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.

House | May 20, 2014 | Chamber | House Session

Full MP3 Audio File

The house will come to order. Members, please take your seats. Visitors, please retire from the chamber. The sergeant-at-arms will close the doors. The prayer will be offered by Representative Debra Conrad. Members and visitors in the gallery, please stand and please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let us pray. Almighty God, we give you thanks for the opportunity you have given each of us to serve the people of North Carolina. As we remember with humility the faces of those who sent us here to serve. May we seek their best interests. May our agenda be that of the people, so that this state may thrive and flourish in both prosperity and peace. As we work together this day, teach us to listen, to work together and to compromise, that our work may be productive and well-pleasing to you. These things we ask in your name, and for the benefit of your people. In Jesus' name, Amen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America , and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, the journal for May the 19th, 2014 has been examined and found to be correct and approval as written. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore moves for the journal for May 19th be approved as written. All those in favor say Aye. All opposed No. The Ayes have it. The journal's approved as written. Petitions, memorials, or papers addressed to the General Assembly or the House. Ladies and gentlemen, the chair would like to extend a welcome and a thank you to the doctor and the nurse of the day. The doctor of the day is Dr. John Burkhard from Raleigh, the nurse of the day is Ernie Glover from Tarboro. Please stand and let us welcome you. Ladies and gentlemen, the chair would like to welcome back a friend and member of the legislature, Representative Ensco, welcome back. We're glad to see you back in the chamber. Introduction of bills and resolutions, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? HB 1119, a credit for school supplies. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Education, if favorable finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Meyer, Luke and Ensco, HB 1120 two county commissioners drawn on technical board. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, calendar, operations to the house. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? house drawn resolution 1121. Honor Leo Mercer, former member. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, calendar, operations of the house. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? house bill 1122. Drivers license material technical standard. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Transportation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? HB 1123 Exclude federal lands access funds from strategic transportation investments. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Transportation, if favorable, Finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? HB 1124 DOT minority women business program. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Transportation, if favorable, appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? HB 1125 ?? criteria under strategic transportation investment for emergency repair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Transportation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? HB 1126 DOT partnership with private developers. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Transportation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? house bill 1127 ?? deannexation.

Government of Favorable Finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative R. Brawley HJR 1128, Ban publication of mud shocks for profit. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, Calendar operations of the House, if favorable, Judiciary. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cleveland, HJR 1129, Military Appreciation Day. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, Calendar operations of the House. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, we are going to take up two matters on the calendar today. The HB 725, the Chair anticipates that that will be re-calendared, HB 1050 will be taken up today along with amendments. The Chair would ask any members who have amendments to send them forward so that we can review them and seek with them appropriately. We will also have a resolution come our way from the Senate at the time that we get it. It's a Military Appreciation Day, we will be suspending or displacing whatever matter we happen to be on so that we can take that up for immediate consideration. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To formally make that motion the Speaker just referred to, concern of the calendar. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to state his motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Would move that HB 725, The Youthful Offenders Rehabilitation Act be removed from today's calendar and calendared for tomorrow. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection? So ordered. Ladies and gentlemen, upon motion of Representative Susan Martin from Wilson County the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Scott Jones and the students from Beddingtonfield[?] High School, please stand and let us welcome you. [APPLAUSE] Also, ladies and gentlemen, upon motion of Representatives Grier, Martin, from Wake County and David Lewis from Harnett County the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to George Obira[?]. George is here to shadow Representative Martin today. He is a senior at Harnett Central High School, an outstanding student, a junior ROTC member, and will be attending Morris Hill University. For his future plans he would like to be an officer in the army. George, please stand and let us welcome you. [APPLAUSE] Ladies and gentlemen, upon motion of Representative Annie Mobley from Bertie, Gates, Hertford, Pasquotank Counties, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Hertford and Bertie County Extension Relief Extension group, celebrating their 100th anniversary. Please stand and let us welcome you. [APPLAUSE] Also, upon motion from Representative Mobley, from Bertie, Gates, Hertford, Pasquotank Counties the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Judy Northcut and the Eastern Collaborative of Nurse[?] Family Partnership from Northampton, Hertford, Halifax, and Edgecombe Counties. Please stand and let us welcome you. [APPLAUSE] Ladies and gentleman, the Chair will do a couple more courtesies before we begin on

the calendar, upon motion of Representative Brawley from Mecklenburg County, the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to City Councilman and personal friend of mine, Ed Griggs of Charlotte, who's legislative liaison chair for the City of Charlotte. Ed, please stand and let us welcome you. I believe this is especially poignant given military appreciation day, upon motion of Representative Grier Martin from Wake County, the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to John Reed. John is a United States Marine, veteran of Afghanistan, he traveled to the United Kingdom as part of an exchange program benefitting wounded warriors through motor sports. John, welcoome. Ladies and gentlemen, without objection, rule 12D is suspended. Is there objection? Representative Winkie Wilkins will be able to eat lunch. Calendar. HB 1050. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee substitute for HB 1050 the ?? entitlement act ?? revenue laws as recommended by the revenue laws study committee, Jullia Howard of North Carolina, you're next. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Howard, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill, Mr. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members of the house, I hope that everybody has had the opportunity to review this bill. I know we had some caucus meetings and some finance meetings and revenue law meetings and this bill has had a lot of scrutiny. It is a rather long bill, and I'm going to try to go through the bill section by section, and when we finish, Mr. Speaker, if there's any questions, we have staff on the floor, with permission of the speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objecton. So ordered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We will try to asnwer all of the questions, so if you have the bill before you, there's actually sixteen parts, and this is a little different than what you have seen in the past. Actually, we try to normally break up true technical corrections in one bill and then policy changes in a second bill. But in the essence of time, with this being a short session, there's a lot of different things in this one bill, so I'm not going to stand here and tell you that it's truly technical because it is not. There's definitely policy changes. We will start with part one, and folks you will find that, if you have the bill before you, on page one, line 6 through page 2, lines 21. And that's a deduction for the state net loss. Now this is something that we had debated every provision in this bill was vetted in the revenue laws and had full discussion in many of the cases, the issue was so difficult to understand that we would send it to a study subcommittee and this being the case on part one. The deduction for the state net loss. And this does three primary things. And the purpose, the objective is to simplify the calculations, and ease the administration of the corporate loss deduction, and the effective date beginning on and after January 1 of 2015. Now the three things that it primarily does, it replaces the corporate net economic loss deduction with a state net loss

That is more comparable to the federal net operating loss deduction. Second, it removes the requirement that a net economic loss must first be offset by nontaxable income and thirdly it instructs the secretary of revenue to apply the standards under 381 and 382 of the internal revenue code in determining the extent to which the law survives a merger or an acquisition. Moving on to part two, that begins on page two line twenty-six through page six line ten I believe and this is the other income tax changes and this does basically four things and the first being it corrects the dollar amount of