Judge Louis, would you yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I do yield.

THE CHAIR: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I do yield, yes. I'm sorry.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Tryon, we have spent a whole lot of the time on this bill, haven't we?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Pardon me?

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: We've spent a whole lot of the time on this amendment -- this bill, have we not?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Whatever time we've spent on it.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: How many people were convicted of this in the last year?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: You know, I'll tell you, I think the way this is written I don't think anybody could be convicted ever and have it stand up.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Then why do we need this bill?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Because I think the crime occurs. It is just the way this is worded, it would be impossible to convict someone unless they confessed, it seems to me.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: (inaudib le) (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Pardon me?

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: (Inaudib le) mens rea, for a criminal offense, do you not?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Well, no. That's not accurate at all. There are a number of penal statutes that don't start off (inaudible) intention of (inaudible) something. They just say, you know, someone enters a location without the consent of the owners.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: (Inaudib le) intentionally, knowingly or recklessly.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: They don't. There are lots of penal codes statutes that don't say intentionally, knowingly or recklessly. It can sometimes, under Article 6 of the penal code on culpability. Frequently a mental state is imputed, unless the statute shows clearly that it should not be imputed. But many penal statutes do not contain that requirement.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Let's talk about your affirmative defense requirements. So I Juan Valdez goes over to vote, and he's an illegal immigrant, and he is a good faith belief that he is not an immigrant and is a U.S. citizen, that's all he's got to say?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I'm looking here -- at sub section C (inaudible) (inaudible)

(inaudible) that the person believed in good faith that the person was a citizen of the United States.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Prosecut ion for a defense under the section that the person believed in good faith that the person was citizen of the United States.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct. But the only part I have to quibble with what you say, is that you say that's all he's got to say. I mean the jury is the one to decide whether it was in good faith or not, so if the person --

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Well

(inaudible) Let's be very clear, if a person believes, in good faith, that he was a U.S. citizen then that's the defense that the prosecution or a jury, the finder of fact would so find. And so again, how many people would be convicted under the old statute?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: You know, as I said, I don't -- I don't know if anybody could be prosecuted for this crime under the old statutes. So I don't know how many have been convicted under the old statute.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: You heard my amendment earlier --

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I can tell you that I did look under the annotations and appeals, and there were no modern appeals under that statute at all, under that point. Because I don't think you can convict anybody so they would have to appeal.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: My amendment was pretty ridiculous wasn't it, going after people that claimed to be illegal. Not as ridiculous as this bill.

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. The Chair recognizes Mr. Alonzo to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Members, I'm going to now rise to speak against the bill. First, let me tell you part of the discussion that we've heard is do we have laws right now -- right now, that can prosecute individuals if they vote illegally? And I think, even without answering out loud, the answer is yes. Now, if we join this legislation, because it's so bad, the situation out there, that means people voted illegally and guess who got elected to the office? Now, the other point is, who -- who is asking for this legislation? Every time we come up here, whether it was payday loans, whether it was this issue, that issue, the stakeholders; well, if that's our arguments here at the House when we try to pass legislation, let me tell you who the stakeholders are for this legislation. Davis Carter, Rebekah Forest and Ann Headinger. That's it. They are the stakeholders who are asking for this legislation. It doesn't say here the Attorney General of the State of Texas, it doesn't say here the District Attorneys here at the State of Texas, it doesn't say here the Police Chiefs in the State of Texas, it says Bill Carter, Rebekah Forest and Ann Headingier. So because of three individuals, members, three individuals in the whole State of Texas we're not going increase penalties and make this bill harder. Now, why? Why? Now, the reason I say why is because we have to think why is this legislation being introduced and offered here? I don't think it has to do with the law, and let me tell you why I say that. I went to the Texas Public Policy Foundation, you guys ever heard of that? Texas Public Policy Foundation. Anybody ever heard of that? Well, let me tell what the Texas Public Policy Foundation says. It says, as it relates to the criminal law checklist, it says that the conducts pose a substantial threat to public safety. We already have laws to, you know, prosecute people. And then the next part is this legislation necessary because the conduct will pose a substantial threat to public safety. The other point that the Texas Public Policy Foundation says, is the conduct already prohibited by existing law? Now, we've heard, as we come up here, make our presentations, what groups support or don't support -- I would think that the Texas Public Policy Foundation would say that this law does not meet this test. Members, the HRO states that there is no evidence, no evidence of what is being said occurring. I think that the main reason this legislation is being introduced, members, is to scare people from voting. Nobody -- There is no proof, no evidence, but this is another step in what I believe and, you know, that happens, one you can vote for somebody. Two, you can vote against or, three, you scare people from voting. So, members, I ask that you vote for --

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Alonzo, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, I do.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Representative Alonzo, about a minute and a half ago you said you thought the amendment or the bill was designed more to do voter intimidation.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I think so. I think so, in fact, the discussion that we had when we were discussing voter ID is not (inaudible) there was no evidence, there was no proof, there was no proof, but (inaudible) the discussions proved out that by during these types of legislation it's not that you vote for or against, it is to keep five hundred thousand people from voting.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Was there any voter intimidation in this state in the 1960s?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Pardon?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: No voter intimidation in the 1960s? So in the 1970s or any decade since that time?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well, I know that during the middle '60s we were -- had the voting rights act and extended it in Texas in '75.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Oh, the reason we fall under the voting rights act is there's such a long history; virtually every decade, since we've been a state, of voter intimidation. Particularly directed the people of color. Is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: That's right. And, in fact, in 2006 they extended the voting rights act, and that's why, when we're doing redistricting, we deal with what's fair and what's legal. Because the law says you got to do it legally.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So you're not at all surprised to see we're doing this kind of legislation under a different guise again. But, in reality, you're suggesting that all of this is all about voter intimidation?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I am not surprised.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: But you're as disappointed as I am that we have to deal with this in the second decade of the 21st Century.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: We are in the 21st Century, and all I've seen in this legislation is unnecessary legislation at this time.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Members, I ask that you vote no on this bill.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Berman in favor.

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: M embers, I rise to speak in favor of the bill. Is there anyone in this room that believes there is not voting fraud in Texas? I think every single one of us has seen voting fraud occur in your own districts. In fact, I chaired the Elections Committee three sessions ago, that Mr. Anchia was talking about. And Paul Bettencourt, who was the election's administrator from Houston, testified before our committee that five thousand individuals were taken off the voting rolls because they were noncitizens. And several hundred had voted. In the newspapers we had read about illegal aliens voting in San Antonio, Fort Worth, and in Dallas. All agree --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Anchia, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LEO REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: I don't yield at this time.

THE CHAIR: Not at this time.

REPRESENTATIVE BERMAN: In fact, I'm going step away from the mic. There's a lot of people that want their bills heard tonight, so I'm just going to finish. We have ACORN in Texas. ACORN is being prosecuted now in 14 states for voting fraud. So, with that being said, members, this is a good bill vote. For the bill. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Will the gentleman come back to the microphone and defend his statements?

THE CHAIR: The gentleman has yielded

(inaudible) The Chair recognizes Mrs. Farrar to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker, members, this -- this legislation is problematic in so many ways. First of all, we've never even defined what attempt means. Does that mean you've driven up, does that mean you've actually presented identification? We all know that it's very difficult for those folks without the right papers to be able to present identification. Does that mean -- we don't know what it means. That's the first part of the problem. We've also if any seen that there's no evidence that there really is a problem. I think there is a perception among some folks that there is problem, but there really isn't. We haven't seen examples of people -- We don't know what those examples are if, in the affirmative defense of those that thought they were eligible. What does that mean? If you thought you were eligible, what does that mean? What does that look like? We don't know what that means. I'll just say that in response to the some of the comments that I heard before, we say that that's a problem with people voting that are not eligible to vote. I would tell you that in my experience in working in elections, and working my own elections, is that the problem really is we don't have enough people participating in elections. That's the real problem. Not that folks are not participating that shouldn't be. In fact, I would also argue that those folks that -- maybe some of the those folks in this room are concerned about, don't want you to know that they are even around. And certainly they're not going to show up. Believe me, my experience is that voting may be a lower priority, more lower a priority than I would wish that they would be in the lives of some of these people. These folks really don't want you to know who they are. And I would just say that in -- in the legislation as amended, we have made -- changed the existing law says that it's a third-degree felony if you're ineligible to vote. And it's interesting to me that we would treat a different set of people, those folks that are undocumented, we would raise the level on those folks. Why? There really is no policy reason why. There certainly is a political reason why. But the fact of the matter is, if you're not supposed to be voting you shouldn't be voting and the penalties should be the same for everybody. So why not -- Why not make it universally wrong for all people, and why single out a people, and that might make us feel good. But, members, we have to remember that the things we do today have lasting consequences. We have to remember, we have to be responsible to the fact that all people, all those that are -- committing offenses should be treated in the same way. It doesn't make it more wrong that one set of people, undocumented people, maybe attempting to vote in the minds of some, than anybody else that is ineligible to vote. It could be somebody that is a citizen, they're not registered to vote, they may attempt to vote. The wrong is the same and it should be treated the same. We shouldn't single out one group to be punished more than any other. Thank you, members. I'd ask to vote against this legislation.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Veasey to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Members, there's something that you need to know about this particular piece of legislation. If you look on the bottom, I don't have voter registration cards, before you get ready to register to vote there's already language on the bottom of that card that deals with if you are knowingly, illegally registering to vote; that there's a conviction that can be had that is punishable with jail time. There's already a remedy on the books to deal with this situation that Mr. Louis' bill is trying to accomplish tonight. The bill is totally unnecessary. I'll tell you what this bill is really for. This little bill is to appeal to people of a certain age, to people of a certain era, a certain generation, the same people that believe the president was not born in this country, the same people that even after he produced his birth certificate they said the birth certificate is not old enough, that birth certificate can't be 50 years old. It isn't old enough. It is simply trying to appeal to those people. It is nothing -- It is doing nothing more than appealing to the worst in every individual. I think there if there's been a lot of talk about the fast growing Hispanic population in our country, and about people wanting to do outreach to them and have certain candidates run for office, and for there to be more diversity in the republican party, and I have to tell you that just getting someone black or getting someone Hispanic to run and putting their name on the ballot isn't going to be enough. Because the type of bill that is being laid out here tonight, it's clear who it's aimed at. And people are going to want substance. And if you really want to make real change and you really want to do outreach to people, you have to be sincere and you have to look at what's going on in those respective communities, and you have to have real policy that is going to include outreach, and is going to be sincere and genuine. And this is not. This piece of legislation is divisive. We don't need it. It is never going to do anything to build diversification in both of our parties. I ask you to vote no on this. There is already a remedy on the books to deal with people who illegally register to vote.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Anchia to speak against the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I rise in opposition to this bill, not because I don't believe that people who illegally vote and are ineligible to vote should not be prosecuted, because I think it goes too far. Under current law, members, if you know you're ineligible to vote in an election and you vote in that election, you are subject to two to ten years in jail and up to ten thousand dollars worth of fines. And if the photo ID bill passes, that's going to get bumped up to 20 years. To 20 years, Mr. Fletcher, for illegal voting. And I would argue, members, that the risk-reward for a person engaging in illegal voting even under current law is extremely severe if somebody wanted to intentionally illegally vote and they'd get caught, they'd be looking at ten years in jail. That is a significant deterrent already. Now, this bill doesn't deal with just anybody trying to illegally vote, this deals with noncitizens illegally voting. And I've sat on the elections committee for three sessions before this session, and we looked into this issue and Representative Berman, who chaired the committee, referred to the testimony of Paul Bettencourt, the former tax assessor of Harris County, who made I think wild allegations about thousands of undocumented people or noncitizens voting in our elections. But I think what Chairman Berman left out is that when I asked Mr. Bettencourt in cross-examination in an interim committee well, how do you know that? He said well, I really don't. Because the people that I'm saying are definitively undocumented or noncitizens, who are voting in elections had both the voter registration card where they submitted that they were citizens, and then had filled out their application in the jury pool to say that they were noncitizens. Well, guess what, when we worked on it in the interim and we went and interviewed these people, they were U.S. citizens who were using the excuse of getting out of jury duty, the excuse of being noncitizens to get out of jury duty. So those five thousand alleged cases of noncitizens melted away. And you hadn't heard about them for the last -- that's in 2007-2008 you hadn't heard about it until today, you know why? Because it just wasn't true. And the narrative of noncitizens voting in our elections has been, I think very gratuitously promulgated by members on this floor and others. But when you scratch that and you look at the evidence, it's just not there. The Bexar county DA, Representative McClendon, looked at this issue and found no instances of noncitizen voting. The state auditor audited a

(inaudible) compliance voter registration files at the state level and found no evidence of non citizen voting. Even our Attorney General, who has looked at this issue, has found only one case of a noncitizen voting. And it happened when a candidate went to noncitizens who happened to be legal permanent residents, and told them that they were eligible, legal permanent residents to vote in that election. The Attorney General looked at them and said, you know, these people did not have the requisite mental state to prosecute. They prosecuted the candidates they prosecuted the people from the campaign, but not the noncitizens. And there is just one case, and I'll yield for a question in just a minute, Mr. Hochberg. There was one case where we looked very closely. You'll recall after I got elected in 2004 that we had an election contest in 2005. And there were wild allegations in that election contest of noncitizen Vietnamese voting in the Vo-Hefflynn race. And Special Master Hartnett looked at all those allegations and looked at all those allegedly illegal votes. And you know what? They found one case of nonvoting. But it wasn't one case from Vietnam, it was somebody from Norway, that person happened to vote straight ticket republican in that race. And they did so under the mistaken belief that they were eligible. You know why? Because on a voter registration application that a campaign worker gave them, they checked that they were a noncitizen, therefore making them ineligible to vote. But they received from the Tax Assessor Collector's Office in Harris County a voter registration certificate telling them that they were eligible to vote, even though they fully disclaimed that they were noncitizens. So that person believed that they were eligible to vote and, in fact, voted. Under this bill that Norwegian legal permanent resident would be facing 20 years in prison for having voted, with the mistaken belief that they were eligible, because they received that voter registration card. And, in addition to that, that probably is not even the greatest deterrent. The greatest deterrent for an undocumented person or a legal permanent resident from voting, is not that the penalty that will be set up in this bill, is that it's a deportable offense. And the last thing that any immigrants in this country want to have is to become deported or to be deported. So, ladies and gentlemen, I find it very strange that the Attorney General's Office, who has been very keen on finding cases of illegal voting did not come to this body and ask for this tool. Not one district attorney in the state came to this body and asked for this tool, and the author is unaware of one case, one documented case of noncitizen voting; yet wants to change the law. Not because it may give tools to prosecutors, not because the prosecutor have asked for this, but because he thinks he just is under a general perception that there maybe noncitizen voting, because some people said there might have been, called his office and said they thought there was a non citizen voting.

THE CHAIR: Representative Deshotel raises a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: So, members, I think this is a bad bill and a trap. And I'm going to be voting on this. I'm going to be voting a white light.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Lewis to close.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I close, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: M r. Speaker, I have one question for Judge Louis.

THE CHAIR: For what purpose, Mr. Gallego?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: I have one question for Judge Louis, actually.

THE CHAIR: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: I yield Mr. Chairman.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: A s you know, the committee that I chair has jurisdiction over the penal code, and, as I understand it, as a result of Mr. Aliseda's amendment, it's now a second degree felony; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: That's correct, Chairman.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: A nd, as a former district judge, you know what some of the other second-degree felonies are?

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: S o aggravated assault, aggravated kidnapping, it would be in the same category as murder with sudden passion, or manslaughter, or intoxication manslaughter or indecency with a child, or injury to child, or injury to an elderly, or injury to a disabled, or sexual assault, or sexual performance by inducing a child. That's the category that this bill now --

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: It would be in the same category with all the rest of the illegal voting statutes, yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: T hank you.

REPRESENTATIVE TRYON LEWIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I close.

