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 | July 23, 2013 | Chamber | Session

Full MP3 Audio File

Senate will come to order. Sargent and arms would close the doors. Members will go to their seats. Members and guests of the gallery will please silence all electronic devices. Senator Berger is recognized for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. The journal for Monday, July 22nd 2013 is being examined and is found to be correct. I move that we dispense with the reading of the journal and that it stand approved as written. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, the journal for July 22nd stands approved as written. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Berger, you’re recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I move that the senate stand in recess until 4:30 subject to ratification of bills and receipt of messages from the house. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, the senate will be in recess until 4:30 subject to the stipulations of Senator Berger. That motion is adopted. All those in favor, say Aye. All opposed, say no. The motion carries and we are in recess. Senate will come to order. Sargent and arms would close the doors. Members will go to their seats. Members and guests of the gallery will please silence all electronic devices. Recognize Senator Apodaca for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I move that we go into recess for 15 minutes till 4:45 and when we go to recess, I move we also allow any conference reports to come in. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brown. [SPEAKER CHANGES] An announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead, Senator Brown. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Republicans will caucus during the recess. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein. [SPEAKER CHANGES] An announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The democrats will caucus during recess. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any other announcements. Hearing none, without objection, the Senate will go into recess until 4:45. Senate will come back to order. Sargent and arms would close the doors. Members will go to their seats. Members and guests of the gallery will please silent all electronic devices. ?? the Senate in prayer, is the reverent Peter Milner, Senate Chaplain. All members and guests in the gallery will please stand. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oh my god. When we come before you, we come before a great high priest that is full of peace. We’re humbled by that peace, by your holiness. Father, you accept us and receive as we are and as we should be and I just don’t know why you do that, Lord. You will accept us as fickle folks into your presence. But we’re grateful for that. In the face of all that we need here today, and that we need in this session, we affirm that your resources are far greater than our needs. Lord, you remind us through genes that you are the giver of every good and perfect gift, streaming down from heaven. As we wrestle with one another towards the end of this session, one must remember that you will continue to walk with us and that your love endorse forever. In Christ, then we pray. Amen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Leave of absence has been granted to Senator Clodfelter. We have a nurse of the day but she is not here but I will let you know who she is. Carol Womble from Greensboro, North Carolina and we appreciate her service. Ladies and Gentlemen, we’re ready to start with our calendar. First, before we do that, our pages are gonna be publically recognized tomorrow because of the lateness of the arm which were starting tonight. But we will recognize them tomorrow. Ready to go to the calendar. Local bills, third reading. House Bill 726. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Send forth a committee report please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca may send forth his committee report. The clerk will read.

…read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca of the Rules and Operations of the Senate submits a passage, House Bill 669. Unfavorable as to Bill but favorable as to Senate Committee Substitute Bill titled, “An Act to Appoint Persons to Various Public Offices Upon the Recommendation of the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.” House Bill 491, Committee Substitute Number One, “School Resources Officer/Lee County.” Unfavorable as to Committee Substitute Bill Number One but favorable as to Senate Committee Substitute Bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 669, calendar. House Bill 491, calendar. Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] A motion relative to the calendar please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca may state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, thank you Mr. President, members. House Bill 293 is on today’s calendar towards the front and I ask that it be moved to the end of today’s calendar, House Bill 293, Mortgages/S.A.F.E. Act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. Senate Bill 127, “Economic Development Modifications,” we’ve removed all committee referrals and placed on today’s calendar for concurrence. We need to get that up as soon as we can if we might. That’s Senate Bill 127, “Economic Development Modifications.” I think it was sent back from the House. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We’re working on getting that Bill out, Senator Apodaca. When it comes out we’ll take it up. We’ll start off with local Bills. Third reading, House Bill 726, Senator Hunt recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. This is third reading. I appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It has to be read in, excuse me. First mistake of the day. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 726, “Wake County Commissioner Responsible for School Construction.” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hunt, you’re recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is the third reading and I just appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President, members of the Senate. We’ve heard how this makes all kinds of business sense, “County Commissioners they’re businesspeople, they know how to handle money. School boards are concerned only about little kids, we probably shouldn’t let them handle too much money. Let’s let the County Commissions be in charge of school construction. “We’ll leave education to school boards,” even though we all know that schools are part of school education and how you design the school, what facilities you offer in the school, these are all aspects of kids learning. So, to that end I have an amendment to send forth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein you may send forth your amendment. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein moves to amend the Bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, you’re recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, I appreciate that. This amendment is exceedingly simple. As you know this Bill targets Wake County and Wake County alone, but if you believe this is appropriate for Wake County then you will support this amendment because it gives every county in the State the authority to take over school construction from their school boards. So, this just makes a purely local Bill a statewide Bill and if you’re planning on voting for the local Bill I fully expect you to support this amendment. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To see if Senator Stein would yield for a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, thank you. Is this a permissive amendment or does it mandate that everybody in the State would have to do this? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Bill gives the County Commissions around the State the option. It is not mandatory.

Senator Stein, do you have any further remarks? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, Senator Hunt, urged the body to vote against the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the senate is the adoption of amendment three. All those in favor will vote aye. All opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting, and the clerk will open the machine. Rabin votes no. Parmon, aye. Newton, no. Robinson, aye. 10 votes, yes, and 39 votes, no. The amendment fails. The bill is back before you. Senator Hunt, any further comments? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No, I think everything's been said that needs to be said. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. Senator Stein. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hunt should know that with me it has not all been said. Well, it must not be a good idea. You all voted it down statewide, so I look forward to you joining me in opposing this legislation. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the senate is the passage of house bill 726, on its third reading. All in favor will vote aye. All opposed will vote no. The clerk will collect the votes, and open the machine, and we'll have five seconds to vote. Sorry about that, folks. Four no. Bryant, McKissick, no. The vote is 33 in the positive and 16 in the negative and the vote carries. 726 will be sent to the house for concurrence in the senate committees substitute. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Public bills. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, did you have a motion at this time? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. I believe I do. Senate bill 127. I move that all referrals be taken off that bill, and it be brought before us for concurrence in the second economic development modifications. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is it on the dashboard? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It should be. It should be loading, madame clerk, correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] State bill 127. Economic development modifications. And I don't believe it's on the dashboard, but just ask that you don't concur. Please do not concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do not concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there further discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Senator Brown. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a little more discussion on that one. There are several things in the bill that we agree with, but there are also a few things that had been changed that we feel like need to be changed in that bill. This is a bill that does the new regions, and it's also the piece that reorganizes commerce. There are some things that we feel like need to be changed, so we ask that you do not concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The bill's sponsor asks that you not concur on senate bill 127. All those in favor, is there discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of concurring will vote aye. All those in opposition to concurring will vote no. The bill's sponsor asks that you not

Clerk will open the vote. Five seconds will be allowed. Senator Gunn votes no. Senator Graham votes no. Senator Heiss are you voting? Oh he’s excused. The vote is 0 in yes, and 48 in the no. The house will be notified. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Public Bills. Second reading. House bill 293. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House bills 293 Mortgages safe act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. president that’s been moved to the end of the calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] My bad. Turn to page two. Second reading. House Bill 857. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House bill 857. Public contracts construction methods. ???? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rayburn [SPEAKER CHANGES] House bill 857 is an act to enable government entities options in seeking contracts and seeking constructions projects throughout the state. We’ve been several visas local bills throughout time, this has to do with design build and design build bridge and MP3’s, and Mr. President I would like to send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rayburn may send forth his amendment. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rayburn of ??? moves to amend the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator baring you are recognized to explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much Mr. President. Members of the senate, imagine my delight when I saw ultraviries in a bill here tonight. What this amendment does is it states a person, corporation, or entity which submits a bill to a public entity may apply for an injunction against that public body if they do not comply with reporting requirements. It’s my understanding that all of the stakeholders concur with this amendment and I urge and hope for your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate on the amendment, hearing none, all in favor of the amendment will vote aye, all opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Nesbitt, Senator Bryant votes aye, Aye’s are 49 the No’s are zero. Amendment 1 passes and now the bill is back before you again Senator Rayburn, do you have any further remarks? Senator Parmann will you turn off your microphone? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. Just the final remark is that over 15 stakeholder just have all come together and agree on it, so we encourage your support, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further Discussion or debate? Hearing none the question before the senate is passage of Bill 857, House bill 857. The house to concur with the senate committee substitute #2 if the bill passes here and we will commence the voting, all in favor will vote aye all opposed will vote no, 5 seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote.

Senator Bryant, aye. Senator Nesbitt, aye. Senator Clark, aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Forty-nine have voted in the affirmative, 0 in the negative. House Bill 857 will go back to the House for concurrence with the Senate Committee Substitute, number two. I’m sorry third vote. Third hearing has to take place. I’m sorry, third reading. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly Act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 857 for its third reading. All those in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed may say no. The motion carries. And now we’re ready to send the 857 to the House for concurrence with the Senate Committee Substitute and the Amendment. The amendment will be engrossed. Concurrence, second roll call. Senate Bill 103. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 103 amend assessment for infrastructure needs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hartsell, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President, members of Senate. I’d like to recommend we concur in 103. The reason for the changes in language is because of the date upon which the house ultimately adopted what was our language that they had do it and had to get some fixing things so it does the same thing as it did when it came out of this chamber two months ago. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate. Hearing none, the question before the Senate is concurrence in the House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 103. All in favor will vote aye, all those opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote. Senator Berger, aye. Davis, aye. 49 have voted in the affirmative, and 0 in the negative. The House concurs on the House Committee Substitute and will remain on the calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? Motion. go ahead and answer [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President Senate Bill 315 is next on the agenda. I move that it be removed from today’s calendar and placed on tomorrows calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objections. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President.. Additional motion if I might. I move that all bills and resolutions that are going to the House be spent by special messenger as we get close to leaving. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, so ordered. For concurrence, Senate Bill 420. Clerk will read [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate bill 420 UI laws administrative changes [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Clark, do you recognize? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, Senators. Some time back we passed this particular bill to the Chambers unanimously. at the time all it did was basically provide technical corrections that clarified the UI law ad made it easier to understand what an employer contribution requirements were for the unemployment fund. Since that time we’ve received communications from the Department of Labor, which stated that the Unemployment Bill that passed through this Chamber did not conform completely with federal law. As a result, some additional language has been added. I’ll highlight some of the more saline things that have been added to that. Language that has been added to expressly limit the use of funds in the Unemployment Insurance Fund to the payment of unemployment benefits. Language has been added to expressly state that governments, nonprofits and Indians tribes are to be treated the same as other employers. Language has been added to expressly the state that each claim stands alone. Thus, allowing an employee to file a valid claim even if past claims were denied. Language has been added to expressly exclude social security retirement benefits. In other words if somebody is eligibility for unemployment, their benefits will not be reduced if they are receiving social security benefits. Language has been added to expressively wave word search requirements

for all training approved by the division. Other words, if somebody's in a approved training program, they can still receive unemployment benefits while they're not actively searching for a job. I ask for your support for this particular bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sen. Rucho, you have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you sir. Members of the Senate, I want to thank Sen. Clark on doing a good job explaining this bill. Everyone knows that there were some concerns raised by the US department of labor, none of the concerns were substantive and the clarification that Sen. Clark outlined in this bill has been accepted by the Dept. of Labor and they say we comply with 100% and I urge that you support concurrence of this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sen. McKissick, rise to speak on the bill. You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I understand why this bill is before us, I understand it's simply a technical modification and it's necessary, the thing that really deeply disturbs me the most though is the fact that right now, we have over 70,000 people here in North Carolina that aren't getting their long term unemployment benefits because we went out and changed the unemployment laws and did not change the effective date to January of next year. $780 million could be coming into this state to help people, and we've turned our back on them in a time they needed us the most. The time when our unemployment rate is the 5th highest in the country at 8.8%. At a time when we are needing to create jobs, [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sen. Tillman, for what reason do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ruling from the chair, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] State your inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Inquiry is the amendment before us is what we're debating right now, or the motion, is ??, well he may be on top, Okay. Sorry Senator. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, the unemployment bill. We're talking about unemployment. So I think that it's appropriate to address our unemployment in the state. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead Sen. McKissick. [SPEAKER CHANGES] At a time when we really ought to be doing all we can to address unemployment, I wish that what we could be doing right now is considering an amendment. An amendment that would change the effective date of a law that we just recently enacted, to take it back to Jan. 1, so we wouldn't have 70,000 people losing benefits today, and before it's over with there will be close to 133,000 that would have potentially qualified that would not have money to pay their rent, wont have money to put gas in their tank, they've got to look for jobs, won't be able to pay for the necessities of life that we all are able to do each and every day. That's what we should be amending, it shouldn't be just a technical modification when we've got 8.8% unemployment in this state. People are suffering, we need to take it seriously. We should have compassion. We should have empathy. We should do all that we can to undo what we did about 2 months ago. But instead, all we have here today is a technical amendment when we should be considering a significant amendment that would undo the damage that's having devastating impacts on lives of many that are unemployed in North Carolina. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sen. Bryant, you're recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, I'd like to speak on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Colleagues, I too have to stand in support of the almost 2800 constituents I have that whos benefits are cut off because they are not eligible for the Federal extended benefits because of the timing, simply because of the timing of the changes you made. So I'm urging you to vote to not concur so we can use this opportunity, and you can take this opportunity to do the humane thing as well as the fiscally responsible thing, which is to postpone the effective date of the changes to the unemployment program to Jan. 1st so that the 2800 people in my district and the 70,000 across the state who are now ineligible for Federal extended benefits would be eligible. I come from a community that has a metropolitan statistical area in the Rocky Mountain area that has the highest unemployment in the state. In Nash county alone, over almost 900 people have lost the opportunity for these Federal extended benefits, some 800 and some in Wilson county for example, this is revenue that would be circulating in the local economy, these are families who are facing homelessness, who are not able to pay utility bills in the hottest time of the summer, and

And not get their children ready to go to school because of this decision you've made, that you can change just by making a six month extension in the time frame. And I urge you to vote not to concur, and to take into account these thousands of citizens that we're putting in distress simply by making this harsh decision that's unnecessary to accomplish your overall goals with revamping the unemployment program. Thank you for your consideration. Please vote no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, Senatur Rucho, for what purpose do you arise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak a second time, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead, you have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Bryant, we are all concerned about the well being of the people in your district and across the state. We are working diligently to try to solve this problem. But one thing we all need to understand is this UIs fund was never designed to be a long term solution to unemployment or needs as unfortunately they have because Washington kept extending it. It's usually about a 12 to 26 week period of time. And it's extended to 3 years. That change in philosophy overwhelmed the system and put it into a nearly 3 billion dollar hole that we're trying to dig outselves out on. And we are concerned about that in the social safety net that exists today is more there than they handle. The problems that you're addressing. And what that means is we can have 2 things done. Those problems will be addressed with food stamps and 4 other programs in the social safety net. And we're also trying to be sure that this UI fund gets back it's financial integrity so that it will be available for the next group of people that are unemployed in this state. We can't leave it go with a big deficit and assist somewhere it's failed financially. And that's the purpose behind it. And don't confuse the fact, this is not part of the welfare system. This is a unemployment insurance program that is a short term relief that has been abused by the federal government, has cost us go in a big hole. And that's what it corrected. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Bryant. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I appreciate your comments Senator Rucho and I understand. And I'm not, at this point, debating the need to revamp the system. And I agree that it's not a welfare program. It's a program for people who are working and paying taxes and contributing to a system that would help buttress them in harsh economic times when for reasons of no fault of their own, because of the economic times we're in, and for other reasons that are no fault of their own, they would become jobless. And I'm not asking you to abandon the goal of revamping the system or to do any welfare. I was only asking you to extend the effective date of your changes for six months so that the federal benefits that were made available, because of this unusual recession we're in, could help our citizens and families to 2800 in my district and 70000 around the state. And also circulate in the economy that makes a profit for the very businesses that are also paying for the unemployment insurance program as well as those of us who work are paying for. The unemployment insurance program. So that is the change. And so I would disagree to that extent even though I understand the overall change you're trying to make. Thank you. Please vote no on the motion to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President soon to Meredith. For what reason do you like to speak to the bill based on Senator Bryant's comments, I just feel led that I need to share something. As a small business owner, unemployment benefits are paid by the employer not by the employee. So I just would like to clarify that as a small business owner and based on the decisions that we've made. I got my bill the other day. So I wrote my check. So thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodacle, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Meredith yield a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Meredith, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Meredith, can you share the story you shared with us the other day about trying to hire some new employees and what's been happening with that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you for the question Senator Apodacle. I ran an add in the news paper. I've been blessed with some government contracts. I ran an ad in a newspaper offering 12 dollars an hour, full health, full dental, 401k, and a company truck. I had 4 people apply for the job and two of them couldn't pass the drug test. Now, I paid over 800 dollars for the ad. I ran a double column ad where everybody could see it. Ran it in the newspaper, on the radio. I had four people apply. Thank you for the question Senator Apodacle. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir.

How many people were you you trying to here?. I mean 15 people for a two year maintenance contract. Thank You [Speaker Changes] Follow discussion or debate. [Speaker Changes] Mr President [Speaker Changes] Senator Tucker For what reason do you rise? [Speaker Changes] speak to the bill please on the motion [Speaker Changes] You have the floor [Speaker Changes] Thank you sir. I have got a question if Senator Rucho. Would yield? [Speaker Changes] Senator Rucho do you yield to a question? [Speaker Changes] Yes Sir [Speaker Changes] Senator Rucho We talked Senator McKisssick talked about extending Senator Brock talked about extending federal benefits 6 months. Can you share with me who pays those benefits? [Speaker Changes] Of course as Senator Meredith just described Senator Tucker people like your self liar employers are paying those benefits not the employees. Therefore as you have alluded to in a number of occasions you say if you continue putting the burden on your business, you are going to either have to lay off some people or not be able to hire them which would only exacerbate the problem we have now. None of us are happy with 8.8% unemployment. And that’s the burden on the employer and that’s why we don’t want to punish them at this moment. [Speaker Changes] Thank you Sir. Mr President, Just speak make no more comments [Speaker Changes] Go ahead Senator Tucker [Speaker Changes] My business this year, the first cheque that I paid in unemployment insurance for a small business was $61,000. The second quarter cheque that I just paid was $46,000. Ladies and Gentlemen, that’s $100,000 worth of net profit. I know how is that I have go to do to make up 100,000 in net profit. When we weren’t charged for the problem back in the 90s. Allowed the firm to be depleted down to 450 millions when the recession hit it was gone in 5 weeks and every one of us in this state who own a business and I personally employ 83 people, are being hit hard by this. But I had rather go ahead and do it and get over with it. Bit I could tell you these employment benefits are not futile. [Speaker Changes] Mr President [Speaker Changes] Senator Bryant, you have already spoken twice on this. [Speaker Changes] I will not ask a question Mr President . But I would yield to Senator McKissick for whatever he wanted but I would be entitled to ask a question [Speaker Changes] Senator McKissick, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] can I ask Senator Rucho a question [Speaker Changes] Senator Rucho do you yield to a question from Senator McKissick. [Speaker Changes] I am sorry. Yes sir [Speaker Changes] Go ahead Senator McKissick [Speaker Changes] Senator Rucho, could you clarify those that may not be aware of the federal long term unemployment benefits that are paid in. Are those that are benefits that come completely from Federal Government that employers here in North Carolina do not have to repay. [Speaker Changes] The money that is being paid by the employers of the state goes to the federal UI fund and that’s where the money comes from ultimately. Now what you are alluding to is the fact that the money that the quote and unquote state of North Carolina doesn’t pay. But these employers are funding the UI system. Senator McKissick , OK. So, which that means is those employers like Senator Tucker, Senator Meredith and any of the Senator Brown, they are paying for that. It doesn’t, it’s not free money. So they are paying for that and that’s what is causing the problem. And that’s what prevents us from increasing the job as Senator Meredith alluded to. [Speaker Changes] Mr President Can I ask one quick follow up question? [Speaker Changes] Senator Rucho, do you yield to another question? [Speaker Changes] I yield [Speaker Changes] Go ahead Senator McKissick [Speaker Changes] It isn’t true that the state of North Carolina would have no obligations to repay those funds at all and they were projected to be $780 million that they would have received from the time between June 30th and January 1 . And those money are not money that North Carolina would have to repay it at all. [Speaker Changes] I would answer that question. Senator McKissick. You say that the state of North Carolina does not have to repay it all. Had we not done this reform we would not have been in this situation of changing those business and allowing them to may be pay a little bit less to adjust the benefits which is still highest in the South East and trying to make the plan solid and financially sound. We are concerned about the well being of the existing and we are also concerned about the future unemployed in the state and if we have a dysfunctional and a financially damaged UI system which is something we inherited at $3 billion level, it does no good for any body. So in reality the employers are the ultimate contributors to the UI system. You can say as you want, but they are not quote the state is not paying it they are paying it. It’s just another way. [Speaker Changes] Mr President, Just to speak the second time on the bill [Speaker Changes] You have the floor Senator McKissick [Speaker Changes] we can

Deal with this issue with smoke and mirrors, and try to ignore the reality of it. Those funds would have come to long-term unemployed people in this state who qualified, who had run out of their regular benefits. That’s the only way you’re going to be eligible for it. It’s projected to be about 780 million dollars. Right now there are over 70,000 people that are being impacted on a daily basis. And we are the only state in the country that has put ourselves in a position where we don’t qualify with those benefits. And it’s shameful because we didn’t have to do it that way. When we were making these amendments, they could have been made effective January 1 of 2014 and those people that most desperately need those benefits at this point in their lives, would have been eligible to receive them. The state does not have to repay them. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick, you say North Carolina tax payers won’t have to pay for this, and North Carolina employers won’t have to pay for this. Where do you think the federal government gets its money? I know they’re 17 trillion dollars in debt because they will continue unemployment benefits as long as they can. And when we had benefits exceeding everybody else in the Southeast, and length of term and in amount per week, and we cut it back to a reasonable number, at some point you’ve got to say it’s over. And we’ve got to get our businesses back in shape to where they can hire people again. And we go to fix the problem, and all we can hear is yelling and screaming about tailoring a program back to where it now is a program that’s reasonable and makes sense and will get itself out of debt in about what Senator Rucho, 2015 16, in about three years. That’s the way we’ve got to tackle the problem. So you can say that it doesn’t cost us anything, but I just want to know where the federal government gets its money. That’s not a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Bryant, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I wanted to ask Senator Tucker a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tucker, do you yield for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tucker, would I be accurate to suggest that the workers who are employed in your business by their labor and work every day contribute some if not all to the revenue you use to pay the unemployment insurance benefits? Would that be accurate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yeah, why certainly. Those employees would be there but I could also share with you that if I didn’t have to pay $107,000 in unemployment benefits because we’re in such a fix, I could hire at least two more people. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, one more question, Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do you yield Senator Tucker? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tucker does not yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] May I ask Senator Rucho a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rucho, do you yield to Senator Bryant for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I wanted to clarify, I understand that the federal emergency benefits according to what you say, come from monies that our employers have contributed to for the federal unemployment insurance fund. It is my understanding that the contributions our employers have made to this federal fund are paying these same benefits, are in the pool of money that is paying these same benefits in other states throughout the country at this present time. Would that not be accurate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I will say to you that every employer is paying money into the state. Some of them not at the level that our people are because the debt that has been put upon us by previous administrations. We asked for a grandfather clause in there and submitted plenty of notice and actually Department of Labor had agreed and when we went to our congressional delegation unfortunately Senator Hagin did nothing to help us in getting that accomplished. And it would have put us in a better situation. Unfortunately she ignored that issue, and I think she should accept responsibility for a lot of this. But we do have the situation in hand. We have it on a financial positive track. It’s going to be there and available and as I alluded to you earlier, there are programs designed to handle people that need help. This UI program was never designed to be that, and therefore shouldn’t have been abused to the point where it’s in the hole like it is. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, over here. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think folks are confusing things. Senator Tucker’s absolutely right. This fund got in a deep hole. We got in a fiscally irresponsible position. By the way, every vote was majority Republican and Democrat when those votes happened in the last decade. So we’ve got to get out of that hole.

...we need to reform the system. You all institute a whole lot of reforms. We can debate the specifics of whether those reforms were the right ones or whether you structured them the right way. The issue isn't should there be reforms, the issue is when should they take effect. By making them take effect July 1st, you all said to the Federal government that we reject monies from you, the Federal government. And Senator Rucho, it does not come from the UI Fund, it comes from the treasury. And Senator Tillman, yes, the treasury is filled partly with North Carolina taxpayer monies. We've paid that money. We are the only State in the nation, 1 out of 50, which is saying to the Federal government, even though we've paid the taxes into the treasury, even though we've done that, we don't want that money. You keep it and spend it on 49 other States, not the people of North Carolina. By the way, the unemployment rate in North Carolina is the fifth highest in the nation. There are three people for every single vacancy that comes along. Now, I hear Senator Meredith put out a post for a Federal contract job and couldn't find enough people. I absolutely respect that. But not everybody who is unemployed can do the labor required to do what you do. I got a letter from a lady who was an administrative assistant who lost her job. She lost her job because technology came in. That's fine. That helps the business be successful. I'm for profit, I'm for this business being successful. But that lady lost her job. She said she applied for a job, 280 applicants for 5 positions. That's what the folks are struggling with out there looking for work. And what you all have said is we're going to reject that money because we're going to make these reforms take effect on July 1. Now, Senator Tucker, whether those reforms took effect on July 1 or January 1, your bill would have been exactly the same. The only time your bill potentially would change is in 2015 or 2016 and we don't know for a fact that we wouldn't have paid it off in 2016, even if we started on January 1 instead of July 1. And we could have ensured that we didn't. Senator Nesbitt offered an amendment that would have made it guaranteed that businesses would have been made whole and we would have repaid our debt exactly in the same time as your July 1 effective date so that no business was harmed. They didn't have to pay a dime more in unemployment insurance to ensure that 70,000 unemployed people could benefit. That's in one week. It's 135,000 over the next six months, could benefit from it. And I'm sorry, Senator Rucho, it is not abuse of the Federal government to offer people extended unemployment benefits when we are coming out of a recession and have unemployment rate of 8.8%. It is not an abuse. It is not welfare. It is compassion. It is a recognition that people are out there struggling. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] They are struggling and they deserve our help. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rucho, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein yield to a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, would you yield to a question from Senator Rucho? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, you talk about the word abuse and I talk about the word of abuse of a system that was never designed to do what it is doing today with a three-year period of time for unemployment benefits. Don't you think that's abuse when the system has been changed putting us in a situation where you have some financial, some severe financial problems in this State? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No one gets three years of benefits, Senator Rucho. They get kicked off at 80 weeks. All it does is help them from 26 weeks to 80 weeks. Hopefully the get a job at week 28, at week 35. But the fact of the matter is is not everybody gets a job at the end of 26 weeks. Therefore, we should put a helping hand out to people so they can stand... [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rucho, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Would Senator Stein yield to another question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would be happy to. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, early on we discussed the fact that the State of North Carolina made this decision to reform the unemployment insurance program. But I also talked about the fact that the sequestration has caused at least 10 other States to have significant changes in their UI program to the point where they have actually had to cut people off the rolls because of sequestration. But the State of North Carolina, because we made the right decision for the long term future, which means as you made a statement, it would have no effect. The numbers we looked at, it would have been six months of additional payments by Senator Tucker for his business. So that's what you call the problem you would have had by extending it, which...

Describing what in reality there a spindle the states that have presently a significant change in the UI program and unfortunately for them they had to cut people off. What we did is made the right decision, 6 months of planning and we have a system available for their UI help. Why wouldn't that be a better solution to the problem than what your providing and that is just more spending on this program. [SPEAKER CHANGES] More spending by whom, by the federal government and North Carolina taxpayers? I don't have any idea what you're talking about Senator Rucho but if you actually get something in this bill that provided more benefits than what other states designed, I compliment you for that. But that is not a reason to have the effective date be July 1. We should have en effective date of January first, next year, therefore I ask that we not concur. Let's go to conference and let'smove the effective date, and we can institute protections to make sure that Senator Tucker, Senator Meredith and every other business in this state will not incur unemployment taxes in the future longer than ultimately necessary. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brown, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak to the motion, briefly I hope. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brown has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. First of all, when we talk about what the businesses have to pay back for unemployment insurance, I think some of you or many of you may know, and Senator Rucho I may not get this number exactly right, but I think it goes up 21 dollars per year per employee until the debt is repaid. So what has happened because of the state owing the money back to the federal government were businesses were paying basically that 21 per year per employee. By the time it gets paid back that number, I think is correct, will be over a hundred dollars. So 120 dollars per employee per year. So 6 times. 6 times the weight that it would normally be to pay back. So now think about that. Of all the people who are employed in this state, and the employers are going to have to pay 6 times the unemployment insurance compared to what it was and yet we want to prolong it, and it make it cost us 8 or 9 times? Now how smart would that be? And what would that do to the employment rate in this state? Senator Tucker talked about what he had to pay and I can tell you I have to pay about the same thing or a little bit more, and I know Senator Meredith is paying it. And if you don't think that has an influence on who you hire, you're badly fooled. It comes off the bottom line, it's off the net. It's not off the gross, it's off your net that you have to send those dollars in, and it affects employment big time in this state. And that's one of the reasons we're stuck at our unemployment rate, because the employers in this state are stuck with so much debt as far as this and other issues that we're having to deal with as far as tax policy goes. Another thing that Senator Meredith has touched on. I too, Senator Meredith, have put some ads in the paper for sales people and I had several come in. And you know what I get told about half the time? I'll say when can you start, can you start next week? They'll look at you and say you know, my unemployment runs out in about 3 weeks, do you think you'll have an opening, or 3 months, do you think you'll have an opening in about 3 months? That's the response you get as an employer. So you have people that want to ride the system out until it ends instead of taking a job there the next week. That's the problem with the system. We've made it so easy on the people, to take advantage of it, that that's what they're doing. They don't want a job, it's too easy for them. They'd rather just live off the system instead of taking a job. And I can tell you as an employer, you know how frustrating it is when you need good people to come to work and they tell you that. And you know that you're sitting there paying into a system that makes that happen. That is mighty frustrating. I think we've done a great job trying to fix this problem. I don't think anybody thinks paying back two and a half billion dollars, especially when it's employers that are paying it back, is an easy proposition. I ask that we concur with the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Wade, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Senator Rucho a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rucho, do you yield for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rucho, it's my understanding that any new business that comes here will also be subject to this increased tax on the unemployment. Is that true?

then again at a new businesses that come here. we also have to fight against unemployment taxes, x-ray dismay them. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. that is a additional burden on arriving in North Carolina to do business and would you call that it was advanced to recruiting businesses. they are an economic recovery yes, [SPEAKER CHANGES]. thank you. certainly it is a disadvantage because along with the of the taxes that were prior to our tax relief plan. they were very high and then this was an additional burden for them to come here operating here in higher new people here. [SPEAKER CHANGES]. further discussion for the debate. most of Senator Nesbitt for computerized speak on bail, good for. I just haven't members decided off [SPEAKER CHANGES]. Thank you Mr. president on annual leave the subject are only have some factual problems out out there with Republican and my confusions and I am not alone in here would intend that this money that goes to the long-term unemployment unemployed is one hundred percent federal money. it has no impact on our North Carolina portion of that trust on as no impact on what we have. it is paid one hundred percent out of U.S. Treasury, not out of our money. we offered an amendment out member to walk. they don't look back some time ago to say you can move the signing of January and will guarantee our employees and employers. it will be through November of his day, and that's when the magic date that everybody says is out there and you rejected that we showed you how you can do this and get one hundred percent federal money I taxpayer money that we sent out there that every other sites on a bandwagon back. we're not him only, not her repairs, but helpful, but all you get him a guaranteed date that is not long ago I went down all that all we're trying to do today is giving this on the front runner, so that you understand here. there's still time to fix it if we exit we can go back and get those people that money for their long-term unemployment, which might happen survivors Dylan get a job in the face on my plate. everything I learned here. I've told you long time ago. I don't try to describe people 's motives and unknown, and I believe that they feel misunderstood illness and sorry people living in your district. that's all I can tell you I don't have an image where counties with outdoor rights. twenty five is twenty percent to eighty percent eighteen percent sixteen percent. I don't have a lather. I don't have a new job and he got fifteen people find that one job and if you think for a minute that the hard work force at here. this unemployed is so sorry that they don't want work was just following the time now where Cardinal country, and we might as well give up. I believe that my people aren't that way and if you are a you don't might need it. if you want us to link and help you figure out how to find them probably wouldn't find our way. I say that my unemployment writes about, probably around six to six and a half no more than seven percent. people want to work there. not all dead this is a job because of a recession that I was brought to this country. they didn't do anything they want to master ignited and then anything to do with the and we can't. I'm not now sit here and end and leave the impression that the paperless. I reminded at least they're not in the desire of some compassion and a desire some help until I get back on her face and heavily survive. they are not in the lower words how much they got their world. you might get the lien here and I argued about not inverse of that, we go fix this. I help a hundred thousand people get seven hundred and fifty million dollars a year, mostly in these distressed areas that need it. you create jobs. when you put money on straight and I did vote against concurrent

Just one second please. Senator Wayne is excused for the rest of this session. Senator Goolsby, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’d like to speak on the motion to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. We have once yet heard again in this chamber that you can tax people into prosperity. All we’ve got to do is keep spending money we don’t have and everything’s going to be okay. We have some of the highest unemployment in the nation. We’re the highest taxed state in the Southeast up to this point. We’re fixing that now. And we wonder why we have the unemployment rate that we have. The party sitting in the back of the room is to thank for that. I just heard the minority leader tell us that they lost their jobs due to a recession. Partly. Also the fact that North Carolina has been so incredibly slow to recover, is based on our high taxes. Where we have to bribe other companies to come into our state up to this point, in order to do business. We wonder why we haven’t recovered. But to sit here, and hear that our acts are shameful. To hear that we don’t know what we’re talking about? No. We did know what we were doing for years in this state as we drove our taxes so high, as we drove our people out of business, as we’ve watched states like Texas, Utah. You can go over the list. With the lowest unemployment rates and those are the ones with the lowest taxes. The places that are the most business-friendly. ?? Senator Tucker can go out and hire people and create jobs. The government doesn’t create jobs. Spending government money doesn’t solve our problems. Lowering our taxes, getting rid of wasteful spending, that’s what’s going to fix this state. That’s what we need to do. I urge you to concur on this motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is concurrence in the House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 420. All in favor will vote aye. All opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote. [PAUSE] 37 having voted in the affirmative, and 11 in the negative, the Senate concurs in the House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 420. The bill will be ordered enrolled and sent to the Governor. Senate Bill 501 for concurrence. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 501, clarify ATV definition, establish general government oversight commission. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hartsell, you’re recognized to speak to the concurrence. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. Members of the Senate, I ask that you not concur. The edition from the House is simply not related to the basis for the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate. Hearing none, the bill sponsor has asked that you not concur in Senate Bill 501. All in favor will vote aye. All opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote. [PAUSE] 1 having voted in the affirmative and 47, there was a change? 0 voting in the affirmative. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Burke. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I hit the wrong button. [PAUSE] [SPEAKER CHANGES] 0 voting in the affirmative and 48 in the negative, the Senate fails to concur with the House Committee Substitute and conferees. The House will be notified. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] A motion, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead with your motion, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, I move that rules be suspended to the end, that Staff be allowed to come on the floor to deal with the next budget bill coming up. We made such great, quick progress on the UI bill, I’m excited to get into this. Also, Mr. President if I might remind the members pursuant to the rules of the Senate, you need to be careful using your electronic devices while we’re voting, Senator Berger.

Staff is cleared to come on the floor without objection. Senator Meredith has an excused absence for the rest of the session. Conference report for adoption, second reading roll call. Senate bill 402, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate bill 402, appropriations act of 2013. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sen. Brunstetter, why do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To explain the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sen. Brunstetter has the floor. Thank you members, this is the conference report for the biennial budget bill, the conference report does reflect a compromise between the House and the Senate on a number of items. Conference report reports 20 point D budget now appropriates $20.6 billion for fiscal year 2013 and 14, $21 billion for 14-15. The budget transfers $270 million over the biennium to the savings reserve account, we're continuing to try to work to build up our balance sheet, and that will leave us with a rainy day fund in 13-14 of $651 million. It allocates to $162.7 million over the biennium to repairs and renovations as we start to make that a priority after years of ignoring those obligations. It provides funding to cover state health plans, to save pension fund needs over the biennium, a few of the things that were in contest between the House and the Senate, the budget takes the House position and provides 5 days of bonus leave for state employees. It takes the Senate position by eliminating the management flex cut in the public schools, takes the Senate position by continuing the implementation of the excellent public schools act with an additional appropriation of 18.6 million in the first year, and $15.2 million in the second. It takes the House position by providing 9 million for school safety initiatives in the public schools. It takes the House position by providing $10 million for the ?? compensation program. It takes the Senate position by not providing additional funding to the rural center and establishing a new division within commerce to address economic development needs in rural North Carolina. It takes the House position by not transferring the SBI or eliminating 12 superior court judges in JPS. It takes the House position by not closing the alcohol and drug treatment centers as in the Senate budget, and continues as in both budgets to provide over $1.3 billion in new money for increased medicaid costs over the biennium. I'd ask you to adopt the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sen. Stein, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. Senator, we and you had a choice over the last two weeks. We did a revenue bill last week, and we're doing this budget bill this week. And the biennium, there's about a half billion dollars dedicated for tax cuts. And we learned last week that the top 1% get 65% of those benefits, top 5% get 90% of the benefits of those tax breaks. The wealthiest 5% of people in this state. So that's how you've chose to spend a half billion dollars. And we were told last week, we couldn't talk about the cuts because there was nothing in that tax bill identifying any cuts. Well we now have the second half of the story today. We now see the cuts. And K-12, that's about 180 million over the biennium. Senator, what we hear regularly, that no teacher's gonna lose their jobs. But here's a fact, and I know that facts are important. There are 4,000 fewer teachers today then there was 4 years ago. 4,000 fewer. There are 11,000 fewer school personnel, including teachers, today, then there were 4 years ago. Now part of that is understandable. Why? We just went through the worst recession in 80 years. We faced a$ 4.5 billion shortfall, you all faced a $2.5 billion shortfall, there's a lot of pain to go around over the past 4 years. But we are slowly coming out of that recession, but what you all are doing is you're locking in

In the recession era budgets. I’ve got a chart here which you can see. It’s two lines. The dark line are teachers, the light line are students. We are blessed to be a growing state. Every year we have more children in our schools than the previous year. And we’ve always managed to keep those two lines together. Well, this started to be a diversion in 08 and 09. And what y’all are doing here is locking in and in fact widening the gap between the number of teachers we have for the number of students. 120 million being taking out of teacher assistance. That is 3850 TAs who will lose their jobs because of this budget. Our population is growing. We have fewer teachers than we had four years ago. We’re now taking TAs out of the classroom. You all are increasing class size in the early grades. There’s not a pay increase in here. Our teachers over the last five years have lost earning power. Y’all know what inflation is because you stuck it in the campaign finance bill where contributors can give $5000 indexed to inflation, so we want the wealthiest to be able to contribute more money according to inflation to us, but our teachers, they’ve gotten 1.2% pay increase over the last 5 years. Inflation’s been about 8.5%. They earn less today than they did before. In fact you know, we hear all about the Southeast and what our ranking is in the Southeast. Five years ago North Carolina was second in the Southeast out of 12 in what we pay. We were 25th in the nation. Today, we’re 11th out of 12. We have fallen. We are 48th in the country in what we pay our teachers. So we aren’t paying them, we’re reducing the number. We’re taking away the TAs. And this has an effect on kids. There is no way we can have improved education for our young people if we’re underfunding our K12 schools. There are vouchers in this bill. We have never once, never once debated the notion of vouchers. Not less session, not this session. This is a radical policy change to K12 education. We didn’t debate it once. It’s in this budget. That is wrong. It’s wrong on process ground but it’s also terrible policy. You are draining money, 11 million dollars, from the public schools, to send people to unaccountable private schools. There are all kinds of requirements in here on what we’re doing to teachers in terms of raising standards, raising accountability. But I guess if you go to a private school, it doesn’t really matter if they have any standards. We don’t care. We are undermining public education with this legislation. 37 million dollar cut to the community colleges over the biennium. Raising tuition on students who go to community colleges. A quarter of a billion dollar cut to our universities on top of last biennium’s 434 million dollars from our universities. Folks, they are precious. And you can cut them and you can cut them and you can cut them, and one day you’re going to turn around and see that they are not the crown jewels that they once were. That is the risk you are taking. Under your budget, 11,000 fewer students will get need-based financial aid to go to college. Pre-K this year, 29,600 kids slot for Pre-K. Under your budget, 27,500. We’re cutting 2100 slots for Pre-K with this budget. None of this is necessary. If you hadn’t chosen to give tax cuts to the wealthiest 5% of the people of this state, and to large, profitable out-of-state corporations, we could have used this half-billion dollars and plug this half-billion dollar cut you’re making to public education in North Carolina. You can keep ten thousand teachers and TAs. We could have smaller class size. We wouldn’t have to raise tuition at community colleges. We could enable 11,000 struggling kids to get a college education. We could actually debate vouchers rather than stuff it in a budget bill, without a moment’s debate in any committee, at any point over the last two years.

But you’ve made the choice. You’ve chosen the tax breaks for the wealthy over public education. It is the wrong choice in my opinion, for North Carolina’s future. I urge you to vote against this Conference Report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Tillman was the name. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak on the Conference Report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Stein, that’s a good speech. I could have heard the same thing at Democrat headquarters in Asheboro. Let me give you a little history, since you’re lacking in a couple of areas, woefully lacking. You mentioned the raise of one time in five years. I believe that was the last budget, 1.2% given by the Republicans. You all couldn’t see fit to give one when you had the chance. We fully fund enrollment in all three of our education systems. If we fully fund enrollment and class size maximums have not changed but very little. If we do that, then how do we lose teachers? You need, there is a state budget, there is a local budget and there’s a federal budget. The state budget is the only thing we have control over. We are not cutting teachers so your rhetoric about cutting teachers in 4,000 in over the last few years you used to use 10,000. Those are wonderful numbers but they’re not right. The state budget fully funds enrollment in all three of our systems. If we’ve not changed class size maximums, then we’re not losing state teachers. So you need to go back and examine the difference between those items there. And you take the available money you’ve got and you do the best you can with it. Were there some things in this budget that I didn’t like? You bet. You mentioned one of them. But you don’t get everything. You win some, you lose some, and some of them get rained out. But overall, when you take the money, you scream about the public schools. Ever since we’ve had charge of this education budget, the smallest cuts have gone to the public schools. The smallest budget cuts every time we’ve had it, the last four years, have gone to the public schools. A little bigger cuts to the community colleges and somewhat bigger to the universities who have a lot of pots of money they can draw from. When you look at the budget in that light, it’s not the thing that you all said were going to devastate schools and we’re going to close them down and they wouldn’t be able to operate. Well you know, two years ago, you said that and we went and checked and the classrooms were operating fine, they had about the same amount of kids in there. So I just want you to take it for what it is, and know the difference between the three budgets. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Hunt, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just for Senator Stein’s edification and maybe some others, actual spending for K-12 education last year, 7.7 million. Billion, 7.7 billion. Conference Report, almost 7.9 billion. That’s not a cut. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Senator Tillman a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman, I certainly respect your educational knowledge, but as we talk about the budget, the monies that are now appropriated for vouchers and for charter schools, especially for charter schools. Is that per pupil, enrollment costs in the charter schools, and would that normally be in the public school budget? Is that the ADM? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No ma’am. It’s not taking a dime away from the public schools. ADM follows the child. So the money goes with the child. So if they’re not in the public school, they don’t get the dollars. They get them in the charter schools, and vice versa. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So had they been in public schools rather than going to charter schools, that money would have been in public schools? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Of course, it’ll go with the children. Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And another question, Mr. Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Go ahead, Senator. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. The funding for the vouchers, can you tell me where that comes from? Where that normally would, be that 10 million dollars in the budget? [SPEAKER CHANGES] If we didn’t have the voucher program, that money would go to the public schools. But these are public school students here again, that’s going to be taken care, that are going to be going to private schools and will be getting vouchers. And the voucher is going to be

Less than we're spending in state dollars for those children. We spend 8500 dollars on, per student with the, with the state funding, and they're getting considerably less than this for the voucher. [Speaker Change] Thank you. Speak on the bill Mr. Chair. [Speaker Change] You have the floor. [Speaker Change] Ladies and gentleman I don't quote all the statistics and all the numbers that my fellow Senators do, I can quote some of them however. But I do know public schools, I've been involved for 41 years. And I do know that years ago when public schools were created, they were created to level a playing field. So that kids who were then segregated, or poor and not in an education system that could provide them a good job had that opportunity. And so we've counted on our public schools to do that. We talk about jobs Senator Rucho, but we know that people don't come to states to employ folk unless you have an educated population. And that education starts with early childhood development Pre-k, and Senator Pate and some of the others of us went to Finland to see how that starts. And it starts because of the 6 party's in that country all of them agree that education of their children is the most important thing. And they invest those resources in that education from early child development all the way through. And then recruit teachers out of that particular population. So we know that education does mean and improve the economy. So as we look at where we're going even with the excellent public schools act, a title that is deceptive at best. What we're doing is eroding the public school funds, which at the end of the day after we take out vouchers for private schools, we're allowing a limited number of charter schools. And we don't require the same kind of regulations. The public school system will still have to educate the majority of the children who are low income, the poorest of our sectors, whose parents may be unemployed, can't make those other kinds of decisions, or may not be educated themselves. And then those teachers that we refuse to give any kind of pay raise, one that I, several that I've heard from and ?? of you've heard from who are dedicated, they are educated, they have worked hard, even without sufficient salary increases. But they will have the new pay for performance standards rated A through F through their schools, because they don't have teacher assistance to assist them. They don't have the additional funds for instructional supplies, and then their held responsible for educating children who happen to be the ones that private schools ?? they won’t, Charter schools they won't, and they'll have to educate the children who need it most, but with limited resources themselves. And so we may see teacher flight, I would not blame them because they don't have that. And so what we do is, we move on up to community colleges, and higher education. And I know this, that we've had one of the greatest higher education systems in this country. And I don't disagree that tuition has always been lower, we could've increased it a little here and there. But what we're doing at the worst time in our country, was Senator Meredith said that he couldn't find workers because actually they needed retraining. We're increasing the cost in community colleges, so the people who are currently unemployed will have to find more money to pay the per course cost, so that they can get trained for those very jobs you're talking about. And our higher education system, my universities have been responsible for helping to improve the economy in this state. And I, I would beg to disagree with those of you who would say that they don't promote the economy, they do. As you go from one university to the other you can point out programs, you can point out research, you can point out entity's that help to promote the economy. Yet what we're doing is we're cutting the budget again, we're raising tuition to make it unaffordable, and yet our need based aid is decreased. 11,000 fewer students will have the monies they need at a time when the federal student loan rate is already double. And I heard on NPR this morning that parents say they’re no longer paying those

[Speaker changes.] ...costs. The parents can't afford it. Like some of us in here who help to pay for our kids' education or supplemented they didn't have necessary scholarships, parents today cannot afford that. So students have to work, they have to get loans and they have to have need-based financial aid. So we've decreased it by 11,000 students who cannot get that, who will not have the kind of education you and I have...who will not be able to get those jobs, those high-paying jobs ya'll are gonna bring into the state...and I hope you do cause I got some folks who want 'em. But they will not be able to get those jobs, they will add to the unemployment ranks in this state because they'll drop out of school and they won't be able to get a decent job and eventually they won't have any because nobody will employ them! I think this is an atrocity to our education system. At a time when you talk about improvin' education, you wanna' cut out "the least of these", you wanna' get rid of them, you wanna' ignore them. You say that you want to improve the economy, you wanna' educate everybody and make them job ready but yet the budget says exactly the opposite. I vote against it. [Speaker changes.] Mister President? [Speaker changes.] Senator Parmon, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Mister President, if I may, I'll yield to Senator Jenkins. [Speaker changes.] Senator Jenkins, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] To speak on the budget. [Speaker changes.] Senator, you have the floor. [Speaker changes.] We heard the chair of this Appropriations Committee highlight this budget and one of things he spoke about...touched on...was the impact on the rural parts of this state. I represent one of the bigger rural parts of the state and one of the lower wealth parts of the state...and I too read over the weekend, the results of the State Auditor's findings with the rural center...and I would agree that the audit was very complete, very thorough..and from that audit, I think you coulda' made some constructive changes and moved on...but the Governor and the leadership in the General Assembly decided that they would collapse that particular operation and move it into the Department of Commerce. I asked this morning, along with some of my other colleagues "on the back row" as ya'll like to refer to us...the staff is what is the net effect, at the end of the day, to the rural areas as far as economic development, education and other areas and got a fax sheet and it's very telling. At the end of the day, when you finish the adjustment for the rural center, you add back a few things, you take away the funding for the "Golden Leaf" for the next coupla' years, you take away the money to the economic development/non-profit...you wind up over the next several years with 80 million dollars less money going to the rural parts of this state. So I contend that we're not helpin' 'em, we do not have a plan from the Department of Commerce as to how they're goin' to address these issues. We still don't have a plan from the Secretary of Commerce as to how she is goin' create all these new jobs. We've heard great outlines but no facts behind it. So I would content that the...one reason that I have alone, that I would not vote for this budget is that we are takin' away money from the rural parts of this state, we're not addin' to it, we're not makin' life easier for 'em so I ask you to vote against the budget. Thank you. [Speaker changes.] Senator Hise, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker changes.] Speak to the bill. [Speaker changes.] You have the floor. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister President...Members of the Senate, I heard some rhetoric about where the funds were and why the small tax cut that's out there in the next two years is devastating but...I'm goin' take everybody back. Gonna' take everybody to G12 and G13 and their money report and I'm gonna' talk about what we're really dealing with in this budget. We're havin' to keep up with an entitlement program, a program that we can't control enrollment on, we can't control utilization on. We talked extensively about...oh boy, one of those we needed to expand. Medicaid over the biennium is growing over a billion and a half dollars in the budget to where it's taking on...the re-base alone over two years is now over a billion dollars that we hafta account for in a time that our economic growth has been somewhere about 2%. The Affordable Care Act, that great piece of legislation...

The affordable care act is getting ready to cause this state 243 x 10^6 (million) dollars alone. It would working affects, and moving children on insurance to a medicaid. Those requirements, federal government is straggling the budget of North Carolina. This is where it's coming from; there's no way you can look at those two pages and say anything is affecting the budget, at least changes we've had to make in education, slow growth, tax cuts, were reformed. Nothing compares to the scope that we had to deal with in medicaid. I feel like for the first time we were in a better position to forecast, moving forward, what those costs will be. I feel like we've done a lot to control costs in the medicaid area. But we can not continue to keep up with the federal government. It is time we begin to reform this system in the state of North Carolina. There is a provision in here that begins that, I am confident that will be a lot of the discussion coming in the short session. But regardless of what all these fights want to be about, about what we had to cut, and what we had to reduce, I want people to see where the answer is, and that's in the funded entitlement program.[SPEAKER CHANGE] Mr. President, [SPEAKER CHANGE], for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGE], to speak on the accomplished report.[SPEAKER CHANGE], senator has the floor [SPEAKER CHANGE], thank you, Mr. President, starting Sunday afternoon, I started getting questions and calls from the media, and from some of my colleagues, saying that I should be very pleased that finally, sterilization victims were going to compensated. And I have to say to you, that I was very delighted to hear that. And as I reflected on that information,that finally, we as a state was doing what was right. And that's the compensate victims that gave North Carolina one of the darkest periods in our history. So, I'm pleased that the compensation of the sterilization victims is in this budget. But I sincerely do not think it need to come on the backs of another vulnerable population, and that's our students. Sterilization was an act by a state government, who thought it had the wisdom to pick winners and losers in our society. And I think this is what this budget is doing. It's compensating one set of victims and creating another set, and I can not support a budget that does that. Thank you.[SPEAKER CHANGE] Mr. President. . .[SPEAKER CHANGE] just one second, Senator Mckissick, Senator Wade is back in the chamber. Senator Mckissick, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGE] To speak on the bill.[SPEAKER CHANGE] You have the floor to speak on a concurrency report.[SPEAKER CHANGE] Like Senator Carmen, I was pleased to see a eugenics report in our budget. I've worked closely with speaker Carmen, speaker Tellers, and some others. It's good to see those eugenics victims did receive compensation. At the same time, I might add, one of the things that came forth, was a task force that recommended that those victims be compensated by to the tune of fifty thousand dollars each. What we had in this state was a program that impacted the lives of over 75 hundred individuals, that took away their reproductive rights. We really don't know how many are still alive today, but we know that that program ran from basically the early thirties all the way up to the mid seventies. So many of them are still alive today, so many of them are still alive today, there will be many claims to be filed. But when we look at the 10 x 10^6 (million) dollars that are in place there, I hope that we view this as a beginning and not as an end. Because it's predicted that 1500 to 1600 victims are still alive. Yet there in fact, 1500 to 1600 alive, they do come forth and present claims, we actually don't know how many of them are alive today. Or, they'll be too embarrassed to come forward, because many of them felt embarrassed about losing their reproductive rights. But if so, rather then getting them compensated

Two hundred fifty thousand dollars, as was recommended. They might likely receive only about six thousand dollars. And while we are moving in the right direction to recognize this wrong that North Carolina imposed, this egregious wrong by taking away reproductive rights of people who had no say-so, we need to also look at that original task force and its recommendations. And as the years pass, and there's a three-year window that's established under the special provision to this budget, if all those victims come forth I hope that we will fully fund the compensation of these victims in a meaningful and significant way. I would like to also shift gears to some of the other parts of this budget. When I sit here and I look at places like Granville County which is part of my district, that's primarily rural places like Stovall, Stem, Butner, Oxford and Creedmoor, but there's losing the money that they have for public safety. When all of it, the vast majority of their service calls on the state institutions and people housed in those state institutions. It may be only one point seven million a year, but to them that's a significant amount of money. We look at biofuels, which is headquartered over in Granville County. Those monies are gone. There are many people in Granville county and counties like that throughout the state. I thought Senator Jenkins did an excellent job in pointing out how this budget has the potential to negatively impact so many of our rural counties. We need to be deeply concerned about that because we cannot forsake those individuals that live there. We may have had an institution that had a charge of trying to serve them in a meaningful way that perhaps did not follow all the rules the way that they needed. But we need to make sure that those people residing in those areas do have what they need to have jobs, to have water, to have sewer, to have the same things that we all benefit from. And yes, our community colleges. I looked there and seeing further tuition increases for those that can't afford to go to public universities, particularly as need-based grants are being reduced again. That troubles me, because we want to make certain that our community colleges are affordable, particularly at a time when we're encouraging more people to go there and begin their education before they transfer on to the public universities. And we realize that it all starts, that educational experience, from the time that people were born up through the time they hopefully graduate from high school move on in life. It troubles me to see the twenty one hundred slots for ? those that need those type of opportunities early on in life, that they are not going to have it. They're not going to have those opportunities the way they had in the past. We shouldn't be cutting those positions, and we shouldn't be cutting these teaching assistants. These teaching assistants are needed in our classrooms, they're the backbone that help our teachers. And we eliminate teacher tenure and it's hard to attract the best and brightest to our schools. We will once again suffer. North Carolina has had a tremendous public education system. Right now were right about forty eight in what we're paying our teachers, not giving them tenure and giving them these contracts, it's going to be hard to attract the best and brightest, and to make sure that the students in our schools, our most important natural resource, our population and their minds, their intellectual capacity is developed to the point that they can hold and compete for jobs of the future. So for that reasons I cannot support the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there further discussion or debate? Senator Brown for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak to the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. Several points I think I'd like to make. First I think maybe touch on education and I guess pay too. You know, when we think about pay, we did give a pay raise last year, first one in several years. We did do that. When I look at funding, I look at funding for the ten eleven year, the last year that the Democrats were in control, funding for K-12 education that year was seven billion two hundred sixty one million dollars. For the fourteen fifteen year that'll be over eight billion dollars. Eight hundred million more in spending on K-12 education. We fully funded our growth all throughout our education system. We have fully funded our retirement and health care plans, kept them whole. We eliminated a flex cut that was created years ago, that was only a way to say we're going to give you some money and ask you to give it back.

Just played some tricks with some numbers. We got that off the books this year. Senator Hise mentioned it. This budget takes care of the least fortunate more that it ever has, with over one and a half billion dollars in Medicaid dollars that are being spent. One and a half billion dollars. It also puts two hundred and thirty million dollars in a rainy day fund and it funds over a hundred million dollars in R&R, something that hadn't been done in a long time. We think in other areas it funds twenty two additional magistrates and about a hundred and seventy five probation and parole officers to make us more safe. It restores funding for sixty nine trooper positions. In our rural communities, Senator Jenkins, maybe Golden LEAF dollars but other than that, this budget does well for rural North Carolina. It spends more money on water and waste water infrastructure in rural North Carolina than probably any other budget ever has. It also creates a new rural infrastructure authority within Commerce that will look at rural North Carolina needs and I think get those dollars out on a quicker manner than what has been done through the rural center, that still has over one hundred million in reserves that still hasn't gone out to rural North Carolina. It provides sixty million in job development grants that will be available to rural North Carolina in particular. It fully funds VIPER, a system that will surely enhance our emergency response throughout the state. And one thing that I think was misquoted on early childhood, I think we might want to go back on that. This budget actually funds more early childhood slots than last year's budget does. This is a good budget. It's a prudent budget and I think it's a transparent budget. I think when you take a look at this budget, there is no fluff in this budget. It funds priorities for this state and I think funds them well. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Further discussion? Further debate? [CHANGE SPEAKER] Mister President [CHANGE SPEAKER] Senator Nesbitt, for what purpose do you rise? [CHANGE SPEAKER] Thank you Mister President. To speak on the bill. [CHANGE SPEAKER] You have the floor. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Thank you Mister President. I'm going to commend Senator Brown for bragging on this budget and taking ownership for it. I've sat back here today and I've been hearing things like the federal government strangling the state. Said it's Senator Hagan's fault. Inherited the problem. The Governor the other day said Obama did it on the unemployment insurance. I heard do the best you can with what you got. And I even heard that the unemployed are part of the problem. Folks, I don't how to tell you all this but this is your third budget and at some point you're going to take ownership of what you are doing down here. And I think this session ought to be the time you take it. We tried to tell everyone out here two months ago where we were headed and we said you're going to give tax cuts to the rich and out of state corporations at the expense of the middle class. And I remember being chided as to where does it say that what tax cut we are going to give in this bill. It didn't and it just was a reserve but we had other ways to show what we thought was going to happen. Well, it happened and we passed the tax giveaways to the wealthy and to the out of state corporations. We did that part. It increased taxes for the middle class people, not a lot but a little. And then here we are today with the third part of the trifecta cutting education, rural economic development, services affecting middle class families. This is what you had to do to do that. The tax giveaway was about a half a billion dollars, cuts to education about a half a billion dollars. And you can't say you had to do it because you didn't. If you hadn't have done your tax giveaway you

Who would have the money here and not cut teachers, not cut teacher's aids, not knock students of off scholarship money, etcetera, but you made that choice. I told you all back a week or two ago, when you all were giving us a drubbing here about 8 o'clock at night, on abortion, that you did pretty good fighting 3 strong women on the back row. I wanted to see what you did when 10,000 showed up. I didn't take but about 500 to show up. We had every body with a gun and a badge in Raleigh over here, protecting us, and they were swinging from the rafters. I want to tell you something, you just missed moral Monday's as you called them names, you said they're outsiders. Everybody's that check behind you said, Uh,uh, they're not outsiders. They're clergy, they're women, they're teachers, they';re doctors. They're people down here trying to tell you that what you're doing to the people of this state is unconscionable. That's what they're trying to tell you. And of course, you aren't listening to them, and I've asked a couple of times, What's the plan? I can't figure out what the plan is. What's, where's the punch line. Well, we saw that this morning. You're going to try to rig the election so they can't go vote against you. And I'm going to tell you something, if you want to make them a bigger crowd, madder, than you made the women the other night, just carry through with that bill, and tell people they're going to have to stand in lines like they did down in Florida, and you're just going to make it more difficult for them to get to the polls, and we're going to disenfranchise children, where they can't vote, and that way they can't vote us out of office. Let me tell you something. they know what your doing, they're angry, and they're coming for you. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Mr. President [SPEAKER CHANGES]Senator Brunstetter, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES]To debate the bill a 2nd time. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Yup. [SPEAKER CHANGES]Mr. President, I appreciate Senator Nesbitt's abomination to take ownership, to take ownership of this budget. Senator Nesbitt, I have been blessed with 2 good colleagues here that I have been able to work on this budget with, and I will take ownership of it. But, I want you to take ownership of a few things too. I can tell you, for having a front row seat, looking through the decay of the state budget over the last couple of years, what we have had to deal with. Senator Brown touched on a few of these things. Our state health plan was going bankrupt. Boy, we would have loved to spend the money elsewhere, rather than $500 million bailouts, 2 years in a row. But we've managed to get that thing, with the help of the treasurer, back on the right path. Senator Robinson, you mentioned 11,000 students on financial aid, I guess you are forgetting the fact, well this was before your time here so, forgetting the fact that when we got here, the S-cheat fund which funds a good deal, this was going bankrupt. And we had to make decisions, that were difficult decisions that affected financial aid, to put that plan back into solvency.. The funding on financial aid this year, I guess we're being punished in your mind for allocating lottery overages to financial aid last year, which don't exist at the moment. We saw continually, one-time money used for recurring obligations. One-time money. So decisions would be made for this program, or that program, or this initiative, and time and again the gap was filled with one-time money, hoping that the tide would rise, that the economy would be there. I remember just thinking when we were sitting in the back row, there's going to come a time of reckoning here, because you cannot budget that way and keep it going. We've seen budget tricks all through, all through this. We had a Medicaid system in shambles. I can't describe that, any better than Senator Hise, and we've had to deal with it. I can tell you our information technology systems have been completely ignored, completely ignored, and we spend, what? a billion and a half, $1.7 billion a year, trying to fix that situation. Repairs and renovations, taking care of the things that you have decided to invest in, ignored. Ignored. So yeah, we had to make decisions to start taking care of the things in this state, the capital, ignored.

ignored. Talk about thousands of teachers, well again that's slightly revisionist history. I think one of the biggest tricks that was used and one of the biggest problems was that prior leadership in this chamber decided to take one time money from federal government to try to fund recurring obligations to teachers. I've got charts in front of me, too, and the biggest cut in teacher population has come when the folks in the back row were running this chamber. I believe that this budget continues to put us on track, we're healing our balance sheet, we're doing the things necessary that we need to do and they're not always popular decisions. As an appropriator, we've had a constant battle with our good friends on finance because we like to spend money and Senator Rabin, Senator Rucho and others, they keep telling us to behave ourselves. We would like to be able to spend on some of these initiatives you describe. I would love to pick out a line item here or a line item there and say, "boy isn't it awful that you people aren't funding that?" Well, I'll tell you what, the responsibility here is to put together an entire budget. To put the state back on track to start growing the state, make it healthy, get our revenues in place and Senator Nesbitt, I will take ownership of this budget. You take ownership of some of these past practices. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. Senator Berger, for what reason do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak briefly on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President, members of the Senate. This budget does what needs to be done for the state at this time. Are there some choices that many of us wish we didn't have to make? Yes, but the reality is you can talk about cuts and you can talk about how this budget spends less money buty\ if you look at the simple facts of the numbers that are there what you will see is last year's budget was 20.2 billion dollars. This year's budget is 20.6 billion dollars. Now, a lot of the increase is because of Medicaid but increase it is. So saying that we're spending less money is just not accurate. We're spending more money. K12 education, last year's budget was 7.7 billion dollars for K12 education. This year's budget, 7.9 billion dollars. These are not cuts. The reason you can say there are cuts is because of the device of the continuation budget, which is a fiction. That is a number that's a starting number but it's not a number based on what you spent in the past. If you look at what we have spent in the past and what we're spending in this budget we have increased the amount of funding in K12 education. We've increased the funding into community colleges in terms of real dollars. We've increased the total spending and we've done that all in the context the economic situation that we have. I think it's a reasonable budget, made some hard choices, did a number of things, does a number of things that puts us in the right place. I urge you to vote for the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. Hearing none, the question before the body is the adoption of the conference report for Senate Bill 402. All in favor will vote aye. All opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting and the clerk will record the vote, 31 having voted in the affirmative and 17 having voted in the negative. The Conference Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 402 has passed second reading and will remain on the calendar. Conference report for adoption, Senate Bill 76. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 76, Domestic Energy Jobs Act. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton, I recognize you to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President, members. We did the best we could.

[Speaker changes.]...the House didn't wanna go along with some of the improvements that we wanted to make in moving this industry forward but we did make significant advances...we are movin' the state...this is forward in the energy sector. We have some improvements on the offshore components. We have some improvements on some of the boards and the mechanisms and reporting dates...and it's a small step forward but it's not quite as far as we wanted to go but, on the whole, it was the best that we could do so I commend the conference report to you. Thank you. [Speaker changes.] Question before the body is the adoption of the conference report for Senate Bill 76. All in favor will vote aye. All opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting and the Clerk will record the vote. [Speaker changes.] 36 having voted in the affirmative. Senator Jenkins is voting aye. Senator Nesbitt votes no. New total, 37 ayes and 11 nos. The conference report for Senate Bill 76 is adopted and the House will be so notified. Conference report for adoption, Senate Bill 337. Clerk will read. [Speaker changes.] Senate Bill 337, North Carolina Charter School Advisory Board. [Speaker changes.] Senator Tillman, you're recognized to debate the motion. [Speaker changes.] Mister President, we've made several revisions and I believe now that all sides are on board and I ask you to vote for adoption. [Speaker changes.] The question before the body is the adoption of the conference report for Senate Bill 337. All in favor will vote aye. All opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting and the Clerk will record the vote. [Speaker changes.]Apodaca aye, Jenkins aye. 37 having voted in the affirmative and 11 in the negative. The conference report for Senate Bill 337 is adopted and the House will be so notified. Members, I believe there's one bill...House Bill 293? [Speaker changes.] Mister President? [Speaker changes.] Senator Goolsby? [Speaker changes.] Yes... [Speaker changes.] Let me read it in first if you will... [Speaker changes.] Sorry. Yes sir. [Speaker changes.] Clerk will read. [Speaker changes.] House Bill 293, Mortgages Safe Act [Speaker changes.] Senator Goolsby, you're recognized to explain the bill. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister President, I'm taking over for Senator Meredith tonight who had to leave. This bill has had no opposition. It passed the House and all committees unanimously. I do however have an amendment to send up that makes a technical correction. [Speaker changes.] Senator may send forth his amendment. [Speaker changes.] The Clerk will read. [Speaker changes.] Senator Goolsby moves to amend the bill. [Speaker changes.] Mister President, simply... [Speaker changes.] Just one second, is the bill on the dashboard...the amendment? Go ahead with your remarks. [Speaker changes.] Thank you, Mister President. It's only one line. It simply makes a change to this bill that a previously passed bill caused a conflict with and I would ask you to support the amendment. [Speaker changes.] Further discussion or debate? Hearing none. All those in favor of adopting Amendment One will vote aye. All opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting. The Clerk will record the vote. [Speaker changes.] Senator Rabin, aye. DOUBLE CHECK LAST LINE...Senator Rabin OR Senator Rabon?!@#??

Speaker: 48 voting in the affirmative and none in the negative: amendment 1 is adopted and the bill is back before us if you have any further discussion. Senator Busby? Representative: No Mr. President Speaker: Further discussion or debate? Hearing none. The question before the senate is the passage of senate bill 293 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye, all opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for voting. The clerk will record the vote. 48 voting in the affirmative and none in the negative: senate bill 293 has passed its second reading and, without objection, will be read a third time. Clerk: NC [xx] Speaker: All in favor will say aye. [aye] Speaker: All opposed no. [silence] Motion carries and senate bill 293 passes its third reading and will be enrolled and sent to, sorry, will be sent to the house for concurrence and amendment. On that pleasant note, I think we have… Representative: Not so fast Mr. President. Speaker: Senator Apodaka you are recognized. Representative: Thank you Mr. President. I have two motions please Mr. President. We received from the house senate bill 480, UNC capital improvement projects, move to be placed on the end of tonight’s calendar for concurrence. Speaker: Without objection, so ordered. Representative: Second motion Mr. President. House bill 937, conference report, has been sent in, ask that it be brought before us for immediate consideration. Speaker: Without objection, so ordered. Clerk: Message from the house. House bill 480, house committee substitute receive full concurrence, placed on the calendar July 23rd. Senate bill 480, enact authorize full acquisition construction and financing without appropriate fund of certain capital improvement projects of the constitution. If a constituent of University of NC is to require registar the deed to maintain regular office hours. Speaker: Both bills are calendared. House bill 937, conference report. Who’s hand? Representative: Senator Newton. Thank you Mr. President. Speaker: Let us read it in and then you will be recognized. Clerk: House bill 937, amend various [xx] laws. \Speaker: Senator Newton, you are recognized to debate the bill. Representative: Thank you Mr. President, members. This is the [xx] deal we handled earlier in session, by way of memory, it does a variety of things: expanding the rights concealed permit holders to carry in certain places, strengthening the penalties of criminals who use guns in the commission of crimes, and so forth. The conference report dealt with matters related to the pistol purchase permit. The house did not concur with our effort to repeal that permit process, and that is why we went to conference. The compromise that we reached, that was important to the senate, was that we closed a loophole that allowed felons to acquire guns that were not supposed to. That was the purpose of repealing the permit, but we compromised on that and what we have done is instituted

Program whereby the sheriff’s departments who issue these permits are supposed to be checking and making sure that these permit holders are in fact staying out of trouble and that they are still qualified to hold the permits. I would be happy to try to answer any questions. Essentially, if you voted for the bill before, you should definitely vote for it now. If you voted against the bill, well, I hope I’ve changed your mind. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No surprise of course, I voted against it then and I voted against it now. This session, I have heard from more of my constituents more often than in the entire seventeen years that I have been here. Of course, that’s been on every subject. I can tell you on the guns it has been absolutely overwhelming. People have been so upset, concerned and frightened by this bill. I have heard from people not just once but over and over and over again about what a dangerous situation this is creating. They’re worried for their children, they’re worried for themselves, and they feel utterly helpless. What’s interesting is if you look at the polls, people want more gun control, not less. To me it is very upsetting that we’re not listening to our constituents. We’re not listening to people. I certainly hope that I have persuaded a couple of people perhaps to vote against the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak briefly on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sen. Kinnaird as your favorite Senator since the party down east would say. What’s really dangerous is for the criminals to all be running around with guns and none of us law abiding citizens having them. That, that would be dangerous. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak a second time of the conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] There are two statistics in this whole gun debate that to me are probably the most frightening. The first is that 1/3 of the gun deaths are suicides. Suicides. People who have a gun handy who choose to kill themselves. A lot of those are young people. The second statistic that’s every interesting is that of those people who have a gun in their home to hit intruder with are 43 times more likely to be killed by that gun themselves than to kill an intruder. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brown for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask the bill’s sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton do you yield to a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton, I was scrolling very fast trying to find out this information, but maybe you could tell me. One of my concerns with the move to make all the information confidential regarding the permits. I presume the purchase permits are back is confidential for the purchase permits as well as the concealed carry, but I can’t get to that place. Is any public information available statistics, reports, anything about these permits and how they’re issued? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you for the question Senator Brown. We maintain the confidentiality of the records that was in the original bill and the conference report, except for as it related to the pistol purchase permits. We do require the sheriffs to maintain data on those that they deny, and that data with the non-identifying information in it for people…You can’t tell who got denied. It is required that they maintain the data of how many are denied and the reasons why they’re denied. The public can get that on a quarterly basis. For example, if a gun rights advocacy group wanted to fault those of a particular sheriff who was refusing..

...Wrongfully to give these permits out. They'd be able to look at that sheriff's data and see why it was that they weren't given permits out. On the other hand, we'll also have information to find out what it is that they're finding that it would, it would be a good reason to not. And as we go forward that will be data we think that is useful to further strengthen our background check system. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. One more question Mr. President if I may? [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] And overall though we ask here that we have information on the denials and that, at least that's better than nothing. But on those granted we have no information on the number, the volume, in terms of even compliance with those provisions, some sense of how they are varying by county or region or are and time or frequency, that kind of thing? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President that information is collected and held but is not public information. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion? Further debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr.President [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Mcissick, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ask Senator Newton if he would yield for a quest. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton of course these ?? course come back and you know on the calendar and it's hard to kind of review them real quickly but is this the bill where we were allowing guns in funeral processions, restaurants that serve alcohol, sporting events. It seems like you've even got added in there the bill with hunters using silencers. Is this the compilation bill that had all of that in there and is all of that still in there? Because I know we had some separate bills but then they got kind of compiled into one. So if you could clarify what actually came out and if the rest of that's in there. Just say that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sure Senator Mckissick thank you for the question and I will answer your question in a long enough manner that allows everybody in the Chamber to skim through the bill and re familiarize themselves with it. This is in fact the bill that we debated earlier in the session that includes an expansion of second amendment rights for those who have concealed carry permits. It does include a clarification that they can carry in parks and that cities can't overly restrict that. It includes that you can, if you're a concealed carry permit holder, having gone through the training and lawfully holding your permit. You can in fact carry in an Applebees when you go to eat with your family. It also includes all those other provisions in there that we talked about earlier that the cameras and the media seem to forget, which is that it significantly strengthens the penalties for those who wrongfully and illegally use their guns in the commission of a crime. It also significantly strengthens the reporting of felonies and criminal convictions and mental health issues so that our background check system is strengthened. So, yes, it is the same comprehensive bill that my voters and that my constituents keep e-mailing me, telling me that they want so badly. And it does strengthen our second amendment rights in the state at the same time we strengthen our background check system. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Speak briefly on the bill. My greatest concern with this bill is simply that we, the more we increase the availability use of firearms in the locations where they are permitted to be used. I can see any good that can be brought from carrying a funeral, a gun to a funeral, or to a restaurant, or to a park, or to any of these other places. Or having silencers on hunter's rifles. The greater the potential for misuse and abuse. That's my greatest concern. I understand the constitutional rights, and I certainly respect that but my belief is that the more you increase the use of these firearms in a variety of locations where they would not be allowed today, the greater the potential for problems to occur that will result in the loss of life or either serious bodily injury. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion? Further debate? Senator Goolsby for what reason do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I rise to defend the second amendment. Mr.President I'd like to speak on this notion to concur. I'm looking after I heard Senator Kinnaird's comment and Senator Mckissick was speaking. And I'm looking on the web US News and World Report. An article from jsut last month in June. "Study: Using Guns for Defense Leads to Fewer Injuries" And citing actually four specific studies from 1988 to two thousand-

...the assessment from the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council say "Crime victims who use guns in self defense have consistently lower injury rates than victims who use other strategies to protect themselves." I disagree with my colleagues regarding the use of guns. We live in a society where not everyone obeys rules, with a Second Amendment that protects us. And, Senator McKissick, your concerns about the people who are allowed to carry weapons more freely are the concealed weapon carry holders. Those are North Carolinians who have undergone the most in-depth background check and training. They're citizens we can trust the most. They're the people who come to our aid when some crazy person is trying to harm us. They're the people that we don't have to worry about. And I ask you to support this motion to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion for the debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Kinnaird, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask Senator Goolsby a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Goolsby, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I will yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Goolsby, have you read what was in the Second Amendment decision that was made on this very subject, and the fact that they allowed -- they think that it should have gun -- there should be reasonable controls? That they have said, in the decision, that the Second Amendment right, like all other rights, is not unlimited and has limitations which can be applied to the right to carry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, ma'am, and I do agree with reasonable limitations on that constitutional right, and I thank you for acknowledging that. Is the Second Amendment to our Constitution extremely important right. I believe that the changes we have made to it to protect that right, and to see to it that the right people are actually carrying firearms - those who are trained, those who are carrying them concealed - and that we make sure that the people we can trust the most in this society are able to carry out that duty. Thank you, Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion for the debate? Hearing none, the question before the body is the adoption of the conference report for House Bill 937. All in favor will vote Aye, all opposed will vote No. Five seconds will be allowed for voting, and the clerk will record the vote. 32 having voted in the affirmative and 14 in the negative, the conference report is approved, and is adopted and the House will be so notified. Senate Bill 480 conference report. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 480, U.N.C. capital improvement projects. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the motion to concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Here again, I send a child off to college and over to the House and it came back, and I don't know who it is anymore. So in order to identify this child I sent to the House, when it came back, I ask that we do not concur. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion? Hearing none, the motion to concur, Senate Bill 480, House Committee substitute. Bill sponsor asks that you do not concur. All those in favor will vote Aye, and all opposed will vote No. Five seconds will be allowed for the vote, and the clerk will open the machine. Newton? No. Berger? No. Bingham? No. Zero in the affirmative, and 47 in the negative, the motion does not pass. Senate does not concur, and the House will be so notified.

Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Announce conferees. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Senator has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Senator Berger appoints the following conferees on House Bill 392, “Warrant Status/Drug Screen Public Assist,” Chair, Senator Jim Davis. Members, Senator Hise, Senator Randleman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Conferees again, please. Senator Berger announces conferees on Senate Bill 127, “Economic development Modifications.” Senator Brown, Chair. Apodaca, Gunn, Meredith, Randleman and Tillman the illustrious conferees. Mr. President, one more additional conferees please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Berger announces appointing the following conferees on Senate Bill 480, “UNC Capital Improvement Projects.” Apodaca, Chair, Brunstetter, Brown and Hunt. Mr. President, announcement if I might. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Immediately following adjournment, we’re going down, the Finance Committee will be meeting downstairs in room 1027. There are three bills that will be heard. It should not take long so we encourage everyone to get on down there so we can finish that up and get those bills done. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Senator Apodaca. Notices and announcements. Senator Davis, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To send forth a conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Davis may send forth his conference report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further notices or announcements. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let us read this in first, Senator Apodaca. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Conference Report, House Bill 493, the President of the Senate. The conferees appointed to resolve the differences between the Senate and the House of Representatives on House Bill 493, a bill to be entitled, “An Act to Authorize the Town of Robbinsville to Levy an Occupancy Tax, To amend the Existing Graham County Occupancy Tax, and to Create a Taxing District in Graham County for the Purpose of Levying a Three Percent Room Occupancy and Tourism Development Tax.” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further notices and announcements Senator Apodaca? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Send forth Committee Report out of order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We recognize you to send forth your Committee Report. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, of Rules and Operations of the Senate submits for passage House Bill 675, Committee Substitute number one, “Amend Pharmacy Laws,” unfavorable as to substitute bill number one but favorable as to Senate Committee substitute bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Are there further notices and announcements? Ladies and gentlemen, I’d like to have a moment of personal privilege from where I stand up here. This has been very informative, but that’s not what I really wanted to talk about. 47 years ago today I married a young lady from Mount Olive, North Carolina and we have been very happy in all those years and I would like to congratulate my wife for putting up with me, my wife, Joyce Garner Pate. She is not here tonight but at any rate we have enjoyed life together and…

Three healthy children and nine healthy grandchildren to prove all that, and join me in our delight. Thanks very much. [APPLAUSE] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there further business to come before the Senate? If not, the Chair recognizes Senator Berger for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, mister President. Forty-seven years is quite an accomplishment. She must be a patient woman. Mister President, with that, I move that the Senate do now adjourn, subject to the receipt of Committee reports, the re-referral of bills and resolutions, the receipt of messages from the House and the Governor, the ratification of bills, the appointment of Conferees, and the receipt of conference reports, to reconvene on Wednesday, July 24th 2013, at 1 pm. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The motion is that the Senate do now adjourn, subject to the stipulations stated by Senator Berger, to reconvene on Wednesday, July 24th, at 1 pm. Seconded by Senator Brunstetter. All in favor, say Aye. All opposed, No. The Ayes have it, and the Senate stands adjourned.