A searchable audio archive from the 2013-2016 legislative sessions of the North Carolina General Assembly.

searching for


Reliance on Information Posted The information presented on or through the website is made available solely for general information purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents. Please see our Terms of Use for more information.

Senate | June 12, 2013 | Chamber | Session

Full MP3 Audio File

The Senate will come to order. Sergeant at arms will close the doors. Members will go to their seats. Members and guests in the gallery will please silence all electronic devices. Leading us in prayer is the Reverend Miller, Senate Chaplain. All members and guests of the gallery will please stand. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let's pray. Almighty God, you say to us in Scripture, don't be anxious about your life, what you'll eat, what you'll drink, nor about your body and what you'll put on. You speak and we must listen. We are more precious to you than silver or gold, more precious to you than the lilies of the field. Thank you, Jesus, for giving us the much-needed reassurance that through You all things are being ordered rightly and will be put right, for Christ's sake. Amen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca is recognized for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Members, the journal of Tuesday, June 11, 2013 has been examined and is found to be correct. I move that the Senate dispense with the reading of the journal and that it stand approved as written. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, the journal for June 11 stands approved as written. Senators, we have a leave of absence today granted for Senator Woodard. We have two nurses of the day with us today. We have Brittany Demeglio of Hillsborough, North Carolina, and Dr. Melissa Asselagi from Hillsborough, North Carolina as well. If you'll please stand and be recognized. Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca has the floor for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Members, there's been a joint -- excuse me, a Senate resolution 726 honoring the East Carolina men's basketball team that's currently committee on rules. Move that rules be suspended through the end, and Senate resolution Joint 726 honoring ECU men's basketball team be recalled from rules and placed on today's calendar for immediate consideration.[SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Additional motions relative to today's calendar? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca has the floor for those motions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. House Bill 727, Alternate Procedure for Obtaining Salvage Title is on today's calendar. Ask that it be removed and placed on tomorrow's calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 548, Marine Fisheries Rulebook Production is currently on today's calendar. I ask that it be removed and placed on tomorrow's calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 345,Increased Penalties for Misuse of 911 System currently Committee on Rules. Ask to be removed from Rules and referred to Judiciary 2. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 628, Protect, Promote Locally Sourced Building Materials on today's calendar. Ask to be removed from today's calendar and placed on tomorrow's. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, what number was that again? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That was House Bill 628. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, House Bill 593, Registered Deeds Hours, I ask be removed from today's calendar and referred to Committee on Rules. Without objection, so ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, can I make an announcement while you're doing. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca has an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Members, we have a very extensive calendar today. I want to let you know our intent is to stay here and get everything handled today, so please get plenty of fluids, plenty of carbs and a Snickers bar and be ready to go. Thanks. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senators, we're going to move right into the Senate Resolution to begin with out of order in our calendar here. So Senate Resolution 7 - Senator Robinson, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senatorial statement out of order, Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson, you have the floor for your statement out of order.

Senator Robinson, You’re recognized. [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr. President. Members of the senate, today I’d like to read a very special paragragh or two on a very special person who’s here today with us. Karyn Collie Dickerson has been very busy during her seven years as an English teacher at Grimsley High School in Greensboro. She’s taught English at every grade in grades 9 through 12 including English Block Recovery, Advanced Placement at International Baccalaureate While teaching , she also worked and received certification as a national board certified teacher. She also received an advanced placement English literature teacher and as an international baccalaureate organization English teacher. She balanced all of this while serving on the school leadership team, mentoring prospective English teacher student interns from Guilford College and UNCG and coaching the Grimsley High School Women’s Varsity team in tennis. And they won the NCHSSA4A women’s tennis state championship in 2011. Karyn is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with a Bachelors’ Degree with honors and high distinction in English. She was inducted into Phi Beta Kappa and was a member of the Golden Key Honor Society. She also graduated with a Master Philosophy Degree with distinction in romanticism and the forms of modernity from the University of Glasgow in Scotts land, where she served as rotary international ambassadorial scholar. In addition to teaching at Grimsley High School, she is also an instructor for EDU 313 at Guilford College. Earlier this year she was featured co presenter of a new way to text at North Carolina English Teacher Association Conference and we can use that here. Karyn Collie Dickerson ?? honors being selected Grimsley High School Teacher of the Year, Guilford County’s Teacher of the Year, and the Piedmont Triad Regional Teacher of the Year. She is the new North Carolina Teacher of the Year for 2013 -14, and we are proud that she is from Guilford County.[Speaker Changes] Karen, if you’re in the gallery with us, please stand and be recognized for your service for North Carolina. Senator, as mentioned a moment ago, we’re going to go a little bit out of order with our calendar. We’ll come back to some more courtesies as well as things that are typically at the beginning of the calendar. We’re going to move right into Senate resolution 726. Senate resolution 726, clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] Senate Resolution 726, Honor ECU men’s basketball team. [Speaker Changes] Senator Pate is recognized. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen of the senate, North Carolinians have a lot to be proud of and East Carolina University. For starters, it’s the third largest of the UNC system with over 20,000 students enrolled. We also have over there, the Brody School of Medicine and ?? hospital of which we’re both very proud. But today we are here to celebrate another accomplishment. On April 2, 2013, the ECU Pirates Men’s basketball team, captured the 2013 College Insider.com post season tournament championship in thrilling fashion. A 3 point shot from way downtown as the game clock was approaching 0 seconds left. A team

I’m sorry, Akeem Richmond, who is in the gallery today made that winning shot to secure the victory over Weber State University. The final score 77 to 74. Head coach, Jeff Lebo, most of us remember his playing days at UNC under Coach Dean Smith will start his fourth season at ECU this fall. The Pirate Nation is proud of the accomplishments of our Athletics Director, Jeff Compher, Atheletic’s Director Emeritus, Terry Holland, Chancellor, Steve Ballard, and the Board of Trustees. It is fitting that the Senate celebrate of the ECU Pirate’s men’s basketball team. They’re truly champions. Mr. President, at the appropriate time I request you introduce the ECU delegation in the gallery, and ladies and gentlemen, I commend the resolution to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Don Davis, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Davis, you can speak on the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thanks, Mr. President. To members of the Senate, I stand today. I’m extremely proud of what we’re able to achieve at East Carolina University. Not only within our academic community, but, also, within our athletic community, and we’re proud that our basketball team was able to go and be successful and to become the 2013 CIT title champions. In a thrilling game, as Senator Pate shared, they came down to the wire, and a game that went back and forth along the way. I, too, join Senator Pate and the members of this Senate to thank our Chancellor, our Coach, the entire athletic staff, and also these players. The players that go in, and not only put their heart out on the basketball court here but also in the classroom, and in this case to secure the title having one of the best records of our school in history. So, I’m proud of our players. I’m proud of East Carolina University. Not just today but every day. Also, I would like to share that we do have traveling with some of the players today. Members of the Trustees Board of Visitors. We’d like to thank them as well as the Chief of Staff, Phillip Rogers, who’s served us well, and he’s preparing to transition. So, we say farewell and thank you, and I will simply end today by saying purple, gold, go pirates! Argh! [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Senator. Senators, Senator Blue has an excused absence today as well. Do we have any further discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the motion to adopt Senate Resolution 726. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The Clerk will record the vote. Hise, aye. 48 voting in the affirmative and zero in the negative. Senate Resolution 726 is adopted, and at this time I would like to ask Paris Roberts Campbell, Akeem Richmond, Payton Robbins, and any other players and folks associated with East Carolina to please stand and be recognized. Thank you for being with us today. The Chair is happy to extend courtesies of the gallery to Mr. Paul Yager, long-time Wake County resident, three time national rowing champion, 30 year veteran of Army Communications and Electronics at the Pentagon, and the master craftsman of my new Thor-sized gavel up here on the ??. Paul Yager, please stand to be recognized. Thanks for being with us today. Upon the motion of Senator Stein, being of Davidson County, the Chair’s happy to send courtesies of the gallery to Keith and Jennifer Medland, in turn Lora Medland’s parents. If you’re with us today, please stand and be recognized. Upon the motion of Senator Ron Rabin of Harnett, Lee and Johnson counties, the Chair is happy to extend courtesies of the gallery to ?? Sandrock of Wilmington, North Carolina.

Maggie is the current chairman of the Horton county GOP party. She has also served in the United States Navy as a radiomen for communication operations and repair. We thank her for serving the United States and to her community for visiting the general assembly. Maggie Please stand and be recognized as well. On the motion of senator Ron Reagan on behalf of the Johnson county, the chair is happy to extend courtesies to the gallery to Audrey Zapp and Hailey Silverthorne of Buisquick, North Carolina. Audrey and Hailey are seniors of the Campbell University. Currently they both serve in the leadership position with the young republicans of Harnett county club and have taken an active role in giving back to Harnett county. We thank them for visiting the general assembly today and thank them for the services up here Please stand be recognized. Ratification to bills . The clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Enrolling bill. Enrolling clerk duly report the following bills duly ratified for presentation to the governor. House bill 29. an act to create the offensive possession of medicine [??] definitive prior conviction for the possession of manufacturing methophenomine and to activate the penalty for the manufacturer of methophenomine when children, disabled and elderly are present as recommended by the house select committee on methophenomine abuse. House bill 157. An act to protect the tax payers of North Carolina from the burden of fuel tax proceeds for non transportation uses by requiring the unreserved credit balance in the highway fund to be used for road related uses. House bill 211, an act to modify the weight restrictions applicable to vehicles transported to feed that is used in the feeding of [??] to livestock when traveling within 150 miles over the point of origin to certain locations. House bill 278 an act to encourage the party to disputes involving certain matter related to real estate under the jurisdiction of the house owners association to initiate mediation to try to resole the dispute prior to filing a civil action. House Bill 439 an act to create an infrastructure property tax deferral program. House bill 515 an act to amend the law of governing credit unions. House bill 623 an act to modify the vehicle weight limits for single axis truck owned and operated by under the contract of public utility electric and telephone membership corporation and using connection with the installation or restoration of utility services in certain areas. House bill 629 an act to amend the definitions of special purpose project to include the agricultural and forestry waste disposal facilities. House bill 650 an act to make clarify and conform and make other changes to North Carolina Life insurance Guarantee association act. [Speaker Changes] Reports of standing Committees. Senator Harrington for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] Senator Harrington, you have sent forth the committee report. The clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Mr. President [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] [??] motion please [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca has moved the motion [Speaker Changes] Mr. President I am moved that the rules be suspended to the end in any committee report sent in be read in after we adjourn [Speaker Changes] That objection so ordered [Speaker Changes] we will adjourn subject to that Thank you [Speaker Changes] Thank You Senator [Speaker Changes] Mr. President [Speaker Changes] Senator Brown what purpose you rise? [Speaker Changes] sent forth a committee report and a conference report [Speaker Changes] You can send forth your reports Senator. We have any other committee reports. Senator Rabin and Senator Soucek what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] sent forth committee report [Speaker Changes] sent forth the committee report, senator [Speaker Changes] as soon as we have committee report going and sending forth this time we will just read them all in afterwards. Any other committee reports. If not we will move right in to the calendar for the day. We will be starting with

local bills second read role call bill House Bill 562 vocal reading[SPEAKER CHANGES] House bill 562 ?? charter revisal. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. Question for the Senate Is the passage of the Senate committee substitute to House Bill 562 on it's second reading? All in favor will vote Aye opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote[SPEAKER CHANGES]Daniel, Aye. Hardister, Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative Senate committee substitute to House bill 562 passes it's second reading. It will remain on the calender. Non roll-call local bill second reading House Bill 68. The clerk will read.[SPEAKER CHANGES]House Bill 68 established under the Foster Care of Gaston county.[SPEAKER CHANGES]Senator Harrington is recognized to explain the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. This is a local bill that was requested by the county commissioners in my district. It would authorize the appointment of an Ombusman to serve as a resource and advocate for foster parents in Gaston county. This is one done as a time limited pilot program and will end in July 1st, 2015. I ask for your support.[SPEAKER CHANGES]Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the Senate is the passage of the committee substitute House Bill 68 on it's second reading. All in favor will vote aye opposed will vote no.Five seconds will be allowed for the vote and the clerk will record the vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Hartsell, Aye. McKissick, Aye.Daniel , Aye.48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative committee substitute to House Bill 68 passes its second reading without objection. It will be read a third time.[SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the Senate is the passage of the committee substitute to House Bill 68 on it's third reading all in favor will say Aye.[SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye.[SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed, no. The Ayes have it. Committee substitute to House Bill 68 passes it's third reading and it will be enrolled. House Bill 501 the clerk will read.[SPEAKER CHANGES]House Bill 501 Buncombe County Community College projects. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? hearing none, the question for the Senate is the passage of the substitute to House Bill 501 on it's second reading. All in favor vote Aye all opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. Hartsell, Aye. McKissick, Aye. Tarte, Aye.48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative Committee substitute to House Bill 501 passes its second reading without objection. It will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina general assembly enacts [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate. Hearing none. The question for the Senate as it passes the Committee substitute to House Bill 501 on it's third reading. All in favor say Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed, No. The Ayes have it. Committee substitute to House Bill 501 passes it's third reading and it will be enrolled. One local bill for concurrence Senate Bill 325. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] senate bill 325 Ray County school Board Districts [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Senator Hunt for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES]Thank you Mr. President. House made a few changes that I find please vote for concurrence [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hunt recommends that you concur. Senator Stein, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein has the floor to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. The House only changed two districts and all they did was move one school board member from one district and another school board member to the other district. They also changed the election from the primary to the general. Neither of those changes are problematic. What remains problematic is this bill. Wake was the only school board district in the state that hired an outside political consultant to draw it's maps after the 2010 redistricting. The only one. Drawn to favor Republicans and yet the Republicans lost. This bill is nothing more than a political effort to ?? the districts to favor republican candidates for the school board. You all saw the map and you saw how ridiculously gerrymandered those districts were. Goes all the way from Bryer Creek all the way around the county to Garner. We're moving away from compact districts to something that has no relationship to schools and how school kids track from elementary to middle school to high school. Please, if you respect our children's education vote down this motion to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the Senate is the motion to concur on the house committee substitute to Senate Bill 325. All in favor will vote Aye. Opposed will vote no. five seconds will be allowed for the voting The clerk will record the vote.