THE CHAIR: The question occurs on the passage to engrossment of House Bill 804. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. HB 804 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 32. Members, a record vote on the last bill was requested. So, a record vote has been granted. The clerk will please ring the bell. Members, have all voted? Have all voted? Please show Representative Crownover present and voting aye. Have all members voted? There being 101 ayes, 24 nays; 16 present not voting, 9 absent; House Bill 804 passed to third reading. Chair lays out as a matters of postponed business House Bill 32. Mr. Veasey?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Parliamentary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: Please state your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Under what rule in the House, after a vote has already been taken, can you go back -- I mean it looks like the vote was already --

THE CHAIR: (Inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I mean, and you gaveled in and then you went to the next vote.

THE CHAIR: We did not go to the next vote, Mr. Veasey. It was a voice vote. Mrs. McClendon --

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: You banged the gavel and the next deal.

THE CHAIR: Well, Mr. Ritter gaveled that vote, having been done by voice vote. Mrs. McClendon respectfully approached the front, asked for a record vote.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Did you

(Inaudible).

THE CHAIR: She said the vote had been requested, and we had not heard that request.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Would you ask the parliamentarian to affirm that that is within the rules?

THE CHAIR: That's exactly the sequences that occurred. Let me explain it again. We did a voice vote. Representative McClendon approached after we gaveled that vote as passing, she said that a record vote had been requested during that vote by her, that we did not hear it. And so we backed up and provided her request, which she made during that voice vote, for a record vote.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I understand exactly what you did. I was asking was it within the frame work of the House rules?

THE CHAIR: Absolutely, Mr. Veasey.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Can the parliamentarian confirm that?

THE CHAIR: Yes, he is confirming that.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Thank you. Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield for a recognition.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Members, I'd like for you to help me, at this time, take the opportunity to thank Chairman Geren and Chairman Hamilton for a wonderful meal tonight. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out House Bill 32 as a matter of postponed business. The the clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 32 by McClendon. Relating to the prohibition of required health insurance coverage.

THE CHAIR: Members, there is a point of order pending on this bill. Members, the clerk will read the ruling on the point of order and the point of order is respectfully sustained.

THE CLERK: Representative Coleman raises a point of order, under Rule 4, Section 18B, that the witness list failed to properly reflect that a witness who submitted a witness affirmation form in favor of introduced bill in the committee substitute is testifying bills for the introduced bill on the committee substitute. The Chair has examined the witness affirmation card and the witness list for the committee's March 17th, 2011. Meeting the witness list does not reflect the information on the witness affirmation form, that the witness testified on the HB 32. Because the committee failed to list the name of a person who the submitted the committee a forum statement indicating that the person was present in favor of opposition, or ruled out taking a position (inaudible) violates the Rule 4, Section 18, and the point of order is sustained.

THE CHAIR: Members, Chair lays out House Bill 3691 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3691 by Gallego. Relating to the provision of certain programs and services by a community supervision and corrections department.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this allows counties to contract for probation programs from other judicial districts so that a judicial district doesn't have to have a stand-alone probation department. There's no opposition. There was no opposition in committee, and so I believe there is an amendment by Ms. McClendon. And, with that, I would move passage.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by McClendon.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative McClendon to explain the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: Than k you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment enables Dr. (inaudible) county (inaudible) to adopt (inaudible) offender mediation programs to aid in compliance of Chapter 76 of the government code. And it's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Mrs. McClendon offers up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Question occurs --

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: M ove passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3691? Question occurs on passage of House Bill 3691. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3691 is finally -- has passed to third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 3746 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3746 by Frullo. Relating to providing resources designed to combat crimes against children, especially crimes regarding child exploitation and child pornography involving the internet.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Frullo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: I do have a perfecting amendment that I would like to --

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. The clerk will please read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Frullo.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Frullo to explain the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: This amendment more clearly identifies what an eye-catcher

(inaudible) internet crimes against children unit is. It notes the Attorney General (inaudible). It also cleans up information where the subpoena is issued. And this amendment is acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Representative Frullo offers up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none the amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Frullo to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Farrar?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Yes.

THE CHAIR: Will the gentleman yield? The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Frullo , I just have a couple of quick questions. In general, I support your bill. But I just want to make sure some things are clear. How does the subpoena work? Is this -- Is this a review of the surfing history, or is it an actual -- you have physical possession of the hard drive?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: No, no. It's what -- What this is it changes it from a grand jury subpoena and now it's an administrative subpoena. And basically that subpoena allows is that IKAK Officers especially trained officer, to obtain information from the internet service provider.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. So you're basically looking at records, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Well --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: You're not looking at the actual, physical hard-drive?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Well, what that can do is, they actually look at the physical -- They don't look at the physical hard-drive no. This only gives them information from the internet service provider.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Right. So it's a record -- it's a record of the surfing history perhaps?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. And one other question. At what point is a citizen notified that a search was conducted on their activities?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Well, the information is obtained first. That would be through the normal process to the investigation.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: But when does -- When does the suspect, or when does the citizen know that they have basically been -- Their records have been looked at.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: It would be sometime after they get back from the internet provider.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Thank you very much. You do have a good bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3746? House Bill 3746 moves to third reading. All those in favor say aye, all those opposed nay. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3746 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3747. The clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3747 by McClendon. Relating to the selective certain members of the board of trustees in the Teacher Retirement system of Texas.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative McClendon.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: Than k you, Mr. Speaker and members. This bill will allow retired and active educators who directly elect four of the nine representatives to the Teacher's Retirement System of Texas Board of Trustees. These four would include an active TRS member, one retiree and one higher education Representative. I move adoption -- passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3747? The question occurs on passage of House Bill 3747. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3747 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 2383 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2383 by Geren. Relating to a study regarding the reenactment of the franchise tax credit or providing other incentives for certain research and development activities.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Geren.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, House Bill 2383 requires LBB to conduct a study of the cost and benefits to the state of reenacting the tax and credit for RMD that was previously in equity in Texas.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone else wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 2383? The question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2383. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2383 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2884. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2884 by Solomons. Relating to coordinating county transportation authorities; creating an offense.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to explain his bill.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you members, Mr. Speaker. Members, I didn't think we were going to get here. This is a -- this bill is really would improve the operations of DCCA, and it basically -- the bill would make a number of statutory changes to the DCTA. When I created and authored the bill that created the DCTA, it was applicable to a number of counties, but this county is the only one that has taken advantage of it and we (inaudible) that county transportation authority. And in that context it would, through some changes about enforcement, how we're going about bidding, and there's a third change about the ability to work with the cities who want to join the DCTA, and they can't right now under the current situation.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yeah, sure.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Sure.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: This was a very good bill that you passed over a decade ago, right?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm sorry, what?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Originally, you passed this legislation over a decade ago to set up this authority right?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: About that, yeah.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And you said earlier that Denton County is the only one that has taken advantage of it so far?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Can you explain to us why and whether or not what you're proposing to change to impact other entities if they decide to (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: It doesn't impact anybody else, because no one else uses this particular section of the transportation code.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And so for -- like a county like mine, where we have the transit authority, it's a different setup --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: It makes no difference to you because it's created under the section of this particular section of the transportation code that set up the DCTA.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And makes no difference to --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: It makes no difference to car (inaudible) it doesn't make any difference to T. And, in fact, what we're trying to do is emulate at least some of the better -- some of the things that they do. We have a particular problem under that -- under our code, because the way we did it, each session I've had to come back and do a little tweak and do a little thing for the change in evolution of the DCTA. And, in this case, we have two cities in particular that would like to them join the DCTA, but we don't want to have to go through a (inaudible) election, and this allows for some incremental financing. Otherwise, it is solely up to the municipalities. We have some enforcement problems, we're having trains coming through the DCDA. The (inaudible) train and we're coming through from Destiny all the way connected into car

(inaudible). As we develop we've had to make little adjustments for that development and that evolution.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Do you have some municipalities that have elected not to participate but they're reconsidering?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We have a county wide election, we had certain cities actually join the DCTA. So we have we had a couple of periods of elections, on one who didn't want to do it, on the service plan, which cities wanted to come in and tax themselves. Like you said, it was about a decade ago.

(Inaudible) of all we've had some issues we've got a train coming through from the City Of Denton connecting through Carrollton and the Denton county part in connecting into Dart. Well, what we've done is we've got a train system and we now have issues that Dart has had and T and others with their trains. We are having to kind of bring ourselves up to speed for that.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Could other suburban counties do the same thing --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I can barely hear you, can you speak up?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry. Mr. Speaker, can we have a little order?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm sorry, I'm can barely hear you. Not them. You're just speaking real low for a change.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry. Could other counties implement this if they chose to, under the code --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, sir. The DCTA, when (inaudible) in authored it with the Senator who helped me carry it, and it we put it into place, it actually applied to 19 counties. But no county has ever taken advantage of it, other than Den county.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And the legislation that you have would not affect the other 18 counties if they could choose to participate --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: If they wanted to try implement this action section and wanted to go through it --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you very much --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Nobody's done that. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2884? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2884 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out -- Chair lays out House Bill 670. The clerk will read the bill. Members, please pay attention. You may want to learn something from this.

THE CLERK: HB 670 by Crownover. Relating to the elimination of smoking in certain work places and public places; providing penalties.

THE CHAIR: Please pay attention. Chair recognizes the gracious Representative Crownover.

REPRESENTATIVE MYRA CROWNOVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I think it's time for a little smoke break, a temporary one. Out of respect for all the bills on the calendar today, I know many of you are sitting on pins and needles right now. We have a very, very important bill that will save millions of dollars and thousands of Texas lives. But there is a better vehicle for this bill coming up, so I move to postpone House Bill 670, a joy and a love, until Saturday or until July the 4th. It will be back. There is a better vehicle. And good luck with passing your bills tonight and thank you. We have -- I would like to say we have over a hundred votes here in the House, so we think we have a better vehicle that will make this move over to the Senate seamlessly. So thank you very much.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. Thank Representative Crownover.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: M r. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Coleman?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: W ill Ms. Crownover yield for a question right quick?

REPRESENTATIVE MYRA CROWNOVER: I will.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: S o you're going to join me for that smoke break? I am a big supporter of your legislation. Addicted people need a lot of encouragement. Thank y'all.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business HJR 135. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HJR 135 by Phillips. Proposing a constitutional amendment relating to an individual's or a religious organization's freedom of religion.

THE CHAIR: Members, at this time we have left HJR 135. Representative Martinez Fischer has raised a point of order, that the bill analysis was material and was misleading. The point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against HJR 135? Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg to speak on HJR 135.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I won't take long -- take up much of your time. This is the religious freedom constitutional amendment that we talked about at some length last night. I know a lot of folks were interested in it. I've worked with Mr. Phillips and I have to tell you that Mr. Phillips made every change that I asked him to make. And my commitment to Mr. Phillips was that I would vote for the bill if he made all those changes. I must tell you, though, that I -- and I am speaking on the bill, that I am nervous about it. And I am nervous about it because when you make a significant change to the constitution and the language is language that Larry and I vetted in one day's time, I'm nervous about the do no harm thing. I talked to one constitutional expert, the one that we were talking about yesterday, he said it's a good thing. Do it. But he didn't see the final language. But, in general, the direction we were going, he said it's a good thing. Do it. I talked to another constitutional expert who I've know for years, who's worked on this same subject. He said why are you going to put all that new language in there, in the constitution, and have it all litigated? Are you sure you want to do this? I wouldn't do it. So, I'm not a constitutional scholar. I don't know what's right or what's wrong. I'm going to vote for it, because that was the deal I made with Mr. Phillips, and I think he's done everything that I asked him to do and then some, and I appreciate that. But, beyond that, I'm going to leave it to the will of the House in terms of my recommendation, and you have to decide whether you're comfortable making a change in the constitution on a subject that is this important, that is this important, based on the work of a nonlawyer, a lawyer, a good lawyer in legislative counsel, and no real testimony on the language that we have before us. I will also point out, of course, that you know, that since we've started talking about this, several groups have drummed up some opposition to this. I will also tell you that they are groups that are also nervous about this, because they're the ones who bear the brunt of this litigation. And, with that, I think I've been fair about presenting each side of it as I see it. It is a better bill than was brought last night. I appreciate Mr. Phillips' help on it.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Gallego. Chair recognizes Representative Geren in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. The greatest thing this country ever did was to create the first amendment. And everything that is great about America is written in those few sparse sentences. And the most important part of that first amendment is are those words that guarantee each of us the freedom to worship as we see fit. The idea is so simple. They're music. More than that, they're the backbone of our republic. Please listen to the words: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion mor prohibiting the free exercise thereof. These words are very simple yet so very complex in practice. Twelve years ago we got this right, those of you who were serving here, twelve years ago the legislature, we stood here as a legislature and said the U.S. Supreme Court was wrong. As Mr. Hochberg said last night, in 1999 we passed the religious freedom restoration act, which reestablished that if government substantially burdens your practice of religion it is not acceptable, unless there is a compelling state interest. That is the law today. And it works for everyone. It holds our freedom to worship as the highest possible right. Subordinate only to the safety of our state. Yet here we are today to try to abolish any governmental police that incidentally affects your religious practice. In 2007 I was lucky enough to get to carry House Bill 1083, which made it a criminal offense for someone to protest a funeral within a thousand feet of a cemetery. Just two weeks ago we passed out of this House Bill 718, which said you could not protest a funeral within three hours of the funeral, or three hours afterward. As we all know, there's a religious group, the West Burrow Baptist Church that protests the funerals of our soldiers because of their religious beliefs. If this joint resolution were to pass and we changed our standard, then doesn't that empower West Burrow Baptist or anyone else to challenge this law and put them back into the cemeteries protesting military funerals? This bill raises more questions than it answers. It says the health department allowing a restaurant to keep its dairy products in the same refrigerator as its meat products incidentally affects the Kosher right of religious practice? Yes, it does. Does it disallow the carrying a blade of a certain length to impinge on the practice of the chief, who is required to carry a ceremonial blade at all times? Yes, it does. It says giving time and a half to a government employee to work on Saturday impinge the rights of a Seventh Day Adventist? Yes. If this bill passes it will harm their rights even if they don't work on Saturdays and never intend to. Does the state (inaudible) and alcohol use. Gambling, smoke incidentally the free exercise of some Baptists? It might. And I'll bet that someone will sue. Every time we intervene we increase the likelihood that we make a bad call and set a foolish precedent that will weaken our rights, not strengthen them. Every time make a change we put -- of you are unelected federal judges beholden to no one. The more we touch this the worse it will be for Texans of all faiths, so let's leave it alone. I can tell you that every faith in Texas is strong enough to withstand incidental impairment, but what they could not stand is the kind of uncertainty that could come from an activist judge empowered to make a call because we decided to get too cute with our laws. I believe in four things in this life: God, Texas, our Constitution and football. I will not set one against the other because no matter what happens we all lose. Members, what will happen is the law passed ten years ago has been litigated all the way through, or, excuse me, twelve years ago. What this will go if it passes, it will start that litigation all over again. I urge you to vote no on this bill. Thank you. I apologize for taking so much of your time.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: W ould the gentleman yield for a couple questions? I will yield (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: M r. Geren, if there are zoning regulations out there, would this the potential of impacting zoning where you put certain --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: It could, Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: A nd when I was a joint author on that bill that came out of Criminal Jurisprudence with respect to limiting those -- limiting those picketing at the funerals of our soldiers of our military by that church, as an example. That would be impacted because that's a religious freedom, and so we wouldn't --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I would guarantee you that West-borough Baptist Church would sue, because that's all they do is they protest, then they sue.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: F rankly, the idea of religious freedom, it sounds important and it sounds good. So you're saying -- I guess that 1999 agreement was crafted very carefully, and has been litigated all the way through.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: It must have been, because it's been very litigated and it's upheld. I just hate to start that process all over again. I think the thought behind Mr. Phillips' bill is good. I think that passing it would be bad for the State of Texas is and all of us. Thank you, and I ask you to vote no on the bill.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips to close.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I wasn't intending to take long to close. I would ask for your vote. I do believe that this is an important step (inaudible) to our constitution. The reason why we're here is because the Supreme Court told us that the state could -- could impinge upon your religious freedom, not directly but indirectly and incidentally, in 1990, that's why we had this law passed in 1999. I appreciate Mr. Hochberg working with me. But that is the case that came down. All of these fears that are being raised, they could be raised today about the bills that we discussed. The law is very clear. Currently, if you're acting the -- if the government is acting in a (inaudible) governmental interest, and using legal (inaudible) available means to do so. That is perfectly fine. And that's why there's a prohibition. That's why they came out of the criminal court and came out of criminal committee and didn't say you could never protest, they said you could do it what, three hours before and three hours after. If it wasn't for this type of law, that would not be in place. They would have said you could never protest that. This line of cases, and why we have this is because the U.S. Supreme Court says the government has the right to interfere in your life, unless there's a state statute or constitutional amendment stopping it. The federal government passed laws to say that you couldn't infringe in our lives. They had to follow up that with the state. A city sued, went to the Supreme Court said no, the state has to take action. Please let us continue to take action and try that document, so that it takes two thirds to change this law, which we've adopted with Mr. Hochberg's help, it takes two thirds to change this law in the future so you don't have a legislature that has something crazy happen, or you have courts that come and rule differently. Please, I would respectfully ask your support of this amendment.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Phillips offers up HJR 135. This is a record vote. Strict enforcement has been requested. Strict enforcement has been granted. Members, please vote from your desks. And only vote for yourselves and vote from your desk. The clerk will please ring the bell. Members, vote from your desk. Take your time. Have all voted? Have all voted? All voted? There being 97 ayes, 45 nays, 3 present not voting; HJR 135 is passed to third reading. Chair recognizes Representative King for an introduction.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Members, Mr. Speaker and members, we have some unexpected guests. We have the high school girls track team from Alvard, Texas. Would you ladies stand up for us and wave? We hope you enjoy your time with us at your Capitol and welcome.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out as a part of postponed business House Bill 19. Clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 189 by Smith of Tarrant. Relating to the punishment for certain intoxication offenses.