33 having voted affirmative and 15 in the negative. The Senate concurs in the house committee substitute descendent bill 325 and it will be enrolled. Moving on to public bills second reading role call bill. House bill 743 the clerk will read. [Speaker Change] House bill 743 UI laws administrative changes. [Speaker Change] Senator Rucho, Senator Rabin is recognized. [Speaker Change] Thank you Mr. President and members I have an amendment to send forth please. [Speaker Change] Senator Rabin you can send forth your amendment. The clerk will read. [Speaker Change] Senator Rabin of Brunswick moves to amend the bill [Speaker Change] Senator Rabin is recognized to explain the amendment. [Speaker Change] Thank you Mr. President. Members of this amendment is a technical correction that removes a phrase in the lines indicated. [Speaker Change] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, and the question for the Senate is the passage of amendment one. All in favor will vote aye, opposed will vote no. 5 seconds will be allowed for the voting. Clerk will record the vote. 43 having voted in the affirmative and 5 in the negative. Amendment one is adopted, the bill as amended is back before the body. Is anyone gonna speak for the bill? Senator Brown? [Speaker Change] I think its role call isn't it? [Speaker Change] I am sorry. It is role call it will remain on the calendar. Sorry Senator we didn't do second reading yet, we just did the amendment. I apologize. Is there, is anybody, does anybody wanna speak to the bill? Is there any further discussion or ??. Senator Nesbitt for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Change] Yes Mr. President, send forth an amendment. [Speaker Change] Senator Nesbitt you can send forth your amendment. [Speaker Change] ??. [Speaker Change] The clerk will read. [Speaker Change] Senator Nesbitt moves to amend the bill. [Speaker Change] Hold on one second Senator Nesbitt while that's refreshing and we get it up on the, on the dashboard. It's up. Senator Nesbit you have the floor to speak to the amendment. [Speaker Change] Thank you Mr. President. The amendment it looks technical, but it's fairly simple. It does two things, one thing is if you recall when we did the original UI bill we all were sitting here thinking that we would get it paid off by November 1st of 2015. That we would extinguish the debt so that our business people would not have to pay an extra year of penalty. And that was the magic date as I understood it, that's what staff tells me. I remember we were talking about a date, but I couldn’t remember what it was. And apparently the November 1st date is when the feds recalculate as whether you had debt for a period of time that kicks in the penalty. But we didn't say that in the bill. All we did was go ahead and do all the changes and hope that, that would happen. Well as a practical matter when I asked staff whether it happened the answer is they don't know. It may be extinguished 6 months before that, it may be extinguished 6 months after that because it all depends on the economy. And it depends on how, what the employment rate is so that you pay in more or less based on how many people you got employed. What I'm doing is putting a provision in that says it's the intent of the general assembly to extinguish that debt before November the 1st of 2005. That can be done on or two ways that I know of, and you, I'm sure y'all can come up with more. It's my understanding and the, and the ?? heartsful yanking’s at all bill, they actually use the $50,000 tax deduction that, that we're giving to business and converted that to pay this debt off, which would get them out earlier. At

the bill was being passed, the treasurer was out of town, but I talked with him, I know she had said she did not want to bond the entire amount ?? it was over 2 billion dollars. But I said if there's an amount remaining that's less than a half a billion or something like that do you have a problem bonding that? Some of her staff said no and she got back down and I talked to her she said I got to see the details of it but probably that would be ok. You might be able to do it with tax anticipation notes, they've done that before, where they're anticipating revenue. So, by putting this intent language in here it would force us, as a general assembly to look at this in the session before that and determine what we're going to do with it, because it makes no sense for our employers to pay this penalty over into another year. That money just goes to the federal government and once you're locked in , as I understand it, you pay it for the full 12 months and you can't get loose from it. By moving it to us, even if you increase the ?? tax or something to pay it off it would stay in the state fun and would benefit our employers. So that's one part of the bill. 2nd part of the bill moves the effective date for the reduction in payments until January 1st. And, as you know, come July the 1st, if we don't do that, 75,000 people are going to lose their benefits. We anticipate 780 million dollars will not come to this state that otherwise would. 780 million dollars and the disproportionately it will go to these rural areas where the unemployment rate is the highest. They're the ones most likely to have this extended unemployment. You're going to lose 70,000 July the 1st you can lose 170,000 total people coming on that get into extended benefits. The benefits of federal level end on January 1st so we would be ending when they end it. It's my understanding that we are the only state in the nation rejecting this benefit. Every other state in the nation accepted this benefit except us. Once again, it's 100% federal money and by putting the provision in that says that we will terminate this debt prior to this date it gives our business people certainty and it puts us on motives to look and to listen how we want to do that. And it will be a very minor fix whatever it is and moving this date then isn't as problematic because they're not going to have to pay the penalty past that time. It fixes that problem. We've talked down here about jobs and the economy, etc. We sat here and said no to Medicaid expansion, 2 billion dollars a year in the economy. We said no to this. 780 million dollars into these rural areas right now, and they need it the worst. 500,000 people without health insurance. This will mean 70,000 people without a job and without unemployment insurance to help them. I cannot understand what the plan is. If we're not going to do these kinds of things, how are we ever going to have an economy? If nobody can buy anything you can't have an economy. And I promise you this money gets spent when it hits the ground. These people are desperate, they got nothing else, and it'll be spent in the economy and it will help us. So I would encourage you, simple, straight forward, easy to understand, this is a chance to get out of a box that we put ourselves in and to give business certainty. And it's my understanding that the business community is beginning to understand the Medicaid expansion and the fact that if we don't take the Medicaid expansion, they're going to end up having to pay higher premium space for these people. And it's just a matter of time until people realize that when you keep cutting off money that will flow to this state and create jobs, we're not going to have any jobs. So, I would encourage you to support the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Senator Rabin, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, I would ask if the minority leader would yield for questioning. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Would you yield?(/h3>

[Speaker changes.] sir, I'll yield. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Senator Nesbitt. I understood you to say that this is 100% federal money. Does that mean the state doesn't hafta pay it back? [Speaker changes.] That is correct. This is 100% federal money that is not charged against us to be paid back. [Speaker changes.] And the taxpayers of North Carolina don't pay one cent of this money in any way? [Speaker changes.] Well, they pay federal taxes so it goes to federal government but if that money doesn't come back to this state, then our tax money goes to somebody else. We're the only state that rejected this money. [Speaker changes.] Thank you. [Speaker changes.] Mister President? [Speaker changes.] Senator Rabin??, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Yes, thank you, Mister President. I just..I don't see any way that I can support this amendment and I'll yield to Senator Rucho. [Speaker changes.] Senator Rucho, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Thank you, sir. To debate this amendment. [Speaker changes.] Senator Rucho has the floor to speak to the amendment. [Speaker changes.] I am so thrilled to see Senator Nesbitt is so happy to help out small businesses but the bottom line is this...this bill has already been discussed and studied and we have made a decision to move forward for the economic viability of the unemployment insurance fund. And, as he eluded to, to 2015, we still expect that to be the deadline, primarily because of the fact that we had a very conservative model to make sure, taking into consideration the rates that we would've paid, which actually went down this time, based on the federal calculation...and also the unemployment rate has improved. So with all of those and the moving in the right direction, we will be on schedule to our knowledge. Secondly, we talked about the issue of doing bonds and everyone in this Senate knows that those bonds would be at the expense of the taxpayers, which is something we totally felt was not fair and not right, and under the circumstances, the businesses who are obligated to pay for it will pay for it. And so, in that sense, everything is as we planned. The viability of the program will be there and available for any future group that needs unemployment insurance and, very simply, doing so we should defeat this amendment and just pass this technical corrections bill. [Speaker changes.] Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Mister President, House Bill 743, amendment 2...I move we do lay upon the table. [Speaker changes.] Mr. President? [Speaker changes.] Senator Brunstetter, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Second the motion. [Speaker changes.] Seconded by Senator Brunstetter. That motion will come to one electronic vote. Motion before the Senate is to lay upon the table amendment number two...all in favor will vote aye. Opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the Clerk will record the vote. 33 having voted in the affirmative and 15 in the negative, the motion to lay upon the table passes, amendment two lays upon the table, the bill as amended is back before the body. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 743 as amended on its second reading. All in favor vote aye. Opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the Clerk will record the vote. 40 having voted in the affirmative and 8 in the negative, Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 743 as amended passes its second reading and it will remain on the calendar. Moving on to non-roll call public bills, second reading Senate Bill 571. Clerk will read. [Speaker changes.] Senate Bill 571, authorize very special plates. [Speaker changes.] Senator Brock is recognized. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister President, Members of the Senate, this is our annual license plate bill with those organizations that would like to have their personalized license plates and I think there's...everyone in the state and every organization is probably covered by now...but, if not, they're still taking form...urge your support. [Speaker changes.] Any discussion or debate? [Speaker changes.] Mister President? [Speaker changes.] Senator Brunstetter, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Send forward an amendment. [Speaker changes.] Senator Brunstetter, you can send forward your amendment. Clerk will read. [Speaker changes.] Senator Brunstetter moves to amend the bill. [Speaker changes.] Senator Brunstetter is recognized to explain the amendment. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Members. You might remember that in the Finance Committee, an amendment was discussed that would've added a variety of military related plates?? And I had raised some concerns about fiscal impact. What we've decided to do is focus on particular valor plate that has been omitted???? and this adds silver star recipients. [Speaker changes.] Thank you Senator. Any further discussion or debate. Hearing... [Speaker changes.] Mister President? [Speaker changes.] Senator Rabin??, for what purpose do you rise. [Speaker changes.] Like to recuse myself from the voting, plese.

Senator, you can send forward your form. If there’s any further discussion or debate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rucho, for what purpose do you rise. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brunstetter, yield for a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brunstetter, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brunstetter, I was at a quote hearing during that discussion, but I just want to be sure that it complies with all of the regulations of special plates, is that correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Senator Rabin, would you turn your microphone off please? Thank you. Hearing none, question for the Senate is the passage of amendment 1. All in favor vote aye, all opposing vote no. 5 seconds will be allowed for the voting, clerk record the vote. 47 having voted in the affirmative and 0 in the negative, amendment 1 is adopted. The bill as amended is back before the body. Is there any further discussion or debate? Senator Hunt for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To offer amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hunt, you can send forth your amendment. Senator Hunt could you come to the dais just quickly please. We’ll get the amendment signed and then you can speak to it. The clerical reading. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hunt moves to amend the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is the amendment up on the dash? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The amendment is on the dash. Senator Hunt is recognized to explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. The amendment is very technical. The amendment is simply correcting one of the names on the plate of beneficiaries. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the Senate is the passage of amendment 2. All in favor vote aye, opposing vote no. 5 seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. Rucho, aye. Clark, aye. 47 having voted in the affirmative and 0 in the negative, amendment 2 is adopted. The bill as amended is back before the body. Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the Senate is the passage of the committee substitute to Senate bill 571 as amended on its second reading. All in favor vote aye, opposing vote no. 5 seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. Nesbitt, aye. Graham, aye. Bingham, aye. Tillman, aye. Clark, aye. 46 having voted in the affirmative and 1 in the negative, committee substitutes Senate bill 571 as amended passes its second reading. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina the ?? Act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the Senate is the passage of the committee substitute Senate bill 571 as amended on it’s third reading. All in favor will say aye, opposing no. The ayes have it. Committee substitutes Senate bill 571 as amended passes its third reading. Senator Clodfelter would like to change his vote on the- [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. No, Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Clodfelter, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To make a statement that will rule 15b out of order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator you can make your statement out of order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members, I cast my vote on the preceding bill in honor and in memory of former Senator John Carr. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Senator. Committee substitute Senate bill 571 as amended passes its third reading. The ?? will be sent to the House. Senator Tucker is excused for the remainder of the session today. Second reading public bills. House bill 120 clerical reading. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House bill 120: Building codes local consistency exempt cable. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Abodaca is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. Members, this is the companion bill to the Senate bill filed by myself, Senator Hunt, and Senator Ford. The purpose of the bill is to standardize rulemaking by the building council and local cities and counties and also publicizing said regulatory interpretations on the internet.

Key provisions here. It creates uniform types of inspections across the state. Existing building code inspections remain in place. Fail-safes remain in place. Six-year updates to residential building code and electronic access to regulatory guidance, that is the high points of this bill. I’ll be happy to try to answer any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird has the floor to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. I have heard from my local building, zoning, planning folks and they are very much against this because they feel that there will be changes that will adversely affect what they are doing to try to make the buildings that they approve and inspect safer and less expensive, actually, than this, because this changes the number of inspections, so I intend to vote against the bill. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Senators, Senator Blue is back in the chamber with us now. If there’s no further discussion or debate, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee substitute to House Bill 120 on its second reading. All in favor will vote, “Aye.” Opposed will vote, “No.” Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The Clerk will record the vote. 47 having voted in the affirmative and one in the negative, Committee substitute to House Bill 120 passes its second reading. Without objection it will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina re-enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee substitute to House Bill 120 on its third reading. All in favor will say, “Aye.” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed, “No.” The ayes have it. Committee substitute to House Bill 120 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill 209, the Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 209, “Amend Domestic Violence/Civil No-Contact Laws.” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Daniel is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President, members of the Senate. This is a bill that is a consensus bill from the North Carolina Bar Association and others who are interested in family law. It amends the statute in 50B, domestic violence protective orders to allow consent orders between the parties be done between the parties without listing specific findings of fact. This has some benefits to the court system. One, to prevent unnecessary testimony, judicial economy and just will facilitate consent in cases of this type and I would ask for your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of Senate Committee substitute to House Bill 209 on its second reading. All in favor will vote, “Aye.” Opposed will vote, “No.” Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The Clerk will record the vote. Bryant, aye. Curtis, aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative, the Senate Committee substitute to House Bill 209 passes its second reading. Without objection… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Object to third reading. Senator Daniel and I are working on a minor detail. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick objects to third reading and it will remain on the calendar. House Bill 219. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 219, “Update References/Child Born Out of Wedlock.” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Davis of Macon County is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, House Bill 219 has some clarifying language regarding inheritance rights for children born out of wedlock. It also has some technical corrections to our law to remove the phrase “illegitimate children” and “bastard” and “bastardy” out of the language and replaces it with children born out of wedlock. As the proud father of a son born out of wedlock I commend this bill to you and if you want to use any of these expletives and any other ones to the absentee sperm donors, feel free to do so. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of Senate Committee substitute to House Bill 219 on its second reading. All in favor will vote, “Aye.” Opposed will vote, “No.” Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The Clerk will record the vote. Parmon, aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative, Senate Committee substitute to House Bill 219 passes its second reading. Without objection, it will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of Senate Committee substitute to House Bill 219 on its third reading. All in favor will say, “Aye.” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed, “No.” The ayes have it. Senate Committee substitute to House Bill…

19 passes its third reading, it will be sent to the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For concurrence in the Senate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I am so sorry to interrupt you here but we need to clear the air on 219. Senator Davis’ child was adopted so anyway I think that’s a little different than what Senator Davis stated. So in order for him to go home this weekend I thought I might oughta bring that up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Senator. Senate Committee Substitute House Bill 219 passes its third reading. It will be sent to the House for concurrence in the Senate Committee Substitute. House Bill 289. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 289 State Computer equipment buying refurbished. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tarte is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Members, this bill will merely enable our schools to purchase used equipment that has been refurbished and certified like new. I ask for your approval and support. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of House Bill 289 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. Allran, Senator Allran, aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and 0 in the negative. House Bill 289 passes its second reading without objection to be read for a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly Acts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] There any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of House Bill 289 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oppose, no. The ayes have it. House Bill 289 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill 331 the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 331 HOA asking for a lien procedure. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Daniel is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. This is another consensus bill that comes to us from the North Carolina Bar Association to streamline and I guess make uniform across all 100 counties the foreclosure process, and homeowner association liens. And just, appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of House Bill 331 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, oppose the vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. Berger, aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and 0 in the negative. Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 331 passes its second reading without objection to be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly Act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any other further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Senate Committee Substitute for House Bill 331 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oppose, no. The ayes have it. Senate Committee Substitute for House Bill 331 passes its third reading. It will be sent to the House for concurrence in the Senate Committee Substitute. House Bill 350, clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 350 court improvement project juv. law changes [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Daniel is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is another consensus bill that comes to us from the Court Improvement Project and general updates to our juvenile code. I ask for your support, it’s an agency bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage for Committee Substitute to House Bill 350 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. Berger, aye. Blue, aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and 0 in the negative. Committee Substitute to House Bill 350 passes its second reading without objection to be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly Acts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is passage of the Committee Substitute to House Bill 350 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oppose, no. The ayes have it. Committee Substitute to House Bill 350 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill 396. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 396 an act private well water and education act [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McLaurin is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. This is a bill that was requested by ?? and Secretary ??. It’s an education act to help citizens understand water quality issues with their private drinking wells. It’s to add protection to citizens who may have water well contamination. No mandatory requirements for either well owners, no state costs, has received unanimous support from all Committees and from the House. I recommend your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Senator. Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is passage of the Committee Substitute for House Bill 396 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, oppose the vote, no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting, clerk will record the vote. Berger, aye. Jenkins, aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative.

zero in the negative. Committee substitute to House Bill 396 passes its second reading without objection. It'll be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the Senate is the passage of the committee substitute to House Bill 396 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. Committee substitute to House Bill 396 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. House Bill 597, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 597, bail bondsmen official shield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hartsell is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, members of the Senate, House 597 authorizes a bail bondsman to display an official shield in the course of his duties. That is done currently by private investigators, and otherwise they also have an ID card. All of this has been approved by the Department of Insurance. It's actually a safety issue for them. I would commend it to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Bryant, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Bryant has the floor to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President and members of the Senate, I just wanted to bring to your attention a concern I have about this bill, and that is the idea of the bail agents having the badges or shields. We would be the fifth state to allow the bail agents to have badges or shields. The majority of states prohibit bail agents from wearing any badge or shield or uniform, or anything that might imply that they are related to our state or local law enforcement. While I definitely support them being as safe as they can, I also support the role that they do in terms of other law enforcement agents, knowing who they are. The major difference between them and a private investigator is that a bail agent can arrest a criminal defendant or a fugitive, if you will. They can also enter the residence of the said fugitive, the residence on their bond, they can forcibly enter the residence of the fugitive. With that kind of power, I'm concerned about the folks in our community confusing them or thinking they are law enforcement, and then either complying or following instructions or letting them do things that they really are not authorized to do, because they think they're law enforcement agents. I also think, of course, it sets up the opportunity for impersonation, which I don't know that they would necessarily do, but it creates that opportunity which doesn't now exist. And so for that reason, I would ask that you would vote no on this bill. I'm very concerned about the level of discord it may cause. While it may create some safety, with law enforcement I think it may create more opportunity for discord with people in the community if they think they're law enforcement agents and then find out that they're not, and then they try to get them to do something that they don't have the authority to do. So for that reason I ask that you vote no. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To send forth a rule 29. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You can send forward your rule 29, Senator. We have it. Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Senate committee substitute to House Bill 597 on its second reading. All in favor vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. 36 having voted in the affirmative and 11 in the negative, the Senate committee substitute to House Bill 597 passes its second reading. Without objection it'll be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Senate committee substitute to House Bill 597 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. Senate committee substitute to House Bill 597 passes its third reading. It will be sent to the House for concurrence in the Senate committee substitute. House Bill 611, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 611, suspension removed when eligibility met. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Davis is recognized. Senator Davis, who's going to handle this on the floor today? Do we have anybody handling House Bill 611? Senator Daniel is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. This bill deals with the automatic suspension that students get when they fail a, or when their grade-point average drops below 2.0 in high school, they have an administrative suspension to their license. This just changes the procedures so that when they restore their grades above 2.0, the license is automatically restored and the revocation automatically comes off their record and is expunged. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of House Bill 611 on its second reading.

All in favor will vote aye, oppose the vote, no. Five seconds to be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. Goolsby, Goolsby aye. Blue, aye. McLaurin, McLaurin, aye. I’m sorry, ?? McLaurin is not in it. 48 having voted in the affirmative and 0 in the negative. House Bill 611 passes its second reading without objection to be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly Act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is passage of House Bill 611 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oppose, no. The ayes have it. House Bill 611 passes its third reading it will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill 614 the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 614 NC agriculture and forestry act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Jackson is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Pretty much this bill is basically what it says. If a farm has been in operation for more than a year and was not a nuisance at the time of operation again, and someone moves next to the farm or nearby than the farm cannot be considered a nuisance. Unfortunately though, if farmers make any changes to their operation such as crops or technology or ?? or reusability. Any change, they gotta wait another year before that farm is allocated as a bonafide farm under our current rules. This bill will clarify that change and make it that an operation without starting can make some changes to their operation and ?? in the bill without starting the one year exemption over again. It also does not, it also protects a homeowner or landowner that is living nearby as well. If they’ve been there all their life a new farm can’t come in and become a nuisance. So it protects all of rural North Carolina. And the second part of the bill deals with the attorney fees being awarded to prevailing defendants. And Indiana, Texas, Louisiana and other strong agricultural states have passed this bill very similar to this one, and I ask that you support it because it will protect all of North Carolina. Folks living in rural North Carolina. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 614 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, oppose the vote, no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. 47 having voted in the affirmative and 1 in the negative. Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 614 passes its second reading without objection to be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, I’d like to object the third reading. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton objects to third reading, it will remain on the calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 641, clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 641 amend conditional discharge first drug offense. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Allran is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Justice Reinvestment Act requires the court to place offenders in the Conditional Discharge Program. Probation. If all the criteria are met, and that’s basically low-level controlled substance violations and no prior felony convictions or drug offense convictions. This act allows the judge some discretion in agreement with the DA to find that the person seeking conditional discharge is not appropriate for the program. The court can only use factors related to the offense, and the judge must make a written finding in agreement with the DA for this determination. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Senator Goolsby, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, I would like to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Goolsby has the floor to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I appreciate Senator Allran taking the time to speak with me about this and also Senator McKissick. I did have some significant concerns on this because I do deal with folks all the time that qualify for conditional discharge of expungements under 9096 which allows primarily young people who’ve never had a drug crime before all the way up through felonies to qualify. We did a significant modification two years ago that took a lot, well took most of the discretion away from the prosecutor that went on probation and allowed folks the ability to gives these that sometimes I feel like were unfairly denied. The concern I had about this one and they did deal with it in Committee, was that only the factors that I really wanted say this on the floor to make it floor as to make it clear why I

Agree to this. … this offense could be considered if the judge and the prosecutor want to make a specific written finding as to why that person was denied the ability to have a deferred prosecution to do community service, go to drug treatment, and all the things that the court requires. So with those modifications, I do agree to this and I’ll be voting for it. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak briefly on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick has the floor to speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I shared some of the concerns Senator Goolsby had when this bill came up in committee. We were able to work on it, to revise it and it’s coming to us in a fairly substantially revised format from what it originally was. And while I had original reservations, I will be supporting it as well. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 641 on its second reading. All in favor vote aye. Opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. Clerk will record the vote. Bruntstetter, aye. Berger, aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative, the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 641 passes its second reading and without objection will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 641 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 641 passes its third reading. It will be sent to the House for concurrence in the Senate Committee Substitute. House Bill 649, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 649, small group health insurance technical changes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hise is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President and members of the Senate. This bill is designed, we’ve had a lot of changes in health care law and policy over the last few years and they’ve kind of put our small employer group health insurance plans kind of, right now kind of out of that compliance, and so this bill is seeking to adjust those for our small employers so that they can still be relevant, as well as some changes to nine of the stop-loss plans that some choose to use for self-insurance. And with that being said Mr. President, I would move to send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You can send forward your amendment, Senator. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hise moves to amend the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hise is recognized to explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President and members of the Senate, one of the changes under the Affordable Care Act that I looked at, there’s two that this amendment deals with, but the first one is that individuals who smoke can be allowed to be charged premiums up to 50% higher, a 1.5 to 1 ratio, of those who do not. When looking at that, I spent a lot of time trying to determine through studies and others what was the actual health care cost. Not an arbitrary number. You’d be surprised how many studies I found that actually showed over a lifetime you have lower health insurance costs, mainly because you die earlier, in that process. But I did the major study that was done on this was those policies under eHealthInsurance. It’s about 275,000 policies it looked at. Those chosen insurers in general charged 14% higher for smokers than for non-smokers. With that being the market rate, I saw no reason to expand it up to 50%, so this amendment changes it to a 15% cap on the additional premium charge to smokers. And also for the stop-loss, it changes the definition we had at 50 employees. This moves it down to it’s an option for businesses that would go down to 26 employees. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of Amendment 1. All in favor vote aye. Opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. [PAUSE] Berger, Aye. Hise, Aye. 46 having voted in the affirmative and 2 in the negative, Amendment 1 is adopted. The bill as amended is back before the body. Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 649 as amended on its second reading. All in favor vote aye. Opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. Berger, Aye. Parmon, Aye. Blue, Aye. Allran, Aye. McKissick, Aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative. Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 649 passes its second reading and without objection will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate?

as you are, I suppose that is a passing committee subject to House Bill six forty nine on third reading, all in favor say hi. I was no guys have a cynic may subject out for six forty nine, as amended assets to bring the amendment will be engrossed in the present of the house with concurrence of the Senate committee substitute Al Snow six forty eight every hospital, six eighty four six eighty four. once I reached a safe young. currently, Rachel Sanders subject is organized to suppress this will provide solution to some approximate concord. about Rosie Scheibe, driveways, endless rounds is supported by the DOT enhancers urges support for discussion, debate hearing on courts, prisons, passes a committee substitute House Bill six eighty four on second reading on paper, but I always vote no five seconds beloved of voting clerk program murder. I because it forty seven hundred five, informative, zero, negative committee substitute House Bill six eighty four passes second rate objection research on test has banished from enactment discussion of a hearing on question processes the passage may subject hospital six eighty four August third reading all unfavorable sci-fi is no guys have a three cents two thousand twelve six eighty four processes. third reading of the enrollments of the government House Bill seven sixty two recording process. if you do administer procedures center hotels recognizers Plainville. some matches. procedural changes. the first professional bronze mountains for cash balance was to have the backup adventure him as you surround your back, but I think into the show is going on forfeiture or copy of release folder and found his to eliminate a duplicate service of process in the event of that currently when someone's there is a forfeiture motion to obtain relief. the bondsman has to submit that to the school board attorney and otherwise. this eliminates this court will also the fact the matter is, I think this is one more miraculous situations of the receipt, proposals far as I'm aware of the school burns are okay with it. Department of Insurance is okay with it. the bonds were okay with it. I've never seen that happen in twenty years here is a discussion of a·` withdraws not have notice importation HD 's and rapid occupants in four-year excuse me further discussion about it or not? senators asked how school seven sixty two on a second reading on favorable guy." no five seconds a lap of the court record, but rather by Kinnaird has by high forty seven hours, but in the affirmative, zero, negative hospital seven sixty two thousand second reading that objectively rather got diagnosed in a discussion with a hearing on question presented is the past and how school seven sixty two on his third reading all favorable. say hi was no guys haven't hospital seven sixty two assets third renewal be rolled and since the governor. house Bill seven sixty three. Marguerite Kosmos and sixty three. allow how I separate since we were married. sometimes there cannot him in Senegal, Suzanne got to amendment as pertaining to contract from the husband and wife. the last batch to waive or establish an alimony and postseparation support their marriage. it's a family villain that what it would do is actually remove an obstacle to couples who may be trying to reconcile it has pass the judicial committees in both the house since I was half past eleven, thirteen, before the bar has no issues with it and Rogers went back to the discussion. you're not supposed as acid as of two thousand seven sixty three on a second reading on favorable guy was about no five seconds, relaxing, voting record about what you have invited

negative. House Bill 763 passes its second reading without objection. Will be read a third time. North Carolina general assembly enacts. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of the committee sub suit to House Bill 763 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. Aye. Opposed no. The ayes have it. Committee sub suit to House Bill 763 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. House Bill 765, the clerk will read. House Bill 765, jury instructions for school budget dispute. Senator Sanderson is recognized to explain the Bill. Thank you Mr. President. House Bill 765 would amend the instructions that must be given to a jury in a court action on a budget dispute between the local Board of Education and a board of County Commissioners. It instructs the court to, at a minimum consider the following four points: the educational goals and policies of the state and the local Board of Education, the budgetary requests of the local Board of Education, the financial resources of the county and the local Board of Education, and the physical policies of the Board of County Commissioners and the Board of Education. I ask for your support. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of Committee Sub suit Number Two to House Bill 765 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, all opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting, clerk will record the vote. Rucho, aye. Aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative, Committee Sub suit number Two to House Bill 765 passes its second reading without objection and will be read a third time. North Carolina general assembly enacts. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee Sub suit Number Two to House Bill 765 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. Committee Sub suit Number Two to House Bill 765 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. House Bill 850, the clerk will read. House Bill 850, possession of needles [to kill?] law officer. Senator Tillman is recognized to explain the bill. This bill's, this bill amends a general statute to allow an officer of the law to ask prior to the search of a person's vehicle or his residence, if he has a sharp object or a needle that may injure the officer. If the suspect says that they do have a needle or a sharp object, and that object is disclosed and found they will not be charged with possession of that particular object. And this is a safety thing for officers and they've requested it and it passed overwhelmingly in the House and it was supported by their law enforcement folks over there and all the others as far as I know. Appreciate your support. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of Committee Sub suit Number Two to House Bill 850 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, all opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting, clerk will record the vote. Rucho, aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative, Committee Sub suit number Two to House Bill 850 passes its second reading without objection and will be read a third time. North Carolina general assembly enacts. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee Sub suit to House Bill 850 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. Committee Sub suit to House Bill 850 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. House Bill 879 the clerk will read. House Bill 879, grand jurial service. Senator Goolsby is recognized to explain the bill. Thank you Mr. President. All this does is simply increase the time period of service from two years to six years if you serve on a grand jury. In other words you can't be put back on a grand jury for six years. Appreciate your support. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of Committee Sub suit Number Two to House Bill 879 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting, clerk will record the vote. Nesbitt, Kinnaird aye, aye. [Stein] aye. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee Sub suit to House Bill 879 passes its second reading without objection and will be read a third time. North Carolina general assembly enacts. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee Sub suit to House Bill 879 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. Committee Sub suit to House Bill 879 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. House Bill 892 the clerk will read. House Bill 892, no fiscal note for rule repeal. Senator [Raven?] is recognized to explain the bill.

Senator Rabin, are you handling 892? [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you, Mr. President. This is very simple and straight forward. It simply means that when a rule is being repealed, no fiscal note has to be attached, because it's costing nothing to repeal. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee Substitute to House Bill 892 on its second reading. All in favor vote aye. Opposed vote no. Five seconds will the allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative. The Committee Substitute to House Bill 892 passes the second reading. Without objection, it'll be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. North Carolina General Assembly enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee Substitute to House Bill 892 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. Committee Substitute to House Bill 892 passes its third reading. It will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill 937, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. House Bill 937, Amend Various Firearms Laws. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Senator Newton is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you, Mr. President. I apologize, Dr. Warren trying to distract me over there. Colleagues, this is an excellent bill that comes to us. It's an opportunity for us to further enhance our gun laws here in this state. This bill does a couple of simple things, and let me be really clear about this. The first thing this bill does is it closes loopholes in our background check system. The second thing it does is it toughens criminal penalties for felonies that are committed with a gun. The third thing it does is it improves the reporting on our background system, strengthen it under the national background system called NICS. In other words, mental health, and so forth, has to be reported much more quickly by our system. The third thing it does is it clarifies that Sheriffs must revoke Concealed Carry Permits when the holder violates, or is convicted of a crime that would prevent them from having it. That was not clear before. It also tightens the penalties for violating Concealed Carry Permit conditions. And most important of all, it enhances the 2nd Amendment rights of law abiding citizens in this state, and for Concealed Carry Permit holders by allowing them to carry in places like most of the other states in this country. Now, I'll be happy to get into the details of this bill, but it has been well vetted in the House. It has been well vetted in the J-1 Committee. And at this time I would like to send forth a technical amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Senator, you can send forward your amendment. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Senator Newton moves to amend the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Senator Newton is recognized to explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you, Mr. President. This amendment just clarifies, one of the provisions in the bill was that Clerks of Court and so forth, are, that have Concealed Carry Permits, like DA's, are allowed to carry their weapons into the Courthouse and be secured safely in the Courthouse. And this amendment just clarifies that they don't have to be elected, because they could be appointed. And that was an oversight on our part. So I ?? to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Is there any discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Senator Berringer, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES]. To send forth a Rule 29 Request. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. You can send forward your rule. Is there any further discussion or debate? Senator Stein, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES]. To see if Senator Newton will yield for a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Senator Newton, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you, Senator Newton. Mine hasn't loaded and I'm looking at Senator Blue's. You had said it would allow appointed Clerks of Court, but as I read the amendment, it says, OK, so it applies only to appointed but not all the employees in their employ? [SPEAKER CHANGES]. That's correct. Only what would normally be an elected official and not their assistants. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the Senate is the passage of Amendment 1. All in favor vote aye. Opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. 40 having voted in the affirmative, and 7 in the negative. Amendment 1 is adopted. The bill as amended

Is back before the Body. Senator Parmon, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’d like my vote to be no, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Parmon changes her vote to no. Final count, 39 to 8. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird has the floor to speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. I’m not going to present more statistics today except one. As you have heard them from me in past debates and they do not seem to be persuasive no matter how bad they are. The only statistic I want to report is that of the 31,904 gun deaths in 2011 38,285 are suicides. Instead, I’m going to read from a few short pieces. The first is from the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court Case, District of Columbia v. Heller. You know, the one that everybody loves to put on their second amendment rights Quoting Justice Scallia, Like most rights, the rights secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From ?? to the 19th century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever, in any matter whatsoever and for whatever purpose. Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast out a long standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill. Or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing the, and I left off that , some playgrounds, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. The next quote is from Speaker Tillis. Warning his GOP troops about overreaching and getting out of step with the citizens of North Carolina. He says and I quote, a lack of discipline will lay the groundwork for the Democratic descendency. And if they succeed we will only have ourselves to blame. This bill is overreaching and distinctly out of touch with the citizens from North Carolina, as the polls show. I want to finish with quotation from ads from the manufacturer of Bushmaster Firearms, the most popular firearm the United States. I wish I could show you these, or show, the ad shows cards like, membership cards you get when you’re a member of something. And here’s what they say, written on this description of a mock membership card. Man card. This certifies you are a man card holder. Rights and privileges. The bearer of this card has averted complete humiliation. Today he is a man. Fully entitled to all the rights and privileges duly afforded the way ?? before you. A second picture of a card says, Adam now is just unmanly. He avoids contact with tough looking fifth graders. Man card revoked. This ad was taken down after the Newtown Sandy Hook Massacre. Mr. President I would like to send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, you can send forth your amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird moves to amend the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird, let’s wait for it to come up here on the dash. Senator Kinnaird is recognized to explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Since this bill allows handguns or guns to be carried into places that serve alcohol. What this amendment would require is that establishments where firearms are allowed would be required to post a conspicuous notice to let customers know whether or not firearms are allowed on this site. I think the public has a right to know whether guns are allowed where alcohol is served. And this would give the customer an option to avoid a potentially dangerous situation. I urge your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Speak to the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton has the floor to speak to the amendment.

Thank you, Mister President. And thank you, Senator Kinnaird, for pointing out again some of the reasons why we need this legislation. This amendment that you're offering, as it relates to restaurants, is opposed by the Restaurant Association. And it actually defeats the purpose of what this bill does, and so therefore I would urge my colleagues to oppose it. Already, private property owners have the right to restrict firearms if they so choose and they can do that and they can post that firearms are not welcome. So the market can take care of itself if you don't want to go to a restaurant where there may be guns present. Senator Kinnarid, I would respectfully suggest that you search for those restaurants that post that they don't allow firearms on there. So I would encourage my colleagues to defeat the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Mister President. [Speaker Changes] Senator Tillman, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] To speak on the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Senator Tillman has the floor to speak to the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Senator Kinnaird, I do this out of difference to Senator [??East], who's no longer with us, because I know this is what he would say. He would say when you tell criminals they cannot do harm, where the guns are, and where they're not, they'll go shoot somebody where they're not. And that's what your sign would do. Let 'em guess where the guns are. [Speaker Changes] Is there any further discussion or debate? [Speaker Changes] Mister President. [Speaker Changes] Senator Kinnaird, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] To speak a second time on the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Senator Kinnaird has the floor to speak on the amendment a second time. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mister President. I did speak with the Restaurant Association, and it's not that they're opposed, it's that their membership is divided and therefore they could not support it. And I also want to say that we all know that alcohol and guns don't mix, and I'm hoping that you will support this so that the public can know that there is or isn't an allowed use. Thank you. [Speaker Changes] Senator Newton, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] To speak a second time on the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Senator Newton has the floor to speak a second time to the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mister President. Senator Kinnaird, I felt like it's important for the listening audience as well as the members of this body, to remember that the current law in the State of North Carolina already is that it's against the law to consume alcohol and possess a firearm. And nothing in this bill changes that, in fact, this bill strengthens the penalty if you are a concealed carry holder and you're caught consuming alcohol or with any alcohol in your system. So, I appreciate your concern. I think everybody in this body would agree that you shouldn't be drinking and carrying, and the fact of the matter is that concealed carry permit holders by definition, which is who we would allow to go in these establishments with concealed weapons, they've already been through training. And they know that that's the law and they're not going to expose themself to a criminal penalty and a revocation of their permit just to imbibe while they're carrying. So, I encourage my colleagues to defeat the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Any further discussion or debate? Hearing not, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Senate Committee Substitute to House Bill 937. I'm sorry, the question before the Senate is the passage of Amendment 2. All in favor, will vote aye. Opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting and the Clerk will open the vote. Eighteen having voted in the affirmative and Senator Tucker, no; Hartsell, no; Tillman, no...Senator Tucker, back in the chamber again. Thank you, Senator. Sixteen having voted in the affirmative and thirty-two in the negative, Amendment 2 fails. The bill as amended is back before the body. Senator Goolsby, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] I have an amendment, Mister President. [Speaker Changes] Senator Cassidy, you can send forward your amendment. The Clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] Senator Goolsby moves to amend the bill. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mister President. [Speaker Changes] So let's wait for that to refresh one second, Senator. [Speaker Changes] Senator Goolsby is recognized to explain the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Members, this amendment provides that a person convicted of a second felony involving the display or use of a firearm can be indited as an armed habitual felon and sentenced to a minimum of ten years...

In jail. It is careful to not take away the DA's ability to use an enhancement for a fire alarm if that will actually give the criminal more of a sentence, a longer time in jail. I believe this was originally written by Senator Daniel and I appreciate his work on that. I would appreciate your support of it. I will tell you having been a criminal defense attorney for about 20 years now I've represented people who have been accused of a number of things. Armed career felons are people who deserve a special place in jail, but as we talk here about concealed weapon carriers, in all my time, and this is anecdotal, but I've never had a concealed weapon carrier charged with any violent crime. As you all know, to get a concealed weapon you have to submit yourself to a background check, an intensive background check, training, knowing the law, learning how to shoot. They are the safest people that we have in this society. This bill deals with the people who we need to be worried about. This amendment deals rather with the people we need to be worried about and that is the people who are out there committing crimes with guns. We should not fear the armed citizen who's out there protecting himself, his family and others, they don't commit crime.This amendment lets us go after the people who brazenly break our laws and hurt people, and I ask for your support of this amendment. I'll be happy to try and take any questions you might have. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President, speak to the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton has the floor to speak to the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. Colleagues, Senator Goolsby and I had a conversation about this the other day and this is a great amendment. This amendment fits with exactly what the purpose of this bill is, which is to help close loopholes, help strengthen penalties against criminals with guns, and it certainly fits with enhancing law abiding citizens second amendment right. It was a good bill and it's a great amendment and so I commend it to you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Mckissick for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Senator Goolsby a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Goolsby do you yield for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do we have an incarceration note to know what the impact will be of this amendment. Normally if this was going through committee there would be an incarceration note where we look at the cost of this particular provision were it enacted so that we know what its implications would be. So I was wondering if we had that information available to us? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brunstetter what purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I might be of help on that Senator Goolsby if you'd like me to. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I know Senator that it went through your J2 committee so I would hope you could know that it had an incarceration note but Senator Brunstetter please... [SPEAKER CHANGES] I mean referring to this specific amendment we have that's coming up now. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir, it's a bill that cleared your committee, it was. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brunstetter for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES]There was an incarceration note and like many of these increase criminal penalty things that we've seen this year it says yes on fiscal impact and indeterminate amount, and that's an issue we're going to be dealing with in the interim because we're not really getting much helpful information on these incarceration notes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Senator Brunstetter that was my concern. I just think it's important that we know what impact it will truly have in terms of our incarceration levels and how long we're going to have to keep people in jail and what it's gonna cost us. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the senate is the passage of amendment three, all in favor vote aye, opposed vote no, five seconds will be allowed for the voting, the clerk will record the vote. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative, amendment three is adopted, the bill as amended is back before the body. Is there any further discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Bryant for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'll yield to Senator Blue and then I can follow. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Blue for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much Mr. President, to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Blue you have the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I thank Senator Bryant. I was sitting here thinking one of y favorite movies is Tombstone and it stars Kurt Russel and Wyatt Earp and Val Kilmer as Doc Holliday, and the lesson that - anytime it comes on I watch it, I bought it and I just like the movie. But the one lesson that it learned is that Wyatt Earp got in trouble with the guys because he had sense enough to know that when you're packing weapons and you're around alcohol there has to be some control. So he made people check their firearms at the door before they went into the saloon. Now maybe that means that 130 years ago or so they were a lot smarter than we are.

[Speaker changes.]...and the twenty-first century, they were smarter and the early part...later part of the nineteenth century. When I see...and I've been at these venues...when I see that we're sayin' you can bring firearms on college campuses, where hormones are raging with young folk and they get mad about all kinds of things...when I see that you can bring firearms to athletic contests...ya'know for a while they stopped North Carolina State from playing East Carolina because they could really "get into it" at these football games....several people were hurt in Charlotte and here at NC State's campus but when I see that you can bring firearms to Walnut Creek Amphitheatre, places we have here in Raleigh, you can get 20-25,000 people out there on the lawn and stuff and I've been there many times and beer flows pretty freely and people get mad at each other. It's not just the person who has the firearm but, if it's around somebody else who might not be as level-headed, they're gonna grab the first thing that they can to try to even the fighting field with whoever they're wrestling or fighting with. When I see that you can carry firearms in parades and funeral processions...had a cousin that died in Baltimore several years ago and we were takin' him to the Veterans' Cemetery to bury him and we met another funeral procession and my cousin said, "well, you know you can tell that those are Bloods and Crips" by the way they're actin'...they have the party buses and all that stuff...these stretched-out cars and he said "you better to the best you can to turn or get out the way when you meet them cause everyone of 'em is pretty highly armed" and I think about this under this bill. They could have their firearms and all their weapons in this funeral procession. When I think that someway or other, that the basic lessons that I learned from Tombstone, just certainly aren't registering with us and I'm not gonna change anybody's mind 'bout how they vote on this but I just want you to reflect a little bit on...on... [Speaker changes.] Mister President...Mister President... [Speaker changes.] what we're doing by repeating the same mistakes that our society has already taken steps to prevent and (Santayana????) said "he who does not learn the lessons of history is doomed to repeat its mistakes." [Speaker changes.] Senator Brock, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Would Senator Blue yield for a question? [Speaker changes.] Senator Blue, do you yield? [Speaker changes.] I yield. [Speaker changes.] Senator Blue, can you tell the Senate what happened in/to Morgan ????? younger brother. [Speaker changes.] He got shot. [Speaker changes.] Can you tell me what happened to Virgil ???????, the older brother? [Speaker changes.] He got shot as well. [Speaker changes.] Speak to the bill, Mister President. [Speaker changes.] Senator Brock has the floor to speak to the bill. [Speaker changes.] Both of them were shot because they were unarmed and the "bad guys", the gang was armed. I think you...where your point, especially with the gangs, the Bloods and the Crips that are already in violation of the law with their activities. "Bad guys" don't pay attention to our statutes. Law-abiding people need this legislation. Thank you. [Speaker changes.] Mister President? [Speaker changes.] Mister President. [Speaker changes.] Mister President. [Speaker changes.] Senator Tillman, Senator Bryant is up next to speak to the bill so Senator Bryant, you have the floor. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister President, I wanted to ask a question to Senator Newton. [Speaker changes.] Senator Newton, do you yield? [Speaker changes.] Oh yes, I'll yield. (Lsughter.) [Speaker changes.] Thank you so much, Senator Newton. [Speaker changes.] To my good friend. Senator Bryant, I'll always yield. [Speaker changes.] Thank you...thank you. This is regard to the confidentiality provisions because we had a separate bill in J2???? that...maybe the...somehow it got caught up in this bill...and it...was....I have a concern that it appears that there is no way, even with a judicial order for the public...the press...or, maybe researchers to get information about concealed-carry permit holders and the underlying criteria...you know, in order to determine the research problems or to investigate what may seem to be some mistakes or patterns or something like that. I was just concerned...in the bill we had in J2, you at least could get access to you for legitimate reasons with a judicial order or something and I noticed that there's no such provision in this bill...in the version that we had in our committee, there was at least that opportunity. [Speaker changes.] Senator Bryant, we can take a look at that specifically. The purpose of this bill and the provision of this bill is to protect the confidential information about permit holders themselves. It's...here's not any intent to prevent there being any kind of statistical data that could be...like how many were given out in total...and I thought that we had adopted the language that came out of that...

but I may be mistaken about that [SPEAKER CHANGES] is there going to be any objection to third reading or anything else done on this [SPEAKER CHANGES] I hope not. [SPEAKER CHANGES] okay. I was concerned that it just seems to completely close out to the extent that something somewhere may not be going correct. There may be some crimes and people with these ?? conceal permits and we don't have a way for either the press, the university health agency, safety agencies to investigate how many are given out maybe the zip code. Whatever it would be appropriate data without the persons name and address or zip codes I don't know what other information they would have. We had researched that in the committee at the time and I wasn't aware ?? it all got into J1 its one of those J1 J2 kinda situations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr President this is the language I believe cam directly out of the house version on the confidentiality part which I thought was the same language that came out of that bill the purpose of the confidentiality though is to prevent exactly what has occurred on a number of occasions where by news organizations and potentially others who may have criminal intent are trying to get specific information about who has a concealed weapon permit either to embarrass them or intimidate them or publicize it. Part of the purpose of having a concealed weapons permit is so that you are anonymous about and if your publicized in the Charlotte Observer that you are then that defeats that purpose. It also exposes the person who has such a permit to perhaps harassment by the folks that don't really like guns and don't think anybody should have a gun and think we're all going to put flowers in our hair and and sing and drink coca-cola. And so the other main reason why we want the confidentiality is to make sure were not giving information to potential criminals who may target those people when their not at home hoping to find a gun in their home and things like that [SPEAKER CHANGES] follow up Mr President [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] yes [SPEAKER CHANGES] I was wondering if you would be really out of shape if I object the third. We had had an agreement, gotten information from the sheriff's department what would be convenient for them to report if you could get everything but the name and address and I would have to then pull up the details of what they agree could be reported either with a judicial order or in research. Legitimate research on investigative purposes by the public so if there was some concern about these permits and who got them and whether it was appropriate it would at least be some way of looking at the statistics [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Bryant I'm fine with the way the bill is and certainly you have the right to object to a third reading and I'll be happy to talk with you more about it offline or when were done with session but I would prefer the bill to go forward. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is the end of the road for the bill correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] if I may. I assume so but with the house we never know [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr President [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Cook for what purpose do you rise [SPEAKER CHANGES] to debate the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Cook has the floor to speak to the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] I just want to make three points. My favorite movie was the magnificent seven and it was about good guys with guns defeating bad guys with guns. My second point is life is not a movie. Third I don't think any of the examples that Senator Blue gave us entailed people with concealed carry permits. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr President [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] speak on the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick has the floor to speak to the bill [SPEAKER CHANGES] the thing that concerns me about this bill is that it allows for the continued proliferation of fire arms and certainly the concealed fire arms in this case but you know we already have pretty generous provisions already dealing with long arms and it deeply concerns me because I;m not certain that we want to continue down this path. Its a very slippery slope. I hear about limiting access to information relating to pistol permits and things of that sort because somebody might find out where the guns are and they'll go steal them were I think any logical thief would probably be very smart to stay away from property

they thought it was an arsenal and full of firearms. In my mind, that'd be counterintuitive. But more importantly, why do we want to make it easier for people to carry these guns? In parades, and in funerals, and into places that have alcohol. It's counterintuitive to me that we want to encourage that type of activity. I'm probably one of the few people in here who has actually stood eye-to-eye with somebody with a firearm and was shot and survived it and lived to tell about it. And I could have two reactions coming out of that crisis. I could have been one that went out and loaded up my car and loaded up my home and got every gun that I could imaginably come up with. Or I could sit there and rethink that maybe part of the problem was the proliferation of firearms that exists. And maybe we should take a more logical, common sense approach in terms of how we regulate it. I think this bill--in some instance it has provisions which are good, but on the whole it has language in there which I find deeply troubling. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rabin, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To address the last comment, if I may, please? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, you can speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The one thing I'm glad about when I was faced with a person who had a gun is that I had a gun when I needed one. All of this stuff that we're talking about right now, I have to comment. I don't know what kind of a law except banning all guns would make some of the folks who talked against this bill happy. I will tell you right now that I am a proud concealed-weapons carrier. Anybody who wants to know, write it down. I will also tell you that the information in the, my adjudication as a person qualified to do that is well known to every law enforcement agency in the country. If I get caught up doing something and they press that button, it's just like getting caught when I'm in the car speeding. They know who I am, they know what I've got, and they know all about me, the data are already there. All this other stuff is just rhetoric to make people happy. I'm in favor of the bill and the amendment, and expanding even further, if we could, the ability to carry for honest, God-fearing people who have gotten their license to do so. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak a second time on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick has floor to speak a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I might say I have a concealed-carry permit, but I don't need the right to carry a gun into a parade, or to a funeral, or to a place that has alcohol. There are certain things that we should, as a matter of good judgment and common sense, not do, even if you do have that permit. And the last thing we need to do is to put more guns on public university campuses. I look last Friday, out in California, Santa Monica, and another tragic shooting. Only we've become so desensitized to it, when it was reported in the local newspaper here in Raleigh, it wasn't even on the front page except for a little invitation that said go back to page four. We get that desensitized to the use of guns and violence, we need to do something about it in a more profound and significant way. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Nesbitt, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, would Senator Newton yield to a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton, do you yield to a question from Senator Nesbitt? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, sir. This thing has been amended two or three times. I wanted to see if a couple of, if I understand it, some provisions of this. Are you making private the issuance of permits to buy guns? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Senator Nesbitt. If you look on page 8, line 33 of the bill, it states the section--I'm sorry, I just told you the wrong--page 8, section 13, which, that's the area where it is. And if you look in there it says that it's not a public record, and it shall make a list of permit holders, permit information available on request to all state and local law enforcement agencies. The state Bureau of Investigation shall make a list of permit holders and information collected by the sheriff to process an application for a permit and so forth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Nesbitt has the floor to speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. And I was asking that because I couldn't tell if the dealers' records were private or if the permits were private. I had a call two or three weeks ago

...the “Charlotte Observer,” wanting to know my opinion of a Bill, I don’t think it was this one, but a Bill that specifically said that it was going to make these records private. In the course of that conversation, and I’m a gun owner and I get permits from time to time and I told them that it didn’t bother me that that was public information. I have to go through a check in order to get the permits, so all that’s handled. In the course of the conversation… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Would Senator Nesbitt yield for a quick question that may get at what he’s trying to address? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] As I continue to read, Senator Nesbitt, as you go into Section 13, it’s the, “Confidentiality of records. Provided that the dealer shall make the records available upon request to all state and local law enforcement agencies.” I’m reading from page eight starting at line 41 down. So far as the sales, that would be confidential as well. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Right. Thank you, sir. The part I’m speaking to is the records of these permits. Apparently the, “Charlotte Observer,” had done, or someone there in Charlotte, had done an analysis. They went and got the gun permits and apparently these things are good for five years. I knew they were good for a long time because I’ve used them a couple of years later. I didn’t realize they were good that long. They cross-checked that against the list of felons convicted during that period of time and found a significant number of people who were felons who had valid gun permits. These things have unintended consequences. I would say to the members in here, “Don’t always question your opponent’s point of view. It’s not upon us to say why somebody’s thinking about something.” There are legitimate concerns that we may be going too far here and that people will get hurt. I kind of want those records kept public. When I did domestic law, I don’t do it anymore, but one of the first things you do when you get in a threatening situation is tell them to see if he’s got an outstanding gun permit. Does he have weapons? That’s part of what you ask to figure out how to secure your client. It would be handy to be able to get that information if you went to court to ask a judge to revoke it during the pendency of an action if there’s been any kind of hostility there. There are reasons these things are on the books, and it’s not to punish someone or to embarrass someone. I’m not embarrassed that I’m a gun owner. A lady asked me, she said, “Well if they know that you’ve got guns, aren’t they liable to break in and get them?” I said, “No ma’am, all my guns work.” They’re not going to come where there’s guns. So, I’m not sure this benefits gun owners, that’s what I’m trying to tell you. I don’t want…In the area of mental illness, I can tell you I labored in that field since 2004 up here, there is no good database and record. Those things happen and people get off their meds and they’re out of touch with reality and somebody ought to be able to check and find out what they’re doing. So, that’s one of the provisions. These members that are trying to tell you about taking weapons to sporting events, putting weapons in the trunk of your car at school facilities, that’s what we used to do back in the ‘60s, and if you needed it you could go out there and get it. It’s not that hard to go out to your car and get your gun out of the back of the car. There’s a reason we said, “Don’t do that. Just don’t put them anywhere within the reach of people who might do harm with them.” So there are legitimate concerns about this Bill. That’s what I wanted to point out. The one that I just brought up, I think privatizing these lists, especially permit lists, where the permit’s good for five years and you could have a very dangerous person with a gun permit go buy a gun. I told her, “We’ve got to do something so that we find out what’s happening before 10, 20 people are shot and we realize that person should never have had a gun.” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hise, one second…

the move on to dismiss the pages for the day pages that we may rise to hear five so those of you who need to leave. please feel free to be dismissed at this time. summarize for procure us a centre question centre midfield starlet 's same name as I have gotten this done fast. [SPEAKER CHANGES] this is not my understanding that you know that permit issued that would last for up to five years allow someone to purchase a firearm. with that in the real gifts like a centre- appreciate the question very much appreciate opportunity to address that point specifically as soon as the as raise his arm is Charles overall article that this doesn't reference wrong to lie in archaic and and completely on antiquated system of the pistol purchase permit audit position shares in that system was created back in nineteen nineteen, or settlers thereabouts on something for Jim Crow era purposes to arrive on minorities from the purchase pistols. at least that's the some of the history that I read on it and that system is not tied into our background check system, and there was no way he was no mechanism to revoke that five-year permit in-service arms, her professionalism Mrs. one thousand closing this bill MSN address a question, because this is the member: we are closing the school to make sure that felons cannot come out. pistols at the gun store because this program is that these meter was talking about are not limited to let him in the work potentially in themselves over showed it was was this that you can comment from Sheriff and and everything would be appear to be found in that time and presumably so sometime. love you could come in: authority or something that would've disqualified me from anyone can him your time. I wonder how his opponent is still good five years minimum of five years down the road for writing the gun shop and buy yourself a personal, because with that permit you to go through a background check, but no slew what were known as were discontinuing all that stuff to close that loophole 's antibody has bounced back to still has to go in at the time they just may have a background check. so there's an opportunity to make sure that nothing has happened and that they are lawfully assembled by it. at that time, the school strengthens moves and those without mental health. this move strengthens were going on so we strengthen our national background system on his nose designed to close loopholes is designed to tighten penalties and criminals, not law-abiding citizens is designed to enhance and strengthen our reporting system and most important, and I think this is important for you to use designed to enhance the Second Amendment rights for all law-abiding concealed carry permit holders. talk about guns out of the trunk work, concealed carry permit holder people gone to extra background checks take an extra training and gone the extra effort has received through the body. people that run to their trunk when they have a problem. this restaurants. so what if the other states allow exactly what would be in Louisville, but I escaped they don't have a wow wow West lake Centre blues to talk about if you were there,and I'm glad she did some hearts, and I think your question. if you believe the you soon him a strong combination of efforts to enhance our Second Amendment rights that citizens not groups, not the gene has probably consumed. when the process. anyway is definitely ghost writing is for criminals that use guns unlawfully so for those inclined limit… you might think that you have about how you explain that to you constituents come election time. I believe the seven penalties for felons who committed their crimes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] we don't need further discussion or debate was supposed to have been. I just want to get dinner reading. we haven't gotten there yet. centre centre on chapter of your eyes like this wasn't not too long to Israel for the purpose of the speaking on Bill• Russell is a

As a proud gun owner, I will support this bill as in many bills here there is not everything in it that we like. There are a couple of areas where I have got some problems with that Commanding center Newton in his efforts I thank him for bringing this forward. I did want to you know on both sides of the aisle there are tremendous observations about gun ownership that the minority has made and I appreciate that. I did want to clear up on one thing though that Senator Blue said. My great grand father though so much of wired up that he named my grand father wire and my grandfather named my dad wire and my son my name is wire and my son’s first name is wire and you pointed out that wired up was smart enough to have every body check their guns at the door, which is a good observation and I want to submit to you that the reason he did that was that he would be the only one in the room with the gun. [Speaker Changes] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none question for the senate is the passage of the senate committee substitute the house bill 937 as amended on its second reading all in favor would vote Aye and oppose the vote “No”, five seconds would be allotted for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. 32 having voted in the affirmative and 16 in the negative senate committee substitute to house bill 937 has amended passes second reading. Senator Bryant objections will remain on the calendar. So we are going to move on to bills for concurrence. Senate Bill 9. clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Senate bill 9, utility design survey location surfaces [Speaker Changes] Senator Meredith is recognized [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr. President. I would just ask every one concurs, Thank you [Speaker Changes] Any further discussion or debate. Senator Bryant would you turn off your microphone? Thank you Any further discussion or debate. Hearing none. The question for the senate is the motion to concur in the house committee substitute number 2 to senate bill 9. All in favor vote Aye oppose vote No. 5 seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote. 49 having voted in affirmative and 0 in the negative the senate concurs in the house committee substitute number 2 to senate bill 9. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. Senate bill 76. The clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] Senate Bill 76, [??] Energy jobs act [Speaker Changes] Senator Newton is recognized [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr. president. Our colleagues in the house are on remarkable number 76 and there are quite a few changes that we need to talk about and I would ask you to vote against the motion to concur. [Speaker Changes] Senator Newton recommends you to vote against the motion to concur. Any further discussion or debate. Hearing none. The question for the senate is the motion to concur in the house committee substitute to senate bill 76. All in favor vote Aye oppose vote No. 5 seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote. 8 has voted in the affirmative and 41 in the affirmative. The senate does not concur in the motion to house bill substitute senate bill 76 and the house will be so notified. Senate bill 124. The clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Senate bill 124, shoot gun inside to incite fear [Speaker Changes] Senator Brunstetter is recognized [Speaker Changes] Thank you members. The house just changed the underlying offence from a Class E felony to class F felony. I would ask you to concur. [Speaker Changes] Senator Brunstetter has asked you to concur. Any discussion or debate. Hearing none. The question for the senate is the motion to concur in the house committee substitute to senate bill 124. All in favor vote Aye oppose vote No. 5 seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote. Bryant. Bryant. Aye. 49 having voted in affirmative and 0 in the negative the senate concurs in the house committee substitute to senate bill 124. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. Senate Bill 222 The clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Senate bill 122

Speaker: will revise controlled substance reporting. Speaker: Senator Allran is recognized. Allran: Thank you, Mr. President. The House amended this bill to allow a sheriff or police chief to access the controlled substances reporting system when investigating a specific case involving illegal use of prescription drugs, pursuant to a court order. It’s a good amendment and I urge you to vote for concurrence, thank you. Speaker: Senator Allran asked that you concur. Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question is before this senate. The motion to concur with the committee to substitute Bill 22. All in favor vote aye, opposed vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. Apodaca, aye. Forty-nine having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative, the senate concurs with the committee substituting Senate Bill 22. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. Senate Bill 306. The clerk will read. Clerk: Senate Bill 306, Capital Punishment Amendments. Speaker: Senator Goolsby is recognized. Goolsby: Mr. President, the House has made a few changes concerning notification dates and scheduling periods for executions, the report dates by the attorney general and the central prison warden, and also they put a requirement in that the licensed physician be someone separate from the prison doctor. I would ask that you vote for concurrence. Speaker: Senator Goolsby recommends that you concur. Is there any further discussion or debate? Senator McKissick, for what purpose do you rise? McKissick: To speak on the bill. Speaker: Senator McKissick has the floor to speak. McKissick: Of course this is the bill that many of you will recognize as the repeal of the Racial Justice Act. And in my mind it’s really a sad, shameful day for North Carolina when we’ve turned out backs on our commitment to eliminate racial bias and prejudice from the courtroom in death penalty cases. When the Racial Justice Act was originally approved by the House and by the Senate, those that supported the death penalty as well as those that were opposed to the death penalty all came together. In fact I would say there are probably more who believed in the death penalty than those that did not, all of whom said that in these death penalty cases, we want to make sure that when the prosecutor seeks the death penalty, or when the jury decides to impose it, or when they are selecting juries in these cases, that it is done free of racial biases and prejudices. That was a strong commitment. That’s something we should stand behind. It’s not something we should retreat from. Since then we’ve had studies done, exhaustive studies that came back with evidence that clearly showed that prosecutors in these cases were out there eliminating and striking African Americans from serving on many of these juries, particularly those cases where the defendant was black and the victim was white. We just need to make certain that our Bill of Rights is respected, that we have juries of our peers. And the only way to do so is to know that our prosecutors understand there’s a code of conduct. That can’t go in there and randomly just strike-strike-strike people based upon their race. We had judge Gregory Weeks down in Cumberland County preside over a case for over four weeks. He ended up writing an opinion that was close to 200 pages. That was really something that should have struck all of our consciences in terms of the language that he stated. One of the things he said was the conclusion that he had reached, based on these four weeks of cases, was that the words and deeds of prosecutors in these defendants’ cases, and the writings of prosecutors long buried in case files and brought to light, for the first time the hearing presented strong, powerful evidence of race-consciousness and race-based decision making. If you look at the lists that were produced, the lists that prosecutors had, they’d write down that somebody was black along with their history and indicated that they needed to strike them. That’s not getting a jury of your peers. That’s wrong. That’s not something that we should embrace. We need to tell our prosecutors. One thing the Racial Justice Act did is send a strong, effective message to them that we’re not going to tolerate that in our courtrooms in North Carolina. And the same study is out there. I’m sure some of you are probably tired of hearing me talk about this. But what we know is when an African-American is the defendant in these cases, and the victim is white, that It’s two-and-a-half to three times more likely that the prosecutor…

...seek the death penalty and juries will impose it. And why the prosecutors want African-Americans off these juries, because they think they're going to be light on crime. And somehow they're going to allow these people to get off. Most African-Americans that I know many of them have been victims of crimes. They're in neighborhoods frequently where there's high incidences of crime. They're not going to go in there and make decisions willy-nilly. They're going to be thoughtful jurors. They're going to be doing their constitutionally charged responsibilities and handling it effectively. When we repeal that bill, we're repealing a bill that sends a message to prosecutors that they can go back to conducting business as usual. They no longer have to think about their conducts and the repercussions. We know the district attorneys have already conducted seminars during the time the Racial Justice Act was effective that basically indicated ways and methods that you can get around it. To circumvent it. That's wrong. That's unconscionable. That's not something we should tolerate. Send a strong, effective message to them that we won't stand for this. And I guarantee you that if race was in this country flip-flopped, and African-Americans were in the majority and whites were in a distinct minority, and there'd been the history of discrimination throughout the decades, many of you might feel somewhat differently. When I sit here today and I think about hearing something on the radio yesterday about George Wallace. Fifty years ago, he stood in front of the university doors to stop them from being integrated in Alabama. But you know what, George Wallace repudiated those views and he moved on. Strom Thurman held views that he repudiated and he moved on. Heard today that 50 years ago Medgar Evers was shot. That person who shot him eventually was held accountable and came to justice. Why do I point out some of these things? Because I would like to hope and think that a decade from today or two decades from today, those of you that are going to vote, go ahead and repeal the Racial Justice Act, will have to explain it to the next generation. When somebody goes back and looks through our historical archives as to why we did what we have done. And I'll hope that you will not want to be in a position where you have to repudiate your views, or repudiate the position which has been taken. I don't expect to change a lot of votes in here today. Don't expect to change a single one. But I would not be doing the right thing in my mind if I did not speak these words and bring it to your attention. Since I was the author of that Racial Justice Act. That was my bill. And to the extent to which it made changes that were profound and significant and I think that's something we should look at. I heard people say, "Well, almost everybody on death row filed a petition." The only thing anybody ever had to do was to hear those cases. Hear them. If the cases were not justified, they deserve to be dismissed and they should have been dismissed. But if they were valid and we know that four of those cases were determined to be valid. Let ?? get out of jail. They're serving the rest of their lives in prison without the possibility of parole. And today, more than ever, we should be thoughtful about when we impose the death penalty. Five people on North Carolina's death row since 1999 have been exonerated. Juries got it wrong. Our criminal justice system does not always predict and provide the correct result. The DNA advances and evidence being what it is, there's hardly a day, a week, or month that passes that somewhere in the news we don't hear about somebody who was wrongfully incarcerated being freed. So we should be more careful and thoughtful and reflective in the imposition of the death penalty. Those of us that came together, those in favor of the death penalty, those opposed that supported the Racial Justice Act to purge our courtrooms' bias, racism and prejudices should be commended on what we did. I regret to the day we will reverse those efforts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Parmon, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Parmon, you have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. I feel almost like the Baptist preacher that says he get up every Sunday and preach the good news and nobody hear him, but he has to preach it anyway. So you going to have to hear me...

...began today say that the righteous justice act which we passed in 2009, is an act that will just guarantee that we have fairness in our court system. I refuse to say justice, because when we refuse to acknowledge that we have flaws in our court system, that impeach justice. I can't continue to refer to it as the Criminal Justice System. I was appalled when we talked about this bill. When we discussed this bill the last time, before it went to the House, right here, in this Senate, it was important enough for one of the members of this body to remind you that the cases had been heard by a minority judge. Such as to infer that because a minority judge, an African American Judge, heard those cases, that it wasn't valid. To me, that is a form of discrimination. Some [??]letters ask the DA's that exempt jurors when they have sheets that they put certain comments by, in order to exempt them from the jury. I just want to say that like [??] Bo preacher, you may not hear me, you may not listen to me but I am going to tell you anyway. Racism in our criminal justice system is a fact, it has been proven over and over again. And today, as we vote, and I know it is going to pass, to allow injustice in the court system, I just wan't you to know that if you ever hear of a case where we made a mistake, the blood is on your hands because you have heard it. And once we do something that we can't undo, we have to give an account for it. I would ask you not to concur, but I know that this is what I wan't you to think of the Baptist preacher who told you so. Thank you. [speaker changes] [??] Any further discussion. Senator Goolsby... Mr. President?... Senator Goolsby for what purpose you rise? Speaking on the motion. Senator Goolsby has the floor to speak to the motion. Thank you, Mr. President. I have heard two of my fellow Senators, once again confuse the issue in this matter. The RJA has only been able to be used in cases where we know that we have a cold-blooded, first degree murderer who attempts to call the District Attorney, a racist, and him or herself a victim. The problem that we all have, who have voted the majority on this, and about who we have voted before, is the way the bill was written. It deals with frequency. Not dis-proportionality. Not bias. That is why Senator Harrington's District Attorney, [??] Mark Fell, has three cases from the three people he put on death row, Senator McKissick. All three white. [??] Block Bell is white. And, because of the way he wrote that bill, Senator, they actually do have an argument. Their argument is that the frequency of the death penalty given to one class, is greater than that to another. In fact, [??]Block Bell has only put white men on death row. That is why they appealed under your bill that it does not deal with the word discrimination. Does not deal with racial bias. It deals with frequency. That is why virtually everyone on death row has appealed under it. And that is why it is has caused a defacto moratorium on the death penalty in our state. You mentioned the innocence project, finding [??] a UD2, Senator McKissick. Finding out when improper evidence has been used. DNA is wrong. Those types of things, That actually was started by Republican, Chief Supreme Court Justice, [??] High Beverly Lake. It has been very helpful in weeding out cases where they are mistakes. But to appeal into RJA and to make this frequency argument that holds no water, you have to be a cold-bloodied, convicted killer. That isn't claiming at all that I am mistakenly on death row, is that the DA is a racist. That I am only here because I am a victim. And, you know who I look to are the families of those victims. Roy Turner, black [??] police officer, murdered by a black man, who has been put now, life in prison, instead of being on death row. I have seen his family [??] in these pews. I have met them. They are real people. They are African Americans, and they hurt. Because their killer is not getting the justice the jury gave him. Additionally, I have met many times, Yvette Howell's mother, who is actually a high school friend I know of Senator...

Brock. Murdered at 17 years old. Shot in the head. A black young lady who had a whole life before her. Her brother Fonzi/g who the killer shot in the head and then the gun jammed. And he couldn’t finish the job. So he took a hammer. And he took the claw end and almost ripped the top of Fonzi’s/g head off. Senator Brock I see has just entered the chamber again. I’m talking about your friend from high school Senator who was murdered. Murderer was a black man. The victim a black young lady. He’s appealed under the Racial Justice Act and hopes to get off death row using it. Folks it is a poorly written law. It does not deal with racism. All of the things that Senator McKissick talked about we deal with. I’ve represented over the years many, many people and a large number of African Americans. And I use bats/g and motions every time I can in a trial. If there’s any prejudice I feel like’s going on at all I fight like a mad man to prove that. And to stop the D.A. from taking people improperly off. Everything we’ve talked about can be argued on motions for appropriate relief right now. In fact we restate all of those things in the bill. Motions for appropriate relief. Writs of Habeas Corpus. Appeals to the North Carolina Supreme Court. Discretionary review by the North, by the United States Supreme Court. We have multiple avenues of appeal that work in the innocence commission. But to write a bill poorly that deals not with what is not alleged to be dealing with but only with frequency does nothing but thwart the will of the people of North Carolina. And to this day it is to have a death penalty. And I ask you to please concur with the motion and see to it that the will of the people and the victim’s families are met. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick you have the floor to speak a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] First/g [UNKNOWN] I just want to state for purposes of clarity that when it comes to heinous crimes, those people charged with them, they committed them, they should stand before the law, stand before the courts and get their judgment. What we cannot stand for and tolerate it’s racism in our courtrooms. We can’t stand for prosecutors perking/g African Americans from serving on juries. We can’t stand for those prosecutors going in there and seeking the death penalty because, perhaps the African American is the defendant and the victim is white. Last year, what did we do? Senator Goolsby brought you a bill. The bill was intended specifically at trying to revise the Racial Justice Act to do what he thought was appropriate. To fix it in ways that was supposed to make it effective. What changed between the time that thous/g fixes and revisions occurred and today was simply another case that came before Judge Whiggs/g where the outcome was a decision being made that the person had a valid claim under the Racial Justice Act. And those persons continue to serve in jail today without the possibility of parole. As long as our courtrooms are free of racial bias and prejudice, as long as our juries are making decisions the right way, as long as jury selection is done the right way, nobody has a valid claim under the Racial Justice Act. But the best way to decide whether those so-called dubious claims in fact had merit or not was to hear them. But our prosecutors didn’t want to hear ‘em. They deferred hearing them until they could get back here and put enough pressure to bear to get you to repeal it. And that’s what they did. They circumvented it. Get the judges to hear them. If the claims were valid then you got the relief that was requested. If they lack validity then, you, those, those claims would have been denied under Racial Justice Act. Very simple. Easy recipe for justice. Not to circumvent the will and intent of the General Assembly in saying that we want to rid these prejudices from our courtrooms and from our judicial system in capital punishment cases. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the concurrence. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird has the floor to speak to the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I wanted to address a different part of this bill. I have worked on death penalty issues for many, many years. And one of the things that those of us who are opposed to the death penalty and want see it somehow mitigated. And of course those, there are those of us who would like and I do not speak for my fellow Democrats but there those of us who would like to see [UNKNOWN]

is the state do away with the death penalty, but one of the things that we did, was we spoke with doctors, medical doctors who feel the way that we do about the death penalty, and we got them to go to their medical board, which they did to say that killing people in the name of the state, violates their oath to do no harm, to care for all people and to save lives. Now this is true of all of these other people that you have mentioned in this bill that are now allowed to take a life in the name of the state. And I just want you to think about one thing. On the death certificate of the person who has been executed by the state of North Carolina, the cause of death is homicide. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate. Senator Bryant for ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President and members of the of the Senate to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Senator Bryant has the floor to speak to the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the Senate, I wanted to just clarify a couple of points. One is that it is unfortunate to me that we want to engage in a cover-up for the District Attorneys in this situation who've been shown to have engaged in explicit racially discriminatory conduct in trying these death penalty cases, and there's also been evidence that they have collectively worked together to develop strategies to purge African-Americans from the jury in contravention of the very case, the Batson case, that Senator Goolsby is saying he would often use to protect his defendants, so they have clearly shown an intention to circumvent the constitutional rights of the African-Americans in this community and this state. And all citizens in this state. In addition, it surely is important that these are convicted murderers who are, who have been given the death penalty, that is ultimately important. However, in the criminal justice system that we have constitutionally in this country, as important is that those convictions are done, and the ultimate penalty is rendered in a situation where the constitutional rights of all the citizens are respected. And the people who are now have their sentences commuted to life in prison without parole are not there because of a poorly written law, and their families do not have the justice you would want them to have because of that, it's because they had a District Attorney who used explicitly racial discriminatory practices in prosecuting the case. That's the only way that the judge was able to make findings and that those sentences have been commuted under this law. And I want to reemphasize too that it is short-sighted of you as whites, to not want to support racial justice across the board because whites can also be hurt by racial discrimination not just African-Americans, Asian, Latinos, and American Indians; Whites can also be hurt too, and if it is the case that a District Attorney is prosecuting whites for death who kill whites and not whites who kill or anyone who kills African-Americans or others for death, that is also harmful to whites, so racial discrimination hurts all groups, not just any one group, and it is short-sighted of you not to want to stand up for racial fairness in this case, and to support the explicit racial discriminatory behavior of the prosecutors that have been documented in these cases, and for that reason, I ask you to vote no to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the motion to concur, and the house committee substitute to Senate bill 306, all in favor will vote Aye, opposed vote No, five seconds will be allowed for the voting, the clerk will record the vote. Tillman: Aye Nesbitt: No Thirty-three have voted in the affirmative, and sixteen in the negative, the Senate concurs, and the house committee substitute to Senate Bill 306 will be enrolled and sent to the Governor, Senate Bill 409 ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 409 obsessed costs, restraining orders. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tarte is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, thanks Mr. President, members, there is one modification

[Speaker Changes] Concur and we will take care of it in conference. Thank you. [Speaker Changes] Senator Tarte asks that you do not concur is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none the question for the Senate is the motion to concur in the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 409. All in favor vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The Clerk will record the vote. Walters, Jenkins, No, Nesbitt, Kinnaird, Graham, No, No, No, Rabon, No. 1 having voted in the affirmative and 48 in the negative, the Senate fails to concur in the House Committee Substitute Senate Bill 409, and the House will be so notified. [Speaker Changes] Senator Cook, for what purpose do you rise? [Laughter] [Speaker Changes] Its not going well, I change my vote. [Speaker Changes] Senator Cook changes his vote. [Speaker Changes] 0 to 49 is the final number. Senate Bill 439, the clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] Senate Bill 439, men in ?? limited liability act. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President? [Speaker Changes] Senator Barringer, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] To recommend concurrence, only grammatical and technical corrections were made. [Speaker Changes] Senator Barringer recommends you concur, is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question for the Senate is the motion to concur in the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 439, all in favor vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The Clerk will record the vote. Nesbitt, aye, Kinniard, aye, Rabon aye, Parmon, aye. 49 having voted in the affirmative and 0 in the negative. The Senate concurs in the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 439, it will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. House Bill 443, the clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] House Bill 443, disposition of abandoned firearms. [Speaker Changes] Senator Brock is recognized. [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr. President, the House actually made some good changes going into greater detail also allowing the abandoned firearms to be sent to a museum if it is of historical significance. I urge your support and ask you to concur. [Speaker Changes] Senator Brock asks you to concur is there any discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question for the Senate is the motion to concur in the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 443, all in favor vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The Clerk will record the vote. 47 having voted in the affirmative and 2 in the negative. The Senate concurs in the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 443. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President. [Speaker Changes] Senator Nesbitt. [Speaker Changes] Change my vote to aye. [Speaker Changes] Senator Nesbitt changes his vote to aye. 48 to 1 is the final count. And the Senate concurs, it will be enrolled and sent to the Governor. Senate Bill 452, the clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] Senate bill 452, jurisdiction amounts arbitration, small claims court. [Speaker Changes] Senator Goolsby is recognized. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President, the changes that the House made is they changed the district court jurisdictional amount from 20,000 that is currently up to 25,000. They also limited the attorneys fees to $10,000 maximum in judgements, less than 25000, it was under the 20, it was 10, so its going to be 10 under the 25. And then, they also gave a time period of one years where you can file lawsuits in either district or superior court when the jurisdictional amount ranges between 10,000 and 25000 for confused attorneys, I guess. but I would recommend that you concur. [Speaker Changes] Senator Goolsby asks that you concur. Is there any discussions? [Speaker Changes] Mr. President. [Speaker Changes] Senator Blue, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] Will Senator Goolsby yield for a question? [Speaker Changes] Senator Goolsby do you yield? [Speaker Changes] Yes. [Speaker Changes] I’m sorry, I was listening to your explanation, have you created a new statute of limitation you say on claims under $25,000. [Speaker Changes] No sir, the law correctly allows a maximum of attorneys fees, where a judge awards it. I didn’t realize this until I read what the House changed, because they had to go in and find this and change it too. Currently, if you win a case and the judge gives you attorneys few, they’re limited to $10,000 if you have a $20,000 judgement. They had to change that to $10,000 for a $25,000, thats what I meant. [Speaker Changes] Yeah, another question, Mr. President. [Speaker Changes] Senator Goolsby, do you yield?

[Speaker changes.]...stand that but you said something about a year within which to... [Speaker changes.] Oh, yes sir. [Speaker changes.] bring your clean????? [Speaker changes.] It's not a statute of limitations action, it's simply, since we're changing the jurisdictional amount in District Court, this is Representative Stam's idea...(Laughter.)...that we would allow...I don't wanna confuse you any more that I already have. We're going to allow District Court or Superior Court to be proper jurisdictional for filings ranging between ten and twenty-five. Over twenty-five, it is Superior Court but, between ten and twenty-five, it's now going to be District or Superior Court for a one year period until June 30th, next year. [Speaker changes.] One last question. [Speaker changes.] Senator Goolsby to you. [Speaker changes.] Thank you. As I understand it...and realize it's been a while but it was my understanding that the amounts were allocational rather than jurisdictional. [Speaker changes.] Yes... [Speaker changes.] that is, whatever court you ???? it in, as long as it was in the general court of justice, if you brought $100,000 case in the District Court [Speaker changes.] And I've done that! [Speaker changes.] And I have. It was up to the opposing counsel to try...because by consent, parties quite often will decide to do a case in the District Court. And so, this one year experiment...does it do anything at all to the question of allocation. [Speaker changes.] No. [Speaker changes.] That is, if you bring a million dollar case in the District Court, it does nothing on jurisdiction, you just hafta move it to Superior Court...at some point if the opposing party wants to. [Speaker changes.] Yes, sir. It leaves it the same way except nobody apparently can force a removal to Superior Court if it's between ten and twenty-five. It can be in Superior or District Court for this one year period. I didn't think it was necessary. It was somethin' they wanted to do. I just wanna get the bill passed. I mean I know it doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't see it causing any problems. It just seems a little bit superfluous. Yes, sir... [Speaker changes.] Mister ???Anderson??? [Speaker changes.] Senator Rucho, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] To Senator Goolsby, yield for question. [Speaker changes.] Senator, do you yield? [Speaker changes.] Yes. [Speaker changes.] Senator Goolsby, I'm sure Senator Blue's questions were valid...important and all that...but let's get to a basic question. Did you say attorneys or lawyers are getting $20,000 for every case? [Speaker changes.] Absolutely. We do everyday. (Laughter.) I'm jokin'. [Speaker changes.] Senator McKissick, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Ask Senator Goolsby a question? [Speaker changes.] Senator Goolsby, do you yield? [Speaker changes.] My word, I shoulda just asked ya'll to concur. Yes sir. (Laughter and applause.) [Speaker changes.] Probably so. [Speaker changes.] It seems that now that we are raising up the jurisdictional limit in District Court...you know, all the way up to 25,000. I'm not...that doesn't trouble me...I think that's fine. The problem is our District Court dockets are likely to be fuller than they have been in the past because those cases otherwise would have been going to the Superior Court. So has any thought been given to the additional work load in terms of volumes of cases that our District Court judges will now hear. Cause we have the same number of District Court judges but the volume/work load of cases has the potential to be substantially increased so what thought was given to that potential impact? [Speaker changes.] Yes, sir. We raised the jurisdictional, of course, amount of small claims from five to ten, which will incur more cases going down to the magistrates. We added 39 magistrates in our JPS budget and we also have this time period over the next year where people can file either in District or Superior Court for those 10 to 25,000 dollar cases and I can assure you that Senator Newton and I...when we start seeing an overabundance of cases in JPS oversight, will look to try to adjust that and to help our District Court judges out but this is...not much of an experiment...but I think it's...ya'know...all of this was supported by all the different business groups because I think it will give people...I mean, my main concern about all this was giving people more access to courts without lawyers. That is, the $10,000 jurisdiction will now... in small claims...it did make...really we had it at twenty, the House sent it up to twenty-five... I don't think it's gonna cause any problems. If it does, we will work hard to address those. [Speaker changes.] Follow up, Mister President? [Speaker changes.] Senator Goolsby, do you yield? (Laughter.) [Speaker changes.] I yield. [Speaker changes.] I guess my que..and I appreciate you guys looking out at JPS. My greatest concern is...it will have an impact and the thing that gives me some concern about magistrates hearing some of these cases is that they tend to use laws of equity rather than rules of law. [Speaker changes.] Yes, sir. And we do try to address that with... [Speaker changes.] [Speaker changes.] [Speaker changes.]

Situation provision and then it does go to the district court and there is a trial and you lose the third time, you end up paying everything. It’s a loser pays case. We hope that it would also help prevent more cases being appealed needlessly to the district court. [Speaker Changes] Any Further discussion or debate. [??] motion to concur in the house committee substitute for senate bill 452. All in favor would vote aye opposing would vote No. five seconds would be allowed for voting. The clerk will now record the vote. Senate bill 468. Clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Senate Bill 468 allowing [??] installer licensing [Speaker Changes] Senator Jenkins is recognized [Speaker Changes] Mr. President and Ladies and gentlemen of the senate. I plead with you. Please Please concur. [Speaker Changes] Senator Jenkins pleads with you to concur. Hearing none for the discussion or the debate hearing [??] is the passage of because we are seeing some motion concurring on the house committee substitute to senate bill 458. All those in favor vote Aye all oppose vote No. five seconds we have got. The voting clerk would record the vote. Nesbitt Aye. 48 having voted. Apadaca Apadaca Aye, 49 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative, the senate concurs in house committee substitute senate bill 468 would be enrolled and sent to the governor. Senator bill 530. The clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Senate bill 530, Prohibiting cigarette sales to minors [Speaker Changes] Senator Goolsby is recognized [Speaker Changes] Please concur [Speaker Changes] Senator Goolsby asks you to concur. Any further discussion or debate. Hearing none the question for the senate is motion to concur on the house committee substitute senate bill 530. All those in favor vote Aye all oppose vote No. five seconds we have got for voting. And the clerk would record the vote. Rabon, Senator Rabon Aye. 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative. the senate concurs in house committee substitute senate bill 530 would be enrolled and sent to the governor. Senate bill 542, the clerk will read. [Speaker Changes] Senate bill 542 drug testing for OTC applicants and employees [Speaker Changes] Senator Clark is recognized [Speaker Changes] Please concur [Speaker Changes] Senator Clark asks you concur. . Any further discussion or debate. Hearing none the question for the senate is motion to concur on the house committee substitute senate bill 542.. All those in favor vote Aye all oppose vote No. five seconds we have got for voting. the voting clerk would record the vote. Goolsby Aye. 47 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative. the senate concurs in committee substitute senate bill 530 would be enrolled and sent to the governor. Senate bill 545. clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Senate bill 545 master maintenance land lord tenant agreement [Speaker Changes] Senator Rabon is recognized [Speaker Changes] Anybody who doesn’t concur, I am calling them to back me. Please concur. [Speaker Changes] Senator Rabon has asked you to concur. Any further discussion or debate. Hearing none the question for the senate is motion to concur on the house committee substitute senate bill 545.. All in favor vote Aye oppose vote No. five seconds we have got for voting and the clerk would record the vote. Bryant Aye. 47 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative. the senate concurs in committee substitute senate bill 545. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. Senate Bill 630. Clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Senate Bill 630 Evidence in DNA and [??] [Speaker Changes] Senator Newton is recognized [Speaker Changes]I recommend concurrence [Speaker Changes] Senator Newton recommends concurrence. Any further discussion or debate. Hearing none the question for the senate is motion to concur on the house committee substitute senate bill 630 All in favor vote Aye oppose vote No. five seconds we have got for voting and the clerk would record the vote. . 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative. the senate concurs in house committee substitute senate bill 630. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. We have one caucus report for adoption today. Senate bill 36. The clerk will read. Speaker Changes] Senate bill 36 APA Technical clarifying changes Speaker Changes]Senator Hartsell is recognized Speaker Changes] Please adopt Speaker Changes] Senator Hartsell recommends you to adopt

Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the senate is the motion to adopt the conference report for the house committee substitute for Senate Bill 36. All in favor will vote Aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting and the clerk will record the vote. Ford, Ford, Ford Aye Aye . 48 having voted in the affirmative and zero in the negative the conference report is adopted. The house will be notified. It will be enrolled and sent to the governor. That does wrap up our calender for the day. Senators, upon a motion of Senator Harrington of Gaston County the chair is happy to extend courtesies of the galley to Mr. Craig Collins with the tenth district GOP chairman and his son Luciano who is serving as a house page today. Y'all stand to be recognized. Thank you for being here today. Do we have any notices or announcements? Senator Brown, For what purpose do you rise ? [SPEAKER CHANGES] An announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brown, you have the floor for an announcement.[SPEAKER CHANGES] Republicans will caucus immediately after session.[SPEAKER CHANGES]Senator Nesbitt, for what purpose do you rise?[SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, the same message for the Democrats. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any other announcements? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Allran, for what purpose do you rise ? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Judiciary two will meet tomorrow at eleven o'clock in 1124. [SPEAKER CHANGES] any other notices?[SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President[SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brock, for what purpose do you rise?[SPEAKER CHANGES] For those that are not part of a caucus, the manufactured housing association will have the reception tonight till seven thirty at the natural science museum, the one with the globe. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodac, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Announcement[SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodac has the floor for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the Senate Rules Committee, we will be meeting tomorrow morning at nine thirty to take up the confirmation of Don Bailey to the utilities commission. nine thirty, their usual location. Mr. President, if I might , Personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, you have the floor for personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Members, I'd like to remind everyone, Senator Tillman and others and this ?? that we have rules about using cell phones on the floor. It is beginning to become somewhat of a problem so I'd like to advise everyone: We chat on our cellphones outside the doors, please. It interrupts other members so lets try to be cognizant of that.[SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Senator. Senator Goolsby, for what purpose do you rise?[SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. We'll have two bills to consider tomorrow in J1 tomorrow at ten AM. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman, for what purpose do you rise?[SPEAKER CHANGES] A brief moment of personal privilege.[SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, you have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like with your permission Mr. President to recognize someone that I felt who ?? to send the note up to you. A friend of mine and a educator and a leader in the education circles for many years Dwight Story is in the audience today and I just wanted to recognize him and thank him for his many years of service. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Mr. Story if you'd please stand to be recognized. Thank you for being here today. Is there any other business to come before the Senate. If not, the chair will recognize Senator Berger for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. I move that the Senate do now adjourn subject to the receipt and referral of messages from the house and the governor, the receipt and referral of committee reports and conference reports, the ratification of bills and the referral and re-referral of bills and resolutions to reconvene on Thursday June 13, 2013 at eleven AM. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The motion is that the Senate do now adjourn subject to the stipulations stated by Senator Berger to reconvene Thursday June 13 at Eleven AM seconded by Senator Apodaca. All in favor say Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed, no. The Ayes have it. The Senate stands adjourned.