THE CHAIR: Members, there was a previous point of order. It was respectfully withdrawn. The Chair recognizes Representative Smith.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Mr. Speaker and members, this is the bill that we -- the DWI bill that we laid out yesterday that creates a new, alternative form of punishment in DWI, in first time DWI cases that do not involve injuries or property damages, and supported by Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Police Chief Association, prosecutors, judges and the Texas Conservative Coalition. There is an amendment by Representative Carter, which she believes will make the bill better, and there's a technical amendment by Representative Callegari.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Carter.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Carter to explain her amendment. Representative Eiland?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mr. Speaker, I'd request that Mr. Geren's words be reduced to writing and placed in the journal.

THE CHAIR: Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this amendment is an amendment that says if you're going to take the deferred defense as option, you're going to need to serve not less than three days in jail. If a defendant has a probation revoked, and what happens is there's a minimum, under Texas law right now, of three days of jail time up to 180 days. This changes it to a 14 day minimum for deferred defense. And it's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Representative Carter sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none the amendment is adopted. Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment. Members, we're backing up to Amendment No. 1. Chair recognizes Representative Smith.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to reconsider Amendment No. 1.

THE CHAIR: Members, there's an amendment to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: I move to withdraw amendment No. 2.

THE CHAIR: Amendment No. 2 is withdrawn. Amendment -- Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Callegari.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Members, my amendment basically changes the -- and specifies that the act would be known and the Nicole Lily Lalain* and Todd Laughlen* Memorial Act. Move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Caligari sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Smith to close, to close on his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Mr. Speaker, members, I close.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Smith sends up an amendment. It has been amended. It's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none the amendment is adopted. Following amendment. The clerk lays out the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Martinez Fischer.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Martinez Fischer to explain.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This amendment says that upon proper motion by the defendant and acceptance by the court, that a defendant who is currently charged can opt to be prosecuted under this act. And I believe it's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Representative Martinez Fischer sends up an amendment. It's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair -- Chair recognizes Representative Smith to close.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Mr. Speaker, members, I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone else wishing to speak for House Bill 189? Question occurs passage of on House Bill 189. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 189 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out the matter of postponed business House Bill 31. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 31 by Guillen. Relating to the suspension of the driver's licenses with certain persons younger than 18 years of age.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Guillen. Members, at the time we postponed this bill there was a point of order on an amendment by Representative Burnam. That point of order is respectfully overruled. The following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by --

THE CHAIR: Representative Riddle.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. Once again, this amendment is simply saying that if there is an individual who has an accident, and is driving -- has an accident, has no driver's license; that does not mean that a license has been suspended, or it was left on the night stand, or it was left in another purse, or a license from another state; it means no licenses at all. And that would be a second degree --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Would the lady yield

THE CHAIR: Does the lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: -- Class C misdemeanor. Excuse me.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Do what?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I was correcting myself.

THE CHAIR: The lady yields for a question.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you. This amendment is also a bill that you're carrying this later on in the calendar; is that correct? Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And what practical use does this amendment fulfill? Because it's already illegal to drive unlicensed; is that not correct?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Yes, it is. It enhances the penalties so that people will take it seriously.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So you're thinking that people don't take the fact that driving without a license is illegal seriously enough, and there's already a penalty, isn't there, if you have an accident?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: Well what it does is it enhances the penalty so that people can take this seriously, so that they know that when you're behind the wheel of a vehicle that the reason that we have a driver's license is to show that you understand and know the laws that we have here in Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And you think that people actually don't understand that when they're driving?

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I tell you what, if you would like to come and speak against the amendment you are more than welcome to. We're on a time clock here and bills are dying. If you'd like to speak against the amendment, you can.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, I think this bill should die with this amendment on it.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: You'd be more than welcome to speak against it.

THE CHAIR: Following amendment to the amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Alonzo.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Alonzo.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, let me tell what this amendment does. In the discussion with Ms. Riddle, she talked about if you do not have a driver's license, that this -- that her amendment would be applicable. But if you left it at home, on the little table next to the bed, or you forgot, as some of us at times will forget, especially if you don't carry your driver's license in your wallet; you carry it in the big purse and you didn't get the right purse, but we also talked about -- and I'm going to point this out, and -- ma'am, I do understand what you said about that boy driving, and I'm not condoning -- this is not about condoning. This is about what I'm about to say, impossibility. If you're under 16 and the law says it's impossible, it's impossible for you to get a driver's license. And let me tell you, members, let me tell you members, that you probably talked to some of these judges who know the law, you can break the law but what if it's impossible, impossible, impossible, to fulfill the requirements of that law? So what my amendment says, if you are eligible to get a driver's license, she is making it a punishment, but you're going to have situations -- you're going to have situations where it's impossible. With all due respect, what happened in that situation, we're talking in general. We're talking in general. If it's impossible to fulfill the requirements of this law, this is what this talks about. And I think, members, even -- even if this amendment doesn't go through, think about this: If it's impossible, the word, the keyword here is impossible. If you cannot get a driver's license, how are you going to be punished if you are under 16 years old and it's impossible for you to get a driver's license?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Alonzo, are you suggesting that it's impossible that one of the unintended consequences of this legislation that has some potential, really negative consequences, is catching, in essence, a 16 year-old -- a 15 year-old, who we all know shouldn't be driving, but catching them in a situation that puts them in far greater harm than natural violation of the law?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: That's correct. And you'll recall a little while ago, Mr. Burnam, where I showed some documentation, some research that was done by the Texas Public Policy Foundation. And I remember it, because they've got some good stuff. Anyway, in that good stuff, in that research, it says think about what you're trying to do. Think about it. In this case, in thinking about it, it's impossible.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Do you know how many hundreds of thousands of Texans don't have their license, although they have had their license, because of the very circumstances that we were putting them, if we were to adopt this amendment, into even worse situation. Hundreds of thousands of Texans and --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thinking about it, it's going to be impossible, impossible for those folks to get a license, to have a license. And that's where you're dealing with unintended -- unintended consequences.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: The unintended consequences on our young, the unintended consequences, frankly, on our working poor, whom we do not provide adequate public transportation, and they have no other choice than to drive to get to work; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: That's correct. And, like I said, you know, I used the example and I apologize for using it, but the individual, for example, the (inaudible) under 16 years old, and I'm sure somebody that knows all about driver's licenses will give them who can get the. (inaudible) with the parent or whatever. But I'm sure there is situations where it's impossible --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Do you think it's possible that this amendment was offered up, not realizing the unintended consequences of how much time this amendment would waste, because it is so infuriating to certain members of this legislative body because it

(inaudible) things like it's a very (inaudible) very small veneer.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: (Inaudible) .

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: (Inaudible) this legislation has been subjected to all session long?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Yeah, it might be. But let me tell you, I think that if you notice -- if you notice, there's a difference. And the members are very keen to this. If you notice, it's a very serious matter. If it's a very serious matter, we appreciate that, we make sure that we point this out, because if it's not that serious they get upset and they want this, let's move along, let's move along, let's move along. But this is the type of case we can't just move along. We're trying to put a law that going to be impossible, impossible to deal with --

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Representative Riddle in opposition to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I got to tell you --

THE CHAIR: Representative Martinez Fischer.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: I rise in a point of order on this bill --

THE CHAIR: Please bring your point of order down front.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: Thank you very much.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield. Dr. Shelton?

REPRESENTATIVE MARK SHELTON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, today is National Nurses Day, and I wanted to recognize two very special people in the House this evening, and they are both on the House floor, and that would be the Honorable Dawnna Howard from Austin, and the Honorable Susan King from Abilene, who are two nurses in this House. And let's applaud them on behalf of the 170,000 nurses in Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M r. Speaker, we have a visitor at the door.

THE CHAIR: Admit the messenger, Doorkeeper.

MESSENGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am directed by the Senate to inform the House that the Senate has taken the following action, the Senate has passed the following measures: The (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Lucio?

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Parliamentary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: Please state your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Can the Chair let me know how many times the word possible and impossible was used in the exchange between the previous two members?

THE CHAIR: I apologize. We were not keeping a ticker.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Okay. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Thank you. Representative Martinez Fischer raised a point of order on Rule 4, Section 32B9. The point of order is respectfully overruled. We're back on the amendment to the amendment. The Chair recognizes Representative Riddle in opposition to the Alonzo amendment to her amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: With respect to time, members, this is not acceptable to the author. It's pretty impossible to think that a reasonable person would take this amendment seriously.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Alonzo to close on his amendment to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Members, you notice the key word is impossible. So now that we all know that it's impossible, you've got to accept this amendment. And the way you accept this the amendment is acceptable to the author by voting aye. Because, think about this for a minute, members. And that's a point I'm trying to make. If it's impossible, how can he be punished for that?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Representative Alonzo, I don't understand. Now why is it not possible for the author of the amendment to accept your amendment to the amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Because if you notice, she herself said the word impossible. In fact, if you recall, Representative Lucio, who was paying close attention, asking how many times those words were used, because what we're trying to do here is recognize what this is the all about.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Anchia?

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I yield.

THE CHAIR: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Alonzo , I have just one question. What is the opposite of possible?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Impossible. Members, I keep repeating the word and I wish I didn't have to, but that's the point. That's the point. And if you will remember one thing about this legislation is that word --

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Branch?

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Mr. Alonzo, do you yield?

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Now, listen carefully: Politics is the art of the -- possible.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: All right. Now you accused me. You see, that's not my word. The word in this legislation is impossible, In fact, did -- that's the whole point, is that it's impossible.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I yield.

THE CHAIR: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you, Representative. Is it possible that one of the reasons that we're having so much difficulty with legislation is people haven't learned well, this session, that politics is the art of negotiating the possible, as opposed to imposing the impossible?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: It's possible. Members, now, seriously, seriously, I think if you vote for this amendment you realize that what is being attempted to be done in the original amendment is something that is possible. Thank you. I ask that you vote for this amendment, vote aye.

THE CHAIR: Representative Alonzo sends up an amendment the amendment. Representative Riddle in opposition. Record vote. Strict enforcement has been requested by Mr. Alonzo. Strict enforcement has been granted. First, members, excuse Representative Pitts because of the Conference Committee on the motion of Representative Phillips. Members, strict enforcement has been granted on this vote. Please vote from your desk. On the Alonzo amendment to the Riddle amendment. All those in favor of the Alonzo amendment vote aye, all those opposed vote no. Clerk, ring the bell. Show Mr. Alonzo voting from his desk, being that he asked for strict enforcement, voting aye. Show Ms. Riddle voting no when she gets to her desk. Have all voted? There being 36 ayes, 84 nays, 2 present not voting; the amendment fails to adopt. The chair recognizes Representative Riddle to close on her amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: (Inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Following amendment to the amendment. The clerk will read the amendment to the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Schwertner.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Schwertner.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Sorry about that, gentlemen. Members. Members, this amendment to the amendment adds to the applicability subchapter, vehicles that operate in violation of section 601051, which is the financial responsibility requirement for operating motor vehicles in the State of Texas. I move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Mr.-- Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Yes. I heard the first half, I didn't hear the second half. Would you just tell us what the amendment actually does?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: Yes. This adds applicability subchapter, vehicles that are operated in violation of Section 601051, which is the financial responsibility requirement for the State of Texas for operating a motor vehicle.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So what would the implication of that be?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: If your amendment was adopted, what would that mean in practical terms?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: This would expand the applicability of this bill, in which motor vehicles that are involved in a motor vehicle accident and are not registered, and are not operated by a vehicle who has -- that is operated by an individual with a license; in addition to a vehicle that is operated in violation of the financial responsibility requirement.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So if your 15 year-old son makes an unauthorized use of your vehicle, does that mean that your vehicle would be impounded?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: My 15 year-old son?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: That is a hypothetical question. If a person's 15 year-old son made an unauthorized use of the vehicle, had no proof of insurance, caused an accident; does that mean the vehicle would automatically be impounded?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: No, this is permissive is my understanding.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Why

(inaudible) permissive? Why would you offer an amendment that is permissive?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: That's the way this is worded -- this amendment is worded. And I'm adding the provision under financial responsibility requirement to that subchapter that makes it applicable.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm not sure I'm sure of what your saying.

THE CHAIR: Representative Schwertner offers up an amendment -- Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Representa tive Alonzo? Yes.

THE CHAIR: Representative Alonzo?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I'd like to ask a question.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: I certainly do.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Are you familiar with the financial responsibility law?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: The financial responsibility requirement, yes. It's to operate a motor vehicle in the State of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Okay. Who can buy a -- Who can get the necessary, let's say, insurance to -- So if you get stopped and you don't have a license now, and -- you're saying if you don't have financial responsibility, you're going to be subjected to this law as well?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Now let me know, tell me real quick, if you have an accident, you don't have a license, you don't have the financial responsibility requirements, you're going to be in violation of this law; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: That is correct, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Now, and I'm not going to get into the same pan of discussion as I did with a prior amendment, what about if a 15 year-old has an accident, has no license and has no financial responsibility requirements?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: It would be at the discretion of the officer as to how to handle that situation.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: You are saying that -- So he doesn't have to have the insurance; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: All right. To operate a motor vehicle in the State of Texas you need to have a driver's license and you need to have financial responsibility.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Okay. I get it. Now, that's the drive. Now, we're talking about this legislation. In this legislation -- proposed legislation, it is said that you got to have a license, right?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And we had all that debate already. Now let's talk about your requirement now is that you got to have the financial responsibility requirement.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: As already set in law under section 600501 (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Right. But in this proposed legislation you're saying if you do not have a financial responsibility requirement you're going to be subjected to the punishment in this legislation; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: That's correct, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Okay. Now I asked you if you were familiar with the financial responsibility law, and you said yes. And I asked you what happens if your 15 year-old -- and you don't have the financial responsibility requirement, and you said whoever's official stops you, it's going to be discretionary. What did you mean by that?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: It would be up to the law enforcement officials to make that judgment. We trust law enforcement officials to do all sorts of tasks, and I think they are certainly capable of making that decision.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: So they're going to have discretion?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Okay. Now, are you also, saying because you're a part of -- you're about to be a part of this amendment as well. So, the official that stops somebody that does not have a license, it's going to be to his discretion whether he punishes them as you're proposing to do, right?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: It is their discretion how to handle --

THE CHAIR: Representative John Davis of Harris has raised a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES SCHWERTNER: I move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Lucio to raise a -- to speak for the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Mr. Speaker, members, you will -- I'll just take a few seconds. Basically what this amendment will do is if you're driving without insurance, and you cause an accident, they will impound your vehicle. The reason I am for this amendment is a dear friend of mine called me at the beginning of this session, he was in a wreck. It was the other person's fault. His car was totaled. He was injured in the accident. He was sitting on the curb getting medical attention. He was looking at the police officer writing the person a ticket for no license, write the person a ticket for no insurance, gave the responsible person for the accident the ticket and the police officer then let that person drive away in that vehicle. So my friend calls me and says what kind of justice is that? This person caused injury to me, totaled my car, doesn't have insurance, now I have to claim it under my insurance, and he got to drive away? The officer witnessed him breaking the law and this person was allowed to drive away. Members, this isn't about the debate that is potentially happening regarding immigration, or any of the other things. To me this is a sensible piece of legislation. You are breaking the law, you caused an accident, you should not be allowed to drive away in your vehicle.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yield? Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: I appreciate your story and I think that argument has a lot of merit. I just have a quick question.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: With this amendment to the amendment, are we creating a second-degree felony?

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: For this amendment, I think you just impounding the vehicle, is the way I understand it. You're impounding the vehicle for a -- (inaudible) (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: It sounds like you're not exactly certain. And if there's somebody up front who can answer that definitively I think it would be helpful.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: (Inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: I think a lot of would want to support preventing what you just described, we also have the reality of paying for our prisons and our criminal justice system. And it would just be important to know if we are creating a new felony.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: The author -- Well, it's a second degree misdemeanor, not a felony. Well, the author -- you would be able to answer that line of questioning from the author when the closes.

THE CHAIR: Representative Alonzo?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: A couple of questions.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I apologize. Let me go through another -- Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Alonzo?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: In the spirit of possibly splitting out the calendar, I'd like to raise a point of order under Rule 4, Section B9.

THE CHAIR: Bring it down front. The point of order has already been raised by Mr. Martinez Fischer and respectfully already overruled. So the point of order is withdrawn. The question occurs on the Schwertner amendment being -- the, Mr. Schwertner offers up an amendment. It's acceptable to Mrs. Riddle. Is there any objection? Chair hears none the amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Riddle to close (inaudible) the adopted.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Representative Riddle offers up an amendment. It's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Guillen to close on his bill.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker? I --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I raise a point of order against further consideration, Rule 4, Section 32C 2 and 4, the rules of the House.

THE CHAIR: Bring it down front. Point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Guillen to close.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 31? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say -- Record vote has been requested. Record vote is granted. Clerk will please ring the bell. Show Representative riddle voting aye. Have all voted? Have all voted? Show Representative Farrar voting no. Have all voted? Ms. Farrar voting no. All voted? There being 130 ayes, 11 nays, 2 present not voting; House Bill 31 is passed for third reading. Chair lays out HCR 161. Clerk will read it.

THE CLERK: HCR 161 by Taylor of Galveston. Recalling HB 1951 from the Senate to the House. Instructing the Chief Clerk of the House to correct the bill reflecting the bill (inaudible) House of Representatives.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Taylor.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a an error in the background here. We passed the TDI Sunset Bill. I had accepted one amendment from Representative McClendon, and we had tabled another and, unfortunately, when -- that was during second reading. When they put it together for third reading they actually attached the amendment to the bill that we had tabled and not attached it to the one we had actually accepted. So all we're doing is that bill was sent to the Senate this morning. We're bringing the bill back to the Senate so they can make that correction. We don't have to do any further action other than that resolution allowed to do that. And then we'll clean it up to where the amendment is correct. The amendment is -- the correct one is on and the incorrect on is off. And, with that, I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there objection to HJR 161? Chair hears none. HJR 161 -- We do need a record; is that correct, Mr. Taylor? Record vote. Please ring the bell. Have all voted? All voted? There being 141 ayes, 0 nays, 2 present not voting; HJR 161 is passed. Chair recognizes Representative Taylor.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, if I could just take a quick moment, and I appreciate your vote on that (inaudible). I've been reminded, we get pretty caught up in what we're doing here and we get all worked up over it and but -- you know, two years ago tonight, around 10:15 in the evening, our friend and colleague collapsed and was resuscitated by Trooper Martinez. And, Dr. Zerwas, if you remember that, do you remember how sobering that was for us and what a reminder

(inaudible) during that evening and the days that followed it reminded us what is really important in this life. Our friends and our colleagues and the preciousness of this life. And so I would ask, in memory of our dear friend and his life example, that we would keep the lessons that we learned during that time in mind, and in these closing days of the session and in the future, in the memory of Edmund Kuempel, and as we're try to keep that in mind as we are going through this process. And thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE CHAIR: Members, we're on the top of page 9. Chair lays out House Bill 3275. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3275 by Coleman. Relating to the powers and duties of counties in political subdivisions of this state, and constituents of those subdivisions.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. What this bill does is it deals with narrowly tailored matters, increment financing and operation of tax reinvestment zones and has county, as you know, and many know, we've used (inaudible) better known to make many changes in many of our lives, communities across our -- our area, as well as being used across the state.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3275. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed nay. House Bill 3275 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2408. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2408 by Darby. Relating to the regulation of the title insurance industry.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, the intent of this legislation is to streamline the rate making process for title and insurance rates within the Texas Department of Insurance, the bill increases efficiency while at the same time ensuring adequate due process.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Darby.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Darby to explain the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: This amendment is offered in response to feedback from TDI that includes technical changes.

THE CHAIR: The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none the the amendment is adopted. Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2408? The question occurs on passage of House Bill 2408. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2408 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 963 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 963 by Hochberg. Relating to the costs associated with proceedings regarding cruelly treated animals.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Hartnett.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, last session we passed a bill allowing appeals from civil judgments forfeiting cruelly treated animals to the state. This bill clarifies the process for appealing this kind of judgment, applies the same process for appeal of these judgments to both municipal courts and JP courts. And specifies the amount of the appeal bond and provides for a de novo appeal with right to jury and speeds up the appellate and process.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Miller of Comal.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Miller of Comal.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, we don't have much of a problem with this bill except for this amendment would help make it better, I think. It simply changes Representative Hartnett's bill that eliminates what might be considered as a dis-proportionate cost for the appealing party, and no other civil case does and appealing party to have to put up a bond for the other party's cost of the investigation or experts. And I'd say let's just treat the defendants in these cases just the same as other civil cases. I'd move passage.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Hartnett in opposition to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, the purpose of the appeal bond is to assure that if the county wins the appeal, the county will be reimbursed for its cost of holding and maintaining the animals during the trial of the appeal. And also recoup the court costs awarded in the judgment. This bill protects the taxpayers in the county from having to put the county's expenses costs by wrongdoers. This amendment reduces the protection to the taxpayers so I respectfully move to table.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Miller of Comal to close.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, again I would just say that we treat these cases the same as any other cases. I don't have a problem with the fact that when you pick up an animal that has been treated cruelly, that the owner or the former owner should have to pay for the keeping of that animal, for the killing of that animal, during that time of the appeal. But to have the person, the defendant in this case, to have to also pay up-front a fine before the final decision on the appeal, or post a bond for the full amount of that, I think is a little over the top. And I would ask you to stick with me. And, respectfully, vote no on the motion to table. I would tell you that my good friends PETA and the Humane Society are probably opposed to me on this. But if you would stick with me and please vote no on the motion to table.

THE CHAIR: Members, Mr. Miller of Comal offers up an amendment. Mr. Hartnett moves to table the amendment. It's a division vote. Vote aye, vote nay. Show Mr. Hartnett not voting aye to table and Mr. Miller voting no. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 84 ayes, 28 nays; the amendment is tabled. Chair recognizes Mr. Hartnett.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 963? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. -- I'm sorry, a record vote has been requested on this bill. A record vote has been granted. The clerk will please ring the bell. All voted? Have all voted? There being 123 ayes, 17 nays, 2 present not voting, House Bill 963 is passed to third reading. Members, the Senate companion to House Bill 1759 is over and eligible. The Chair lays out Senate Bill 690. The clerk read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 690 by Carona. Relating to the enforcement of a self-service storage facility lien; providing a penalty.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Miller of Erath.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker, Senate Bill 690 and over and eligible and I'd like to substitute it in for House Bill 12 --

THE CHAIR: We've already done that, Mr. Miller. Go ahead and lay out the Senate Bill.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Under current law, like most landlord/tenant relationships, self-storage facilities hold a lien against the contents of rented units to secure payment. What this bill does is it brings us up to technology and code, and it hasn't been upgraded in 30 years, and it would allow for certifications by certified email, it would prior special protections for our military service members when they're deployed, and I believe we have one amendment.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Kolkhorst.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This amendment is an amendment that removes self-storage from the applicability of HB 300 by expressly providing that the portion of the health and safety code in HB 300 is applicable to self-storage. Basically what they had to make sure was that when someone might leave a medical record in a storage unit, and they foreclosed on that storage unit and they sell and it might be some medical record that's stuck in some box, that they don't get caught by HB300 and (inaudible) no sale of (inaudible) (inaudible) -- .

THE CHAIR: Representative Kolkhorst sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 690? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. Senate Bill 690 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1036. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1036 by Legler. Relating to liability to file a tort complaint with the Texas Ethics Commission.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Legler.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: Mr. Speaker, members, removed of fees current (inaudible) (inaudible)

(inaudible) commission. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Speak into the mic.

REPRESENTATIVE KEN LEGLER: I'm sorry. Removes confusion that currently exists with regard to current requirements concerning sworn complaints with the Texas Ethics Commission. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1036? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 1036 passes to third reading. Representative Miller of Erath moves to lay House Bill 1259 on the table subject to call. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 608. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 608 by Zerwas. Relating to state agency reports on the cost of services and benefits provided to undocumented immigrants.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Murphy.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I ask for your attention on behalf of Dr. Zerwas and myself, we are the joint authors. I would like to ask your appreciation for postponing this bill until July 4th, 2012. Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2060. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2060 by Pena. Relating to the confidentiality of certain information regarding state election inspectors.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: The elections code allows the Secretary of State to appoint one or more state inspectors for elections (inaudible) required to do so, if requested by 15 or more. If the inspector would monitor (inaudible). That request is not available for public inspection until the day after. This bill would work to protect our basic democracy right and privilege should --

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2060? All those in favor, say aye, those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2060 is passed to third reading. Mr. Pena?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Thank you for getting that out of way.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out House Bill 2722. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2722 by Perry. Relating to the state Medicaid program as the payor of last resort.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Perry.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Thank you, members. This bill ensured that the department of Health and Human Services that makes Medicaid a payor of last resort.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2722? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2722 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2032. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2032 by Darby. Relating to performance and payment security for certain comprehensive development agreements.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Darby.

REPRESENTATIVE DREW DARBY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This simply protects Texas taxpayers by ensuring the most secure method of protection available as the performance guarantee removes the ambiguity, which currently exists in the transportation code, which then replaces it with strong requirements.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2032? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2032 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 677. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 677 by Lucio. Relating to cognitive-linguistic or neuro-cognitive assessments of participants in extracurricular athletic activities sponsored or sanctioned by the University Interscholastic League.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Lucio.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. Before I lay out the bill I would like to lay out an amendment and just explain everything at the end.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Hancock.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hancock.

REPRESENTATIVE KELLY HANCOCK: Yes, Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My good friend, Eddie, Representative Lucio, had a bill that we needed to work on a little bit. What he -- The original intent of the bill was that there would be an opt out clause within that bill. In our discussion we agreed that may be it'd be better that we have an opt out clause in that regard to this bill. So he's agreed to that and that's what this amendment does. It allows schools to opt in, that's it.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is my baseline testing bill --

THE CHAIR: One moment, Mr. Lucio. Representative Hancock offers up an amendment, the amendment is acceptable to the author. The amendment is adopted. Representative Lucio to close.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Simple, this is a baseline testing bill. The NBA, the NFL, the major league baseball, the NCAA all does this. This compares brain functions before a concussion with brain functions after the concussion. Purely permissive. After working with Representative Hancock, who is doing a fantastic job on this session on his rural policy. The Republican Caucus has worked really hard to try to see that democratic members whose bill may have issues, you know, to help where he can. And this does not require school district -- Move passage.

THE CHAIR: A record vote has been requested. A record vote has been granted. All those -- Clerk will please ring the bell. Show Mr. Hancock voting aye. Show Mr. Lucio voting aye. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 117 ayes, 21 nays, 2 present not voting, House Bill 677 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 197 on second reading. Clerk will read bill. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 190 by Solomons. Relating to the provision of certain documentation before a person may engage in a licensed occupation; providing a criminal penalty.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Martinez Fischer?

REPRESENTATIVE FISCHER MARTINEZ: Point of order is Rule 4, Section 18. Rule 4, section 20B.

THE CHAIR: Thank you. Bring it down front. Point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This is the fourth version of this bill, and in three sessions, and I think we finally got it right and finally have gotten it to the floor. And I'd like -- I've got a perfecting amendment and one other amendment that I think really takes care of probably some people's concerns about how this is going to work, and I'd like to lay that out.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Solomons.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members. The amendment, actually the first two amendments, the first amendment actually specifies, if you look at it, and it specifies that the misdemeanor only applies for false documents, or practicing without providing a -- without providing -- or practicing without providing the documents. The second part of the amendment says that it allows agencies to share the documents if someone applies the licenses to two different agencies so you don't have any duplication of effort. And the third part of that says the -- allows the agency to deny or revoking the licenses if they don't actually get around to finally submitting the documents. So I -- The amendment is acceptable to the author and I have one other amendment, and then I'll be happy to debate the bill --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Solomons sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The the amendment is acceptable to the author. Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Solomons.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment is also acceptable to the author and it exempts the Securities Board. And they apparently have, you know, they have a national registration issue, and they came to me and wanted to make sure they were exempted, and it made sense, to my, mind to make sure that they are not part of this particular issue or this particular licensing issue. Anyway, it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Walle?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Would Chairman Solomons just yield for a few questions?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: On the amendment or on the bill?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: On the bill. I'll wait.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Solomons offers up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons. Mr. Walle?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Okay. Just a second, Mr. Walle and I'll -- Just so everybody knows, it requires an applicant to provide documentation of there verified eligibility to work in the country. Federal law requires that an employer confirm that the employees are legally authorized to work in the U.S. This provision -- This simply requires a state licensing agency to track the law and a bill that applies to the occupational business licenses to certify permits regulated by the state, under the Occupation's Code. And it just puts the burden on the person applying for that particular -- for that license, to gives us the documentation. And then we provide in a way for them to have time to do it, go through the process, and however they do it, eventually have to submit that documentation. It pretty well -- pretty well tracks federal law. Anyway, I'll be happy to yield now.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Walle?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Sure.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you, Chairman Solomons. And one of the things that we're kind of concerned about is this bill pertains to all occupational licenses?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, sir. Under the occupational code.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Right. Right. Are you aware that there are several classes of occupational licenses that are necessary for businesses, like (inaudible) organic produce distribution, I mean it can run the gamut on particularly occupational licenses.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: There's a number of ways to get the licenses. It doesn't apply to the businesses itself. It doesn't apply to corporations. It applies to the individuals applying for a license. And the bill actually has some exceptions and some things in it. I wanted to clean up the language and make the work properly and provide all the ability for people to get that information to the state.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Are you aware that it's possible for investors to come lawfully to the United States with the valid immigration visa, but work without -- be here --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We had that discussion, I think, in the committee.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Okay. And then do you think that maybe that it might be -- it would discourage some of those -- what's happening is that --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I don't think it discourages investors. I don't think it discourages people coming over here legally wanting to invest in this country and in this state at all.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: What's happening, particularly in Houston, a lot of folks, because of the violence in Mexico, a lot of investors, a lot of these guys, wealthy Mexican investors are coming to the United States and particularly in Houston, and they are concentrate, a lot of them are concentrated in the Galleria area, in the Woodlands. And they're basically (inaudible) and investments, and they're investing a lot of money into the United States. And what we are afraid of is --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I understand -- I understand the concern that was raised in the committee by someone who testified dealing with the issue of well -- what happens when somebody comes over to scope out some property or some businesses they may want to purchase, or whatever they want to do to invest in their community in the state of Texas. And I don't think it applies to them. It applies to people actually applying for the license. They come over here and decide to do something, they need to go get a license and they ought to provide the same evidence they would if they were trying to get a federal license.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Right. Because a lot of those folks don't necessarily have work authorization, but if they -- and you are saying that if they're actually going to do the individual work --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: If they're going to get the -- if they need the license to do the job, and under the occupation's code, they ought to provide that evidence.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And then as it relates to -- Because, the federal laws are so complex, and what would happen in particular in Houston, too, because of the medical industry, we will encourage a lot of international students to come in, and a lot of nurses to come in. And some of them are on temporary visas until they can get their status adjustment. Is there a way that we wouldn't discourage those folks that are here legally, mind you, legally, not folks that are here undocumented, but folks that have been encouraged to come here; and their job is petitioning for them?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We would go through -- they go through a process to get their licenses. This bill is not intended to hurt nurses that come into that state, or doctors or anyone else. If there is any issue in connection with that should we pass the bill, and it goes over to the Senate, I'm pretty sure whoever thinks so that they still have an issue, they will try to get this bill amended. I do not want to hurt nurses coming in this state, I don't want hurt physicians, I don't want hurt anybody coming in. But they have to get the license, they ought to be able to show that they're here legally. And that's all this is. You know, to get a federal license you have to have, you know, a certain documentation and things you have to do. And that's all I wanted to do with the state. And I tried on this several sessions ago, it didn't work out, it wasn't really -- I thought it was drafted pretty well but, apparently, some people didn't. It didn't get anywhere. I drafted it two different ways last session, still had a problem. I think we really have tightened down quite a bit for this session.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: What prompted the legislation in the beginning?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, I've seen it in other states, and the issue came up back when I first started doing it about this bill, there was the there was the evidence -- well, I say the evidence, there was a lot of concern that even though the CDLR does a great job and all that, there was no real documentation anywhere that we were giving licenses to people who were here legally.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And that was all it was. And the idea that the state, this public policy, wants to give licenses, they want to give people work, they want to give licenses. But they need to show --

THE CHAIR: Representative Sheffield raises a point of order, the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Gutierrez?

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: I'd ask that the time be extended just for a few questions. I just have three questions.

THE CHAIR: Representative Solomons offers up House Bill 197. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 197 is passed. Chair lays out House Bill 239 on second reading. The clerk will read.

THE CLERK: HB 239 by Parker. Relating to the offense of paying or receiving certain forms of compensation for facilitating the registration of voters; providing criminal penalties.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill was unanimously voted out of the elections committee and also was unanimously amended to Larry Taylor's HB 2817 on Monday evening. This bill specifically prohibits the bounty system for voter registration. The bounty system that has led to so much that the voter registration. We've seen in recent elections. The concept was supported in committee by both republican and democratic election officials in the State of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Farrar?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I raise a point of order under rule 4, Section 18 on this bill.

THE CHAIR: Thank you. Bring it down front. Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Parliamentary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Were we able to complete all of the bills that have been postponed up through 5:00 o'clock today yet?

THE CHAIR: State it again, please.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Have we been able to complete all of the bills that were postponed until 5:00 o'clock?

THE CHAIR: No, sir. We have not been able to do that yet.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: How many more bills do we have remaining that have been postponed until 5:00 o'clock today? It's now 10:00 o'clock, give or take a --

THE CHAIR: I don't know the exact time that each one has been postponed to, but I have a count of one, two, three, four, five, six and seven.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: You have seven up through 5:00 o'clock, and then if we counted the ones up through 6:00 o'clock, that would be how many?

THE CHAIR: I don't have them by time. I just know we have seven bills that are postponed.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Is one of those seven bills House Bill 400?

THE CHAIR: You would be correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And when can we anticipate bringing House Bill 400 up?

THE CHAIR: Sometime after we bring the three other postponed bills in front of it up.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So we have three postponed bills that were postponed to time certain prior to --

THE CHAIR: 400. Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: -- House Bill 400?

THE CHAIR: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And House Bill 400 was postponed until 6:00 o'clock this evening, correct?

THE CHAIR: I'll take your word for it.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Oh, don't take my word for it. Please look into it.

THE CHAIR: It's close enough for government work.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Okay. If it's close enough for government work, parliamentary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: May we bring up House Bill 400 at this time, so we can deal with the most important issues at hand, which is how we're going to deal with all the funding cuts?

THE CHAIR: It's not in order at this time.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: How do we get it in order at this time?

THE CHAIR: If you'd like, come down front and we'll discuss the motion.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well -- Well, can I just ask it to bring it up now?

THE CHAIR: Come on down front, if you want to make that motion.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Representative Farrar temporarily withdraws a point of order. Representative Parker?

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: I will move this back about five minutes to give Kristin an opportunity to make a complete ruling.

THE CHAIR: You heard the motion to postpone until 10:25. All those -- I'm sorry. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 263 is over and eligible. Accordingly, Chair lays out Senate Bill 1217. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 1217 by Estes. Relating to an excavator's duty to notify a notification center before excavating; providing civil and criminal penalties.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hilderbran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: Thank you, members. This is the excavations (inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against Senate Bill 1217? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill -- I'm sorry, Senate Bill 1217 is passed to third reading. Representative Hildebran moves to lay House bill 263 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 436. Chair -- Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 436 by Parker. Relating to standing for certain foster parents to file a suit affecting the parent-child relationship.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Parker.

REPRESENTATIVE TAN PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, in consideration of the body and all the bills that are behind on the calendar this evening, we've already debated extensively foster care and adoption issues this evening, and (inaudible) and I won't take anymore time. And, as such, I will postpone further consideration of HB 436 until July 4th, 2011.

THE CHAIR: I think we have plans that day. Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 452. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 452 by Lucio. Relating to temporary housing between academic terms for certain postsecondary students who have been under the conservatorship of the Department of Family and Protective Services.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Lucio.

REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE LUCIO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill allows universities to work with foster students who have no homes to stay in the dorms when they normally close their dorms. Spring Break, Christmas, a lot of students have been living in homeless shelters, living in their cars when their dorms close down and the university brought (inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 452? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 452 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 599. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 599 by Jackson. Relating to the release of certain criminal history record information subject to an order of nondisclosure.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Jackson.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill deals with people that have completed deferred adjudication, that have successfully petitioned the court for and order of non disclosure. It would reduce the number of non law enforcement agencies to whom the information could be released. I believe there's one --

THE CHAIR: There's an amendment. The Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will please read that amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Otto.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Otto.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN OTTO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, what this amendment does, it basically says that in certain cases, the Texas State Board of Public Accountancy would only have access to these records if there was theft, or if there was malfeasance in regards to submitting documents to a bank. It's the type of thing that if you're going to be certified as a CPA the board ought to know. --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Otto sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 599? The question occurs on passage of House Bill 599. All those in favor say aye, those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 599 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 629. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 629 by Pickett. Relating to the use of municipal or county sales tax increment financing for a transportation reinvestment zone.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Pickett.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill which same came out of the Senate today, this adds to the sales tax (inaudible) into the reinvestment zones that we passed out of here as 563.

THE CHAIR: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 620 -- I'm sorry, members. Is there an amendment? Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Pickett.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Pickett to explain the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE PICKETT: Mr. Speaker, members, this assures that there is a public hearing 30 days before. So it's the same as all the other apportions in the reinvestment zone for the (inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Mr. Pickett sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none the amendment is adopted. Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 629? All those in favor, say aye. No. The ayes have it. House Bill 629 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 741. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 741 by Vo. Relating to criteria for financing certain multifamily housing developments.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Vo. Mr. Vo? House Bill 741.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: I move to postpone House Bill 741 to June the 1st.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, the Senate Companion to House Bill 666 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 403. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 403 by Eltife. Relating to the consideration of pension and other post-employment benefits in establishing the rates of a gas utility.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Murphy.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill would allow gas utilities to preserve accounts for their pensions. This was done in the --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Martinez?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Will the gentleman yield for a few questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: L et me just lay this out real quick (inaudible). I just want y'all to know we did this in the 79th Session for the electrical utilities, and so we're asking the same thing to be done for the gas utilities. It will help keep their rates low, since they don't have to go but through the rate cases. And I think it's a good bill for Texas.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Martinez, the gentleman does now yield.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Thank you Mr. Murphy. And I do like your bill. I just have a few questions for, you know -- Currently, what kind of post employment benefits do the people in this industry receive?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: W ell, you know, they have pensions and the other post employment benefits are the things like health care, those are really the two big ones.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: And will all the money in this reserve fund be awarded to former employees or --

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: Y es, it's just for those former employees, Armando. And just so that when these expenses go up they can put them off into a separate account and not cause a rate hearing.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: And I like your bill. I just have a couple more questions. When was the last time the PEC made a statutory change in regards to the post employment benefits? Have they done any (inaudible) in the past or --

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: No . They actually have a different -- they're under PURA -- and then PURA is for the electrical and DURA is for the gas guys. And so we did this with the PEC in the 79th and it's all under a different code.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Will this in any way affect those auxilliary rates?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: No .

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Murphy.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM REPRESENTATIVE MURPHY: Y ou're welcome. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Any one else wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 403? All those in favor of Senate Bill 403 say aye, those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. Senate Bill 403 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1386. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1386 by Coleman. Relating to the public health threat presented by youth suicide.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: T hank you, members. Members, if Mr. Creighton is going to call a point of order on my bill I just want you to know that suicide among teenagers, among -- around the country I, mean around the state, and it is a very important bill. But I'm willing to sacrifice anything for good public policy, to call your point of order, Mr. Creighton, since you want to stop us from preventing teenagers from committing suicide.

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: R ight. Just want you to know that's what he's doing.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Coleman, one second please. Mr. Creighton?

REPRESENTATIVE BRANDON CREIGHTON: I want to raise a point of order against further consideration of HB --

THE CHAIR: Bring it on down front. Thank you. Representative Creighton temporarily withdraws his point of order. Chair recognizes Mr. Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: Y es, Mr. Speaker, I move to postpone House Bill 1386 until a time certain, 10:30, 10:45, 10:45; that's the bill, on teen suicide.

THE CHAIR: You have heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Thank you. Chair lays out House Bill 1547 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1447 by Larson. Relating to the right of certain municipalities to maintain local control over wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Larson.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Mr. Speaker and guests or members, we are -- we've got a statewide water plan. And what this does is it basically defines the conditions of aquifers all over the state.

THE CHAIR: Is there anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1547? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 1547 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out -- Members, Senate Companion to 1751 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 1140. The clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 1104 by Watson. Relating to payment by a water control and improvement district for certain damages caused by the district's operation of a sanitary sewer system.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hartnett to explain the Senate Bill.

REPRESENTATIVE HARTNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill allows water control and improvement districts to compensate property owners in the districts for sewer line backups.

THE CHAIR: Okay. Members, anyone else wishing to speak for or against Senate Bill 1104? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. Senate Bill 1140 is passed. Representative Murphy moves to lay House Bill 966 on the table subject to call. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Hartnett moves to lay House Bill 1751 on the table subject to call. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, we lay out -- Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1937. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1937 by Simpson. Relating to prosecution and punishment for the offense of official oppression by the intrusive touching of persons seeking access to public buildings and transportation; providing penalties.

THE CHAIR: The man who needs no introduction, Mr. Simpson. Go ahead.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Thank -- Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Thompson?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: I just have a rule book up here, where I can see it. I'm waiting for him to lay his last bill out.

THE CHAIR: You're doing some casual reading. Go ahead, Ms. Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, most of y'all have heard me lay this bill out numerous times. Kneeling by a desk and -- this has to do with dignity, and travel and prohibiting indecent groping searches when innocent travelers are seeking access to airports and to public buildings.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mrs. Thompson, what was that?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Before I call these points of orders --

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: This is what we're trying to prevent.

THE CHAIR: Members, members, please. You are offending Mr. Simpson. Mr. Simpson? Ms. Thompson?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Mrs. Thompson, do you have a point of order for us?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: I will if he will give a demonstration of what he's talking about? Can he touch himself?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: That's my wife's privilege.

THE CHAIR: Okay, members.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: I didn't hear. I didn't hear his response.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: I beg your pardon?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: We didn't hear you.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak --

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Wait a minute. I raise a point of order against violation of Article 3, Section 367, Rule 4, Section 18, Rule 4. Section 32C4. You want me to read the rest of the rule book that it violates?

THE CHAIR: We'll scrub it for you. Bring it on down front. Mr. Miles? Mr. Simpson? Representative Thompson withdraws her multiple points of order. Mr. Simpson.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: I'd like to postpone this bill until 10:45.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. Members, the Senate companion to House Bill 28, SB 2 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 509. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 509 by Lucio. Relating to the validation of a home-rule charter for certain municipalities.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Lozano.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill is bracketed just for South Padre Island and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against SB 509? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. Senate Bill 509 is passed to third reading. Representative Lozano moves to lay House Bill 2082 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 2113. Clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2113 by Price. Relating to the creation of a groundwater conservation district in a priority groundwater management area.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Price.

REPRESENTATIVE WALTER PRICE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move to postpone further consideration of this bill until Independence Day, 2011.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2249. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2249 by Bonnen. Relating to governmental entities subject to the sunset review process.

THE CHAIR: Back up, members. The Senate Bill is over -- Members, there is a Senate Companion bill to House Bill (inaudible) is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 652. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB -- SB 652 by Hagar. Relating to governmental entities subject to the sunset review process.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Bonnen to explain the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE DENNIS BONNEN: Members, please pay attention. The Senate Bill is over and eligible. Therefore, I do not have to pass it tonight so I move to postpone Senate Bill 652 until 7:30 a.m. tomorrow morning.

THE CHAIR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative Bonnen -- I'm sorry, Representative Taylor moves to lay House Bill 2249 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 2292 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2292 by Hunter. Relating to payment of claims to pharmacies and pharmacists.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Members, Mr. Speaker, members, as a negotiator in the pharmacy, and the pharmacy groups, this deals with PBM payments.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2292? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2292 is finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 2493. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2493 by Torres. Relating to authorizing enterprise project half designations and quarter designations under the enterprise zone program.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Torres.

REPRESENTATIVE RAUL TORRES: Mr. Chairman and members, this bill analyzing (inaudible) designation to be split in half and quarter designations.

THE CHAIR: There's an amendment. Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will please read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Torres.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Torres.

REPRESENTATIVE RAUL TORRES: Members, this amendment would create a necessary capital investment structure and adjustment --

THE CHAIR: Mr. Torres offers up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. Is there anyone else wishing to speak for against House Bill 2393? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2393 is passed. Chair lays out House Bill 2525. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2525 by Harper-Brown. Relating to a mechanic's, contractor's, or material-man's lien for landscaping.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mrs. Harper-Brown. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, HB 2525 would clarify the rights of landscapers to (inaudible) and liens, and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Members, one --

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Does the lady yield?

THE CHAIR: Hold on. Representative Burnam, does the lady yield? REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Yes, I yield.

THE CHAIR: Lady yields for a question.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you, Ms. Brown. This is about landscapers and filing the liens, and I want to know a little bit about the problem. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: What the problem is that the -- when the -- the language that's in code right now, if you look at the -- at Section 2, it says that it's a contract with the owner or the owner's agent and trustee, receiver or contractor or sub contractor. When the language, when you drop down to the D, when it includes the installation of landscaping for a house, if you read it says owner, agent, trustee --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry, Ms. Harper-Brown, I cannot understand you and I don't know whether you're talking fast or my ears aren't hearing --

THE CHAIR: Members, it's only 10:41 we have an hour and 19 minutes. Please take your seats, pay attention to the conversations. We can all gather round when it gets close to the deadline. Members, pay attention. Mr. Burnam and Ms. Harper-Brown, go ahead. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: All right. Mr. Burnam, if you look at Section B, Subchapter B, Number two, when it talks about liens, it says under or by virtue of a contract with the owner or the owner's agent, trustee, receiver, contractor or subcontractor. When you come down to D and it talks about landscapers, it says written contract with the owner, owner's agent, trustee or receiver. It leaves off out the words contractor or subcontractor. It was meant to cover those, too. And, initially, landscapers were covered, but now some courts are saying that as a subcontractor they're not covered. The courts aren't reading the language above to clean up contractor and subcontractor. All we're doing is picking those two words up and just those two words, and adding them to D, so it matches -- So it reads the same as item two, which B falls under. We're just clarifying that contractor and subcontractor fall under these lien provision.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So this simple clarification language is necessitated by a bad court ruling, was that in Dallas county? REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And when did that occur? REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I cannot tell you that.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Four years ago? Six? REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I am not sure. It was only brought to my attention this year, and I don't think it's been quite that long ago, because I know that I worked with Representative Solomons on this, and he's the one that actually passed this legislation for landscapers originally. And --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, it could have been decades ago. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Well, it could have been decades ago, maybe. But I don't think it was, because I remember him telling me the year and it was much sooner than decades ago.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2525? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2525 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2560. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2560 by Sheffield. Relating to transporting a foster child in a vehicle where a handgun is in the possession of a foster parent licensed to carry a concealed handgun.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Sheffield.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Members, HB 2560 will allow foster parents to carry a handgun in their vehicle when their foster child or children are present, if they have a concealed handgun --

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2560? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. House Bill 2560 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2603. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2603 by Smithee. Relating to the distribution of universal service funds to certain small and rural local exchange companies.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Smithee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SMITHEE: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill adjusts the for U.S.F funds to certain small and rural telephone companies. I've got one amendment.

THE CHAIR: Members, we have an amendment. The clerk will please read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Smithee.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Smithee to explain the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SMITHEE: This amendment that we put in to satisfy and to remove some ambiguities in the bill. And I would move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Smithee offers up an amendment. It is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted, Mr. Smithee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SMITHEE: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Question occurs on passage to third reading of House Bill 2603. All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it. House Bill 2603 is passed to third reading. House Bill 2990 is laid out on second reading, House Bill 2990. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2990 by Deshotel. Relating to the electronic storage of personal identification information obtained from driver's licenses or personal identification certificates.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Members, House Bill 2990 makes changes to current law to allow driver's licenses to be scanned, instead of manually keyed in at the point of sale. I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2990? All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2990 is finally passed to third reading. The Chair lays out House Bill 1937. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1937 by Simpson. Relating to prosecution and punishment for the offense of official oppression by the intrusive touching of persons seeking access to public buildings and transportation; providing penalties.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Simpson. Members, Ms. Thompson is making her way to the back mic and she'll let us know what she's planning to do when she gets there.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mrs. Thompson?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: I'm going to remove my point of order on two conditions.

THE CHAIR: State your conditions.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: The first condition is his wife was very kind to my grandchild at the Easter egg hunt, when she allowed my grandchild to get a (inaudible) balloon out of her purse. So on behalf of his wife, in honor of his wife, that's reason one.

THE CHAIR: Reason one is acceptable.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: And the second reason is because of Mr. Hoover, Representative Hoover.

THE CHAIR: Thank you for your great --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Hamilton?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Does the gentleman know that I actually healed his bill by talking to Ms. Thompson.

THE CHAIR: I don't think anyone understood that. Say it again.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: We healed his bill. I got -- I healed it. Healed it.

THE CHAIR: Okay. Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID SIMPSON: I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Could you heal the rest of the bills on the calendar, Mr. Hamilton? Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1937? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 1937 is finally passed. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3030. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3030 by McClendon. Relating to the funding of projects in the boundaries of certain inter-municipal commuter rail districts.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mrs. McClendon.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: This bill will allow cities and counties to work with all -- with rail districts supervise provide open structures for a passenger rail system --

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3030? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3030 is passed to third reading.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: Please state your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Does Mr. Simpson know that he needs a Senate sponsor to pass this bill?

THE CHAIR: I'm sure Mrs. Thompson --

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Or is it just a House Bill?

THE CHAIR: Yeah. I think this is just a House Bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES KEFFER: Just a House Bill, all right.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out on second reading HB 3237. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3237 by Hernandez Luna. Relating to the establishment and operation of the Texas Women's Veterans Program.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mrs. Hernandez Luna.

REPRESENTATIVE ANA HERNANDEZ LUNA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House Bill 3237 would allow for establishment of Texas Women's Veterans Program within the Texas Veteran's Commission. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3237? All those in favor, say aye, all those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3237 is finally passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3320. The clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3320 by Hunter. Relating to costs related to the towing and storage of a motor vehicle for certain law enforcement purposes.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: It provides judicial discretion with towing.

THE CHAIR: Anyone wish to speak for or against House Bill 3320? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3320 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on third reading House Bill 3439. The clerk will please read us the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3439 by Raymond. Relating to missing children; providing a criminal penalty.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD RAYMOND: Members, this bill makes it a state crime to remove children from the United States or retain a child outside the U.S. with intent to obstruct the parents custody rights, and we have a perfecting amendment.

THE CHAIR: Amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Raymond.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD RAYMOND: Members, simply this is an exception to the application to Subsection 83, it replaces with subsection 83 does not apply.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Raymond offers up an amendment and it's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3439? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have. It House Bill 3439 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 1681 on second reading and the clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1681 by Harless. Relating to the composition of the Finance Commission of Texas.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Representative Harless.

REPRESENTATIVE PATRICIA HARLESS: Mr. Speaker, Thank you. Mr. Speaker, members, House Bill 1681 modifies membership on finance commission by replacing one member.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1681? All those a favor say aye, all those opposed say nay. House Bill 1681 is passed to third reading. Mrs. Woolley?

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: Mr. Speaker, are we on the Local and Consent Calendar?

THE CHAIR: No, ma'am. That is your business.

REPRESENTATIVE BEVERLY WOOLLY: And if we are, why are you up there and not me?

THE CHAIR: No, no, absolutely we are not. Chair lays out House Bill 3474 and the clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3474 by Gallego. Relating to criminal offenses regarding the possession or consumption of alcoholic beverages by a minor and providing alcoholic beverages to a minor.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE REPRESENTATIVE GALLEGO: M r. Gallego, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. House Bill 3474 is some provision to prosecution of a minor in the alcoholic beverage code and I move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3474? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. House Bill 3474 is passed the third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 3624 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3624 by Hochberg. Relating to the eligibility of educational aides for tuition exemptions at public institutions of higher education.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hochberg.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members. This bill limits the eligibility of educational aid to strategic fields and shortage areas. And I believe there is an amendment. And I believe there is an amendment.

THE CHAIR: Amendment Chair lays out the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Hochberg.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Hochberg, please.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, the amendment just to make sure the students who are currently receiving these scholarships continue to receive them, so that this doesn't go into effect for new students. It's acceptable to the author and I move adoption.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Hochberg offers up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is documented. Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3624?

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Thank you. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it House Bill 3624 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 19. The clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 19 by Riddle. Relating to the prosecution and punishment of a person operating a motor vehicle without a license.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mrs. Riddle.

REPRESENTATIVE DEBBIE RIDDLE: This is a stand alone bill, members, that we passed a minute ago as an amendment. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Representative Alonzo?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I just want to ask her a couple of questions.

THE CHAIR: Mrs. Riddle? She has yielded the mic, she has yielded the mic, Mr. Alonzo. I apologize.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well, is there (inaudible) I want to (inaudible).

THE CHAIR: If you want to speak against the bill come down front and you can do that, Mr. Alonzo. Members are waiting on you. Chair recognizes Mr. Alonzo in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker, members, I rise to speak against this legislation. It's -- And one of the reasons I'm doing it is you can, as you can tell, this is like a pattern of increasing penalties. We're going from a Class C, two hundred-dollar fine to Class B, following the same pattern of increasing penalties. And the question becomes what for? And, to me, I'm not going to get into that discussion again about -- rights, but think about this: We're -- we're increasing a penalty if you don't have a driver's license. Why don't we do -- if let's say in the case of the 15 year-old we're going to punish him with a crime for driving without a, license so shouldn't the other side of the coin be not that I'm agreeing at that we should, but then think about why we're doing it. You're 15 years old, go get a pass, a license that says you're 15 years old. Go get a driver's license, because if you get stopped for driving without a license then we're going to increase the punishment on you. It only sounds logical, that's what we should be doing instead of just out having a backhanded opportunity to correct what could be a possible problem.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, I yield.

THE CHAIR: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Representative Alonzo, if the author of the bill had been professional and to entertain your question, what would question -- what question would you have asked of the author of the bill?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: The questions I would ask was why you increasing the penalty? What -- And, in addition, I wouldn't like to belabor the point, but why don't you create an opportunity for that individual, in this case, you know, that's the -- let's say an example, for the 15 year old, because if you're going to punish him. How can you fix the punishment? And you'll say well, then you're not supposed to drive. Well, then you're punishing him for driving. So why don't give an opportunity to get a license if that's a possibility.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So if the question is about increasing the punishment, and you're concerned about increasing the punishment, why do you think the author wants to increase the punishment?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well, because she didn't come to the front of the mic to discuss it it'll never know. And I think, even though we're rushing, we're rushing to try to pass other people's bills, other member's bills, then the other part of the story is you still have a case of questions that somebody should be here to answer that question.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And you were speculating earlier, but you don't really have anybody that's man enough or woman enough to answer the question. Is there a theme in the bills that we're seeing tonight?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well, there's a theme. And if -- Yes. And then the other part of the story is this: One of the items that we've dealt with through the years is what's called a driver's license responsibility program. Which imposes a surcharge to be paid. And people lose their license. So on the one hand, we want to punish them with criminal sanction and a higher sanction for not having a license, holding a license, and on the other hand we take it away because they don't have the money to pay for the surcharge that we imposed on them. In fact, I think it was a good point, in fact, we the house research organization has pointed out that this is tantamount to creating a debtor's prison.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: A debtor's prison? Well that's a real retrogression of another nature, isn't it?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: That's correct. So I mean and like I say why, did she walk away? We could have asked these questions. But -- but I'm glad that the House (inaudible) organization was able to but the put together this (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Do you think there's an amendment in this bill, it just one of those retrogressive bills that just remind me why my family left England, because wanted to get out of the debtor's prisons.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: No, I think that I didn't bring it up this time, but the amendment I had on the former bill could've fixed the problem, because, if you recall on the amendment they presented it had to do with whether you're eligible to get a driver's license. And in the case of this situation, you're not able to. So why are you punishing a person that's not able to get a driver's license. On the one hand. On the other hand, there's no provision here that says that, for example, as I pointed out, both that owners are under the surcharge problem. They don't have the money, they don't have the money to pay the surcharges. As a result they lose their licenses, not only do they not have money, now, we're going to put them in jail on a higher punishment.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So are you hoping, as I am hoping, that this bill will die somewhere between here and there in the Senate?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you. Members, I ask that you vote no on this legislation.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 19? All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 19 is passed the third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 3794. Clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3794 Hildebran. Relating to powers and duties of the Office of Public Utility Counsel to represent residential and small commercial consumers in certain water or sewer utility service matters before the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Hilderbran.

REPRESENTATIVE HARVEY HILDEBRAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill that was passed last year and (inaudible) Senate and move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3754? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3754 is passed to third reading. House Bill 3833. The clerk will read the bill on second reading.

THE CLERK: HB 3833 by Phillips. Relating to the adoption of a uniform collaborative law Act in regard to family law matters.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you. This collaborative family law matters. I move passage

(inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3833? All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3833 is passed to third reading.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out House Bill 3018 on second reading. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3018 by Gutierrez. Relating to a policy of a school district concerning possession or use of a telecommunications device by a student.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Gutierrez.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm very proud to have as joint author my esteemed colleague, Will Hartnett. Basically this codifies the education code that changed the possession of a cellular phone, it allows the school districts to establish policies on distribution of cellular phones and ultimately gives them back. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 3018? All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3018 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2365.

THE CLERK: HB 2365 by Eissler. Relating to the composition of the First, Tenth, and Fourteenth Courts of Appeals Districts.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Eissler. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is the education research centers. 2006 Legislature created three ERC's to benefit education in Texas and I believe there's some questions. I'll yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Farias?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Would the gentleman yield for a couple of questions?

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Chairman Eissler I've been waiting on House Bill 400 for a few days. I wasn't able to get my amendment on it, so I figured I'd ask a couple of questions on this one. How many (inaudible) how many research centers do we have in the State of Texas?

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Three.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Three. And where are they located? I haven't heard of them so --

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: UT Austin, A&M and UT Dallas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Austin, Dallas and where?

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: And College Station.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: College Station?

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: It take a little longer.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: What now? I'm sorry. I heard something over here about A&M.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Okay. We -- is this an unfunded mandate are we mandating?

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: No, actually they support themselves through research grants and they charge for their services, too.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: The reason I ask you, is I've been up at the front on the mic a couple of times, and I've been asked a lot of questions about unfunded mandates and governing to the school districts that we're telling them what to do, and not letting them operate as an individual --

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Right. This is not a school district deal.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: These are not school district mandates.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Okay. And the board, what does the board consist of? Is there a board that governs them? Is that what --

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: There's an advisory board -- they have a joint (inaudible) where -- I believe there's a amendment that expands the advisory board by Mr. Strama.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Okay. And it's coming up.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: He's got his amendments now.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. The clerk will please read the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Strama.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Strama to explain his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK REPRESENTATIVE STRAMA: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment -- in the bill, there's a joint advisory board being put into statute that already exists (inaudible) in rule -- We're adding the ability for the universities that host these CRC's, the president of those universities can appoint some of these commissioners, these joint advisory boards. And I believe it is acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Strama offers up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Mrs. Farrar?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Parliament ary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: Please state your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Aren't we supposed to be taking up postponed business right now? Doesn't that come before what we're doing right now.

THE CHAIR: No, it does not. Mr. Burnam?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Parliamentary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: Please state your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I have been looking for Representative Eissler since 6:00 o'clock. Now, that he's here can I ask him a question?

THE CHAIR: Only if it's on the bill that's before us.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Only if it's on the bill that is before us?

THE CHAIR: Correct. Chair lays out the amendment clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Strama.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Strama.

REPRESENTATIVE MARK REPRESENTATIVE STRAMA: T his is really one that -- that requires that data be held confidential and stored confidentially, whether it's student data or anyone else's data that is collected for purpose of this research. And it's acceptable to the author.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Strama offers up an amendment. It's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered. Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House bill 2365? All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2365 is finally passed to third reading. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 59. The clerk will please read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 59 by Martinez. Relating to recipients of financial assistance administered by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Martinez.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members, this bill increases the number of housing units for those who are classified as very low income. And I believe we have an amendment.

THE CHAIR: There's an amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Guillen.

THE CHAIR: Representative Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this amendment allows communities without neighborhood organizations to equally protect project and establish --

THE CHAIR: Representative Guillen offers up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 59? All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 59 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 96. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 96 by Fletcher. Relating to the exclusion of certain witnesses during certain criminal proceedings.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Fletcher.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill is relating to the exclusion of certain witnesses during a criminal proceeding. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 96? All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 96 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out House Bill 326. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 326 by Guillen. Relating to the reporting requirements of, and certain unfunded mandates related to the functions of, a state agency that is undergoing review by the Sunset Advisory Commission.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Guillen.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill will allow agencies that sunset reviewed the option 9inaudible) review the opportunity to sunset commission obsolete and date reporting documents and I move passage (inaudible).

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment. Mrs. Davis?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I was trying to ask Representative Guillen --

THE CHAIR: I'll bring him back up. Mr. Guillen, would you yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: T hank you. Representative Guillen, tell me what you're doing?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: During the sunset process for every agency, we're asking them to submit to the sunset commission a list of the reports that they think are obsolete. They submit that to the sunset commission and to the legislature and then, at that time, through the sunset process, we can decide as the legislature and as the sunset commission for the recommendations whether or not we can go ahead and do away with those reports that they think are obsolete.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I s your bill telling the agency to submit the previous reports they've done to --

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: No. We're asking them to submit a list of reports they think are obsolete.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: F rom whom -- Where do these reports come from?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: These have reports that were previously passed by the legislature asking them to provide a report. But there's a lot of reports out there that they're having to do every year that are obsolete. So this will gives us list that the things are obsolete, for us to decide whether they're obsolete or not.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Y ou know, one of my concerns with this is what you're doing is that we're telling -- we're allowing the sunset commission, we're giving them reports from the agency and we really want the sunset commission -- it's my understanding that we want the sunset commission to review the agencies in terms of whether or not they need to be continued, based on what value they bring to the state. And I'm worried that when you start having the agencies give the report to the sunset commission, it's going to undermine the review process that sunset is supposed to be going through to determine the value to the state.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: They will be reporting to the legislature as well. Same report will go to the sunset commission and to the legislature. And it's about obsolete reports that we don't have to be spending money on anyway, if we decide to do so.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: C ould you give me an example of what you are talking about? And the reason -- I just want to be sure that we're not underminings our sunset process. Because right now that's the only real review process that we have for various agencies, and one of the things about this whole sunset process is to have some determination that the value is still important for that agency for the state. And if we do anything to undermine that, I think that would be a mistake. And (inaudible) make clear.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: We're absolutely not undermining it. We're just having the agency submit a list to them and to us.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: A nd so what value would this list have in determining the role -- what the work of sunset --

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: The value would be that we have a list to look at that we can analyze to see if, in fact, they're obsolete. Then we can do away with it and save the time and money we're spending on the agency to do something that's obsolete.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: B ut we don't want sunset to go and review (inaudible) past reports. We want them to do a clear evaluation, independent evaluation, of what that state agency provides to the state. We don't want them to take a list and (inaudible) which are still viable.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: They don't decide. They're going to continue to do what they do. But through this bill they're going to have -- we're going to have a list that we can look at to decide whether or not there's reports out there that are obsolete that we can do away with. Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Chair lays out the amendment. The clerk will please read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Torres.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Torres Mr. Torres on the floor of the House? Amendment withdrawn. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Callegari.

THE CHAIR: Chair recognizes Mr. Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Members, this amendment basically asks the sunset commission to review mandates and report any particular mandates and it have to the House and the governor and others.

THE CHAIR: Representative Callegari offers up an amendment. It's acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Amendment's adopted. Representative Farrar?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Calleg ari?

THE CHAIR: We've adopted his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Could he explain what that was that we --

THE CHAIR: Go ahead, Mr. Callegari, why not?

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: (Inaudible ) asked the sunset commission to review any mandates and report that to the legislature.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Representative Guillen to close.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Move passage.

THE CHAIR: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against House Bill 326? All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. HB 326 is passed to third reading. Chair lays out the matter of postponed business House Bill 3477. The clerk will read the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

THE CLERK: HB 3477 by Carter. Relating to the suspension of a person's driver's license or permit on conviction of a fifth offense relating to the operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Representative Farrar?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Parliament ary inquiry.

THE CHAIR: Please state your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Back to the question about postponed business, HB 137 was postponed business, it was postponed for 10:45 and it was after other postpone business?

THE CHAIR: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Including the Coleman bill, including HB (inaudible) and others, so can you explain how that was taken up?

THE CHAIR: Yes. The parliamentarian is

(inaudible) other points of order. If you'd like, you can bring those other bills back up and wait and have the parliamentarian figure those out.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Are the rulings prepared for those other bills?

THE CHAIR: That's the point, I don't believe they are.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Pardon me?

THE CHAIR: I don't believe that they are.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Thank you.

THE CHAIR: Thank you. Chair recognizes Mrs. Carter.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill, excuse me, I'd like to take up and consider this bill, House Bill 3477 --

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker?

THE CHAIR: Ms. Thompson? Mrs. Carter, continue.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: What this bill does is it says if you've been convicted five times of DWIs then your license will be suspended. And there are two amendments. Or three amendments.

THE CHAIR: Ms. Thompson?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: I'd like to call two points of order on this one.

THE CHAIR: Absolutely. Bring it on down.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: HB 519 was inadvertently placed on page 14. In the spirit of republicanism, I would move to suspend the rules to take up and consider 519. Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: It was inadvertently placed on page 14.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: I'm terribly sorry to hear that.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: I said I'm sorry to hear that. Would you like to bring your motion to --

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: I don't wish to raise a point of order on the calendar's committee. I will accept a motion to suspend the rules from Chairman Hunter. It should have been on May

(audible) Mr. Speaker? I will remove the previous question on HB 519.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Is Mr. Hunter on the floor of the House? Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: I was wondering if the point of order that was raised on this bill, if that's still in effect.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The point of order has been withdrawn.

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Then I'd like to reinstitute it.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: What is that, please?

REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON: Then I would wish to raise the point of order upon further consideration of House Bill 3477. It's the same one that was down there that was withdrawn. I have reinstituted it.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Point of order is temporarily withdrawn. Chair recognizes Representative Carter.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I am going to temporarily postpone my bill until 11:25 p.m. tonight.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading as matter a of postponed business House Bill 230.

THE CLERK: HB 230 by Phillips. Relating to the authority of a county to regulate the location of halfway houses in the unincorporated areas of the county; providing a penalty.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, we left this bill at a point of order. It's House Bill 230. The point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of passage of House Bill 230. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. House Bill 230 is passed to engrossment. Members, Senate Companion to House Bill 655 is over and eligible. Accordingly, Chair lays out Senate Bill 420.

THE CLERK: Clerk, read the bill. SB 420 by Duelle. Relating to determining eligibility for indigent health care.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill helps Lynn county with indigent health care program. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Eiland, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Taylor, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Mr. Taylor, could you just explain a little bit more about the bill? I mean I saw someone from Lynn county who testified in favor of it. I saw that the catholic bishop testified against, and it so can you tell me what basically -- Do y'all have a problem with this in Lynn county?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Sure. Resident legal aliens in this country. Typically have a citizen sponsor, that U.S. citizen sponsors a sworn affidavit promising to provide for health care for that resident legal alien. This bill would allow the county, as per federal law, to the income and assets of the U.S. citizen sponsor for the resident legal alien.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: And when -- Is this the sponsor is this sponsor a relative or is it for the -- a work purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: The I864 is typically signed by a relative of the resident legal alien. But it does not necessarily have to be that.

REPRESENTATIVE CRAIG EILAND: Okay. Because we have a lot of central Americans that come in and work on oyster boats and shrimp boats, and I'm not sure if they come in under this program and these affidavits or different program and different afterwards.

REPRESENTATIVE VAN TAYLOR: Since this is a Senate Bill, and you and I have some questions to answer, I move to suspend further consideration until 7:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading HB 773. The clerk will read the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: HB 773 by Anchia. Relating to creating an energy efficiency council to coordinate administration of energy efficiency programs.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Anchia.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I believe this is the energy efficiency coordinating counsel bill, and I have a perfecting amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Anchia.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Anchia.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This amendment simply clarifies that the retail electric providers are not included in the definition of program administrator, and it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Anchia sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE RAPHAEL ANCHIA: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 773. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 773 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 823.

THE CLERK: HB 823 by Farrar. Relating to the liability of certain social workers who provide volunteer health care services to charitable organizations.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker, members, what this bill does is it during times of emergencies, during times of disasters, it extends the liability to social workers to work in those areas. It's -- It will -- it falls in line with some of the other good Samaritan's immunity laws that we have. And, you know, if you've never experienced what social workers can do, I really encourage you to do so. They seem to be able to find where all the maggots are, how to help people, how to (inaudible) all sorts of levels. And so I would -- I would encourage you to support the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Aliseda, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: I raise a point of order on this bill, violation of Rule 7, Section 37A. The motion to reconsider must be made by the prevailing side.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. Point of order is temporarily withdrawn. Representative Farrar moves to postpone consideration of this bill until 11:35 p.m. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 720. Clerk, read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 720 by Hartnett. Relating to the designation of a person as a vexatious litigant.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hartnett.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill makes minor changes to the vexatious litigant statute that they passed back in the '90s. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 720. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 720 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 875. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 870 by Howard. Relating to the identification of certain defendants as foreign nationals who were not lawfully admitted to the United States or whose lawful status has expired and to their release on bail.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M embers --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, I raise a point of order. Rule 4, Section 20A and 2.

THE CHAIR: Bring your point of order down front.

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Weber, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBER: I'd like to move that the exchange between David Simpson and Ms. Thompson be reduced to writing and put into the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Point of order is temporarily withdrawn. Chair recognizes --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: I wish to postpone this bill until 11:40.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 892. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 892 by Howard of Fort Bend. Relating to the creation of the offense of unlawful transport of an illegal alien.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Howard.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M embers, this bill basically said that someone knowingly is transporting an illegal and they're trying to avoid suspect of the -- the authorities that that -- move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Alonzo, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I have a couple of questions for the gentleman, please.

REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: Yeah.

THE CHAIR: Mr. Howard, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Okay, Mr. Howard. What are you trying to do with this bill?

REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: What this bill is based on is Chairman Thompson's bill. It's said if someone knowingly is transporting an illegal for numeration, in other words, they're getting paid, for the purpose of injury that purpose, then it's a felony.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: So what is the punishment right now?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: R ight now there is none that I'm aware of.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Is there federal law regarding this right now?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: I 'm not aware of it. It's very similar to Chairman Thompson's bill.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: So, you don't know whether there's a federal law right now?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: T his bill came out of committee 9-0. Representative Gallego's for it. It's an illegal transport bill. All it's doing is trying to protect, particularly women, transported illegally for prostitution for the purposes.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: That's why I'm trying to get information -- See, when you do this type of legislation it kind of raises questions. And all I'm trying to do is ask you a couple of questions.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: I 'm sorry, Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: All I'm trying to do is ask you a couple questions and that's why I'm asking you questions right now. Again, tell me why you're doing it. And I understood what you said. Representative Gallego is for it and a couple of people are for it.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: H e's for the bills (inaudible) passed out of committee. He just passed me a note said he's for the bill.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Now, I discussed if you knew -- I asked if you knew if it was federal legislation --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: I do not know. I do not know the answer to that question.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Can I ask you why you don't know?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: W hy what?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Why you don't know that there's federal laws already regarding this?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: W hy do I not know the federal law?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: T here are a lot of laws I don't know.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well, specifically on this one, did you think it would be important to know whether it's a federal law since you're dealing with this issue?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: T his bill is to protect women who are being transported illegally in this state, primarily between El Paso and Houston, is the most trafficked area for this transportation, for illegal prostitution. That's what this bill is to prevent.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 892. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 892 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1046. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1046 by Fletcher. Relating to the persons authorized to take a blood specimen from a vehicle operator to test for alcohol concentration or other intoxicating substances.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Fletcher.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill relates to the confidentiality of certain information regarding former employees of certain divisions in the office of the Attorney General. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Thompson, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker, we cannot hear what he is saying. I think the microphone is -- where he was turned off.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill deals with the confidentiality of certain personnel information concerning certain and form employees of certain divisions of the office of the Attorney General.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: What kind of confidential information? Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker. Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Thompson, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: I'm really asking you these questions for information purposes.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: What kind of confidentiality (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: I'm sorry, Mrs. Thompson, I can't hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: What are you doing with the Attorney General's --

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN KUEMPEL: Ms. Thompson , what we're trying to do is keep personal information like addresses, phone numbers and information on the members in the department, who might have worked on -- that might have worked on child support cases and they now are not in that division, they've moved over to other areas. We had this bill last session and it died in the (inaudible) and we just brought it back up in this session.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Is this the bill that Mr. Branch gave you?

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Is this the bill that Mr. Branch gave you?

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: I don't think I've spoken to Mr. Branch about this.

REPRESENTATIVE SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN FLETCHER: Thank you, Ms. Thompson.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1046. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Ayes have it House Bill 1046 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1363. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1363 by McClendon. Relating to the transfer of permit procedures and enforcement related to oversize and overweight vehicles from the Texas Department of Transportation to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative McClendon.

REPRESENTATIVE RUTH JONES MCCLENDON: This bill moves oversized and overweight permitting and seek us from TexDOT to the new DMD collaboration between DMV, TexDOT and the other motor carriers (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1363. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 1363 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1408. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1408 by Flynn. Relating to combination resident hunting and fishing licenses for military personnel.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Flynn.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN FLYNN: Thank you Mr. Speaker, members, this bill (inaudible) wildlife to them foundation hunting and fishing license package for our veterans. And those members of Texas military forces. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1408. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 1408 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 1429. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1429 by Deshotel. Relating to rights and remedies of certain residential tenants; providing civil penalties.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Deshotel.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Following amendment, the clerk will read the amendment.

THE CLERK: Amendment by Deshotel.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Mr. Speaker, this amendment just clarifies -- clarifies the

(inaudible) bill which requires a landlord --

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Dukes, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Deshotel, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Yeah.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Representati ve Deshotel, what does this bill do?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: What does this bill do? Requires a landlord (inaudible) on the third business day to date the lessees fine by each point to the lease provided at least one copy of the; lease to at least one tenant who is a party to the lease. Many times the lessee did not get a copy of a lease and then they are required to live up to certain obligations and fines and things of that nature and state that they had no idea in a they are required to do that, other than (inaudible) they couldn't have a dog, so they require them provide them a copy of the lease within three days.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: So this is to protect the tenant?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Thank you. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Deshotel sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none the amendment is adopted.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DESHOTEL: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on the adoption of House Bill 1429. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 1429 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out House Bill 1497. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1497 by Howard of Travis. Relating to the allocation of certain federal career and technical education funds.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Howard.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill would put the allegation of federal Perkens funds --

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Veasey, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Could you ask for some order, because I'm really into technical education and I would like to hear more about Mrs. Howard's bill?

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: W ould you like to ask some questions?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I would like to. I noticed that there's an technical education component in there, something that I feel very strongly about. I like the word career, a little it a bit better than I like technical education centers, but would you tell me a little bit more about the bill?

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: S ure. There are federal Perkens funds are for technology education (inaudible) that are split between secondary education and higher education. And the funds have been split based on a collaboration between public ed and higher ed. The split was 70/30 when it was first -- I'm sorry, the split was 60/40 when it was started in 2000. With the new career technology education plan in 2007 the State Board of Education changed to it a 70/30 split. And what we're trying to do is put it back to 60/40.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: How will this help local school districts?

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: W hat it's doing is it's helping both local and higher education. We have career technology at both public education and higher education institutions, and the fact is that the change was made in an agreed upon split between higher and public ed. It was agreed upon in a unilateral change was made to change that agreed upon split, and instead of having it 60/40 it became 70/30. This is going back to the originally agreed upon split.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Oh, good.

REPRESENTATIVE DONNA REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: T hank you. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1497. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 1491 passed to engrossment. I'm sorry, members, a record's vote has been requested. A record vote has been granted on House Bill 1497. Clerk ring the bell. Show Representative Keffer voting no. Show Representative Dukes voting aye. Representative -- Have all voted? Being 65 ayes, 78 nays, House Bill 1497 fails. Members, Senate Bill Companion to House Bill 2282 is over and eligible. Accordingly, the Chair lays out Senate Bill 1165. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: SB 1165 by Corona. Relating to certain enforcement powers of the banking commissioner; providing administrative penalties.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Truitt.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, the bank and commissioners charged with prompt probating (inaudible) state bank and trust companies. This bill (inaudible) the commissioner's ability to issue remove or prohibition orders to remove bad actors from the banking industry. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Will the gentle lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Truitt, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Certainly.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Ms. Truitt , I don't recall if you recall but two years ago we were switched in our roles. Do you remember? Right about midnight.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I'm sorry, I don't.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Remember I had the last bill. It was right at midnight.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: (Inaudible) 18, 17 minutes of so.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Pardon me?

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I think it's about 17 minutes of.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Yeah. No. I was just thinking that -- I was just wondering if you recall that moment.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: I'm sorry, Jessica, I don't.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Really, I'm very disappointed. It was very special to me.

REPRESENTATIVE VICKI TRUITT: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of Senate Bill 1165. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Ayes have it. Senate Bill 1165 is passed to engrossment. Representative Truitt moves to lay House Bill 2282 on the table subject to call. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out as matter of postponed business House Bill 885. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 875 by Howard of Fort Bend. Relating to the identification of certain defendants as foreign nationals who were not lawfully admitted to the United States or whose lawful status has expired and to their release on bail.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, when we picked this bill up there was a point of order pending by Representative Burnam. Point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Howard.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: M embers, all this bill does is currently, under current law, when someone is arrested their immigration status is checked and they are held for ICE. All this bill does is would notify the judge for flight risk. Move passage (inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Alonzo?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Yeah, just for a -- (inaudible) (inaudible) just a couple of questions.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Okay. One question.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: O ne question?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Is it possible for you to tell us who else on the committee supported your bill?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE REPRESENTATIVE HOWARD: A ll nother members of the committee that came out of the House. (inaudible) every member supported the bill on the committee. I thank you for your committee. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 875 --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Parliamentary --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I would like an explanation on the ruling that was just now. I have three precedents that suggest that the point should have been upheld.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Burnam, the Chair has examined the witness affirmation card.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry, Mr. Speaker. I cannot hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The Chair has reviewed the witness affirmation card, and prior precedents of the House. The witness -- the witness affirmation form contains sufficient information from the witness, which is the basis of our prior ruling.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, I didn't hear you. I'm not going to try to delay. I'm going to come down and get further explanation.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on the adoption of House Bill -- passage to engrossment of House Bill 875. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 875 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out as a matter of postponed business House Bill 1386. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 1386 by Coleman. Relating to the public health threat presented by youth suicide.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, when we left this bill there was a point of order. The point of order has been withdrawn. Chair recognizes Representative Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: T hank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, first of all, I would like to thank Representative Creighton for removing his point of order. What this bill does is to try to keep students and kids (inaudible) from emotional challenges that harm their lives. And I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Coleman? Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: O h, I'm sorry (inaudible) I said Brandon Creighton. I really did.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Coleman, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: I yield, yes, ma'am. I'm sorry.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Creigh ton, a similar bill passed a few days ago. I don't remember the day, because the days are running together for me right now. Can you explain the differences between this bill and Representative Patrick's bill that passed?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: R epresentative Patrick's bill --

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Oh, I'm sorry. One follow up question. And how were -- this bill affect the bill that's passed?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: O ne, it won't affect that bill at all. It says what I have done is make sure that this that bill is a hundred percent incorporated as amended on the floor in this bill, so it has two opportunities to pass. Number two, the difference is this bill actually looks at the causes for distress among students for whatever reason it may be, and we try to intervene in circumstances where students appear to be having trouble and then direct them to their parent, so their parents can move them away from whatever it comes from. Test anxiety, issues at home, issues with other students where there's a mental -- potential mental health issue, where the parents actually are the decision makers in those scenarios. And that's not in Representative Patrick's bill.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: People were speaking and I couldn't hear the whole thing. Does your bill have the (inaudible) that Representative Patrick's bill does not have?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET REPRESENTATIVE COLEMAN: I don't know, Jessica. But it's time to stop. All right. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1386. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 1386. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 1386 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2443. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2443 by Price. Relating to the offense of remaining, parking vehicles, or erecting structures on certain state property.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Price.

REPRESENTATIVE WALTER PRICE: Mr. Speaker, members, this bill extends some restrictions currently after the state rest (inaudible) to highway right-of-ways. I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2443. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2443 is passed engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2449. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2449 by Aliseda. Relating to the illegal possession of another person's ballot to be voted by mail.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Aliseda.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Members, this raises too much legal possession of another person's ballot to vote by mail. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker, doesn't it raise a point of order under section 32 analysis that the bill analysis is substantially immaterial or misleading?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. Point of order is withdrawn.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker? Can I ask a couple of questions, please?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Aliseda has yielded the floor.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Aliseda.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 2449. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 2449 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3390. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3290 by Lavender. Relating to money allocated under the federal-aid highway program.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Lavender.

REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE LAVENDER: This bill relates to money, highway national, highway transportation fund, I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 3390. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. The ayes have it. House Bill 3390 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 3736. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 3736 by Martinez. Relating to appointment of a department head of a fire or police department in certain municipalities.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Martinez.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is to appoint a fire chief under chapter 143 under -- chapter 143 (inaudible) move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Order, please. Will the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Armando, does this bill impact the Houston Fire Department?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Well, it impacts every fire department in the State of Texas. What it does is currently you have certain requirements in order to be chief of a fire department under Chapter 143 of the local government code, so all this is saying is that nobody can appoint themselves as a department head, they must have the criteria, they must have the criteria under (inaudible) fire chief and that's exactly what it does.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Does it affect civil service in any way?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: It is -- it is a part of civil service. You're just following the requirements under civil service in order to be the fire chief. So in that way, if you are the department head you must be able to fall within to that so that you can be a fire chief.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: I'm sorry, so that -- I'm having difficulty hearing. Mr. Speaker, I'm having difficulty hearing. Could we have order, please?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Could we have order, please?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Could you repeat that, Mr. Martinez?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Yes. All it is saying that in order to be a fire chief you must fulfill the requirements under Chapter 143 and you can't be a department head appointed. So that's all that does is it.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: And what is Section 143?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: 143 is the local governing code that you are under if you're under civil service, if you are a firefighter. Okay. Could you explain that?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Could I what?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Could you explain that?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Chapter 143 is where you are elected -- you're placed on a ballot, Chapter 143 is the -- your -- the voter's voted in, and you fall under that government code so that you have the bargaining right as a firefighter.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Okay. Is this part of the -- how would it affect local union 341 in Houston?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Excuse me?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: How would it affect local union 341 in Houston?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Well, it would just -- It would just help them if they're going to appoint a fire chief. And I move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Mr. Speaker? I have a series of questions I'd like to ask.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: I believe he's yielded the mic.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Now hold on. This does affect my community and --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: You'll have a chance to ask him on third reading. He's yielded the floor. The question occurs on passage to engrossment of House Bill 3736. All those in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. All opposed nay. Ayes have it. House Bill 3736 is passed to engrossment. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 800. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 800 by Anderson of McClendon. Relating to an interlocal contract between a governmental entity and a purchasing cooperative to purchase roofing materials or services.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Anderson.

REPRESENTATIVE RODNEY ANDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill has to do with any local

(inaudible) transparency. Move passage.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Dukes, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Anderson?

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: Does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: He's yielded the floor.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWNNA DUKES: He's yielded the floor? Well then, I raise a point of order for further consideration of House Bill HB 800 --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. Chair lays out on second reading House Bill 2828. The clerk will read the bill.

THE CLERK: HB 2828 by Callegari. Relating to the offense of coercing a person to have or seek an abortion and informed and voluntary consent for an abortion; providing penalties.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Anderson move to postpone this bill until 11:59 p.m. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Anderson.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Move passage. Representative Anchia has asked to speak against the bill. Mr. Alonzo, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. -- somebody's going to speak against the bill?

THE CHAIR: Mr. Anchia has asked to speak against the bill, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well before he does that, Mr. Speaker, I have another point of order under Rule 4, Section 18D, Rule 4, Section 28, Rule 4, section 32B and --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front.

REPRESENTATIVE JASON ISAAC: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Isaac, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JASON ISAAC: Parliamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JASON ISAAC: In honor of our members from El Paso, would you accept a motion to operate under El Paso's time?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Not at this time. Mr. Miller, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: I've recognized Mr. Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE SID MILLER: Mr. Speaker, I'd like to raise a point of order. Under Rule 8, Section 13B. No other House Bill or joint resolution shall be considered on its second reading after the 122nd day of the regular session if it appears on a daily or supplemental daily House calendar for any purpose after the 100th day of the regular session.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Miller, your point of order is well taken and sustained. Members, if you have any announcements bring them down front. Members, are there any other announcements? If not, Representative Simpson and Representative Thompson moves the House stands adjourned pending the reading and referral of bills and resolutions until 10:00 tomorrow. The House stands adjourned. Following bills on first reading and referral:

THE CLERK: HCR 159 (By Hughes), Designating Marshall as the official Birthplace of Boogie Woogie. To Culture, Recreation, and Tourism. HR 1851 (By D. Howard), congratulating Austin Wayne Self on his victory in the opening event of the 2011 NASCAR Texas Whelen All-American Series. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1853 (By Naishtat), In memory of Alfred Richard Castello of Austin. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1854 (By Kolkhorst), Recognizing May 8-14, 2011, as National Hospital Week in Texas. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1855 (By Reynolds), Conmmending Fort Bend county commissioner Grady Prestage for his service to the community. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1856 (By Reynolds), In memory of Acie John Butler of Houston. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1857 (By Reynolds), Honoring Stephen K. Brown II for his service as chair of the Fort Bend County Democratic Party. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1858 (By Reynolds), In memory of Richard David Jones, Jr. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1859 (By Reynolds), Congratulating Danielle Murray Moss of Fleming Elementary School in Houston for being named 2011-2012 Elementary Teacher of the Year by the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1860 (By Reynolds), Congratulating Yolanda Clarke of Travis High School in Richmond for being named 2011-2012 Secondary Teacher of the Year by the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1861 (By Reynolds), Congratulating the Honorable Joel C. Clouser, Sr., on his 18 years of service as justice of the peace of Precinct 2 in Fort Bend County. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1862 (By Reynolds), Honoring Carlos A. Garcia for his service as secretary of the Fort Bend County Democratic Party. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1863 (By Reynolds), Commending Vivian Burley for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1864 (By Reynolds), Commending Shana Barron for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1865 (By Reynolds), Commending JoAnne Johnson for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1866 (By Reynolds), Commending Alma Ramirez for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1867 (By Reynolds), Commending Kiesha Guillory for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1868 (By Reynolds), Commending Clarissa Heard for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1869 (By Reynolds), Commending Geraldine Pace for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1870 (By Reynolds), Commending Doris Edwards for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1871 (By Reynolds), Commending Bernice Coleman for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1872 (By Reynolds), Commending Stevenia Love for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1873 (By Reynolds), Commending Kristi Mack for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1874 (By Reynolds), Commending Renee Blankson for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1875 (By Reynolds), Commending Kimberly Warren for her service as a Volunteers in Public Schools coordinator in the Fort Bend Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1876 (By Madden), Honoring the legislative interns of State Representative Jerry Madden. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1877 (By Madden), Honoring Kathy Ward for her service as a Collin County commissioner. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1878 (By Madden), Honoring Steve Deffibaugh on his retirement as the fire marshal of Collin County. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1879 (By Madden), In memory of James Herbert Boswell of Plano. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1880 (By Madden), In memory of Dale Ralph "Cactus" Martin, a former member of the Plano Fire Department. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1881 (By Madden), In memory of Denise Short Smith of Plano. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1882 (By Madden), Congratulating Hannah Kunkle on her retirement as Collin County district clerk. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1884 (By Schwertner), Congratulating Wayne and Catherine Long of Georgetown on their 60th wedding anniversary. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1885 (By Hilderbran), In memory of Brenda Reagor of Llano. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1886 (By Craddick), Honoring Irene Buchanan on her 100th birthday. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1887 (By Guillen), Honoring the memory of Ramiro Barrera, Sr., of Roma for his public service. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1888 (By Guillen), Honoring Roel Omar Guerra of Rio Grande City for his personal and professional achievements. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1889 (By T. King), Congratulating the Castroville Area Economic Development Council on its first anniversary. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1890 (By Darby), Honoring H. E. "Gene" Crump, Jr., on his retirement as deputy executive director of the Texas Workforce Commission. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1891 (By Larson), In memory of Stephanie Ashley Flores. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1892 (By Carter), Congratulating Richland College on its receipt of the 2010 WasteWise College/University Partner of the Year Award from the EPA and on its first-place statewide finish in the RecycleMania competition. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1893 (By Zedler), Commemorating the 60th anniversary of the incorporation of Crowley. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1894 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Jeremy Pat Pryor of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1895 (By C. Anderson), Honoring the Waco Convention & Visitors Bureau on the occasion of Texas Travel and Tourism Week. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1896 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Debi Deiterman of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1897 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Maria Maciel of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1898 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Jessie Mae Pruett of Hewitt. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1899 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Stanley Louis Jahn of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1900 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Anna Marie Guajardo of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1901 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Megan Lynn Self of Crawford. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1902 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Esther Mae Williams. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1903 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Janie "Tootsie" Dickson of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1904 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Dolores Patricia Jones Skelton of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1905 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Floyd Darvin Parnell of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1906 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Helen Ruth Marek of West. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1907 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Charlsie Ann Rowland of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1908 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Charles W. Green of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1909 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Alfred Pomerenke of McGregor. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1910 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Martha Wade Crone. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1912 (By C. Anderson), In memory of James Robert Morrow, Sr., of Elm Mott. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1913 (By C. Anderson), Congratulating Alec Sanchez of McGregor for receiving a 2011 Prudential Spirit of Community Certificate of Excellence and a President's Volunteer Service Award. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1914 (By C. Anderson), Congratulating Buddy and Judy Baker of Mart on their 50th wedding anniversary. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1915 (By Carter), Congratulating Charles Pickitt, principal of Richardson High School, on being named a regional finalist for the 2011 H-E-B Excellence in Education Principal Award. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1916 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Domingo Suasa of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1917 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Nellie Effie Sutton of Bellmead. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1918 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Victor Guerrero III of China Spring. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1919 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Irene A. Hendrix of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1920 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Jarrell Dean Cantrell of Lacy-Lakeview. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1921 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Edna Delle Hammit of Crawford. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1922 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Nina Leathers-Hunt of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1923 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Albert Galindo of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1924 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Anne Perlman Harris. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1925 (By V. Gonzales), Commending Oscar Moreno for organizing the first McAllen Book Fair. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1926 (By V. Gonzales), Honoring Lydia G. Sandoval on her 25 years of service with Lone Star National Bank in McAllen. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1927 (By V. Gonzales), Honoring the life of Colonel James "Nikki" Rowe of McAllen on the 22nd anniversary of his death. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1928 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Billy G. White of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1929 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Daniel A. Mynarcik, Sr., of Elm Mott. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1930 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Keenan Rhae-Von Hubert of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1931 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Virginia Frances Donaldson. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1932 (By C. Anderson), Congratulating Avery Rae Williams and John Adam Kerley on their wedding. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1933 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Dr. Richard George Fadal of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1934 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Joe M. Rodriguez. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1935 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Virginia Baskett of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1936 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Norman E. Vinson of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1937 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Donna Jean Evetts of Hewitt. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1938 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Beverly Louise Bryan of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1939 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Betty Ruth Ritterhoff Armstrong of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1940 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Edna E. Henderson Anderson of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1941 (By C. Anderson), In memory of John Poe of Moody. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1942 (By C. Anderson), Congratulating Sonny and Carol Ludwig on their 50th wedding anniversary. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1943 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Ira McClease Mathews, Sr., of Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1944 (By C. Anderson), Congratulating Howard and Mary Ann Thompson of Woodway on their 30th wedding anniversary. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1945 (By C. Anderson), In memory of Cleo Frances Malone of West. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1946 (By C. Anderson), Commemorating the "First Things First" Juneteenth Kick Off Celebration in Waco. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1947 (By Veasey), Honoring the Fort Worth Metropolitan Black Chamber of Commerce and its PATHS Forward leadership development program. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1948 (By Martinez), Congratulating Juan and Olga Lugo of Donna on their 50th wedding anniversary. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1949 (By Martinez), In memory of longtime Weslaco resident Janie Cuellar Salinas. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1950 (By Beck), Recognizing May 17, 2011, as BEST Robotics Day at the State Capitol. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1952 (By Callegari), Honoring U.S. Army Staff Sergeant Austin McCall of Katy on his receipt of the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart for his bravery in Afghanistan. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1953 (By Callegari), Honoring Brazos Valley Schools Credit Union for its many contributions to the Katy Independent School District. To Rules and Resolutions. HR 1954 (By Callegari), Congratulating Jo Marie Hestilow on her selection as the 2010 Senior Citizen of the Year by the City of Katy. To Rules and Resolutions.

THE CHAIR: Pursuant to the motion, the the House stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. this morning. House stands recessed until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow.

(The House stands adjourned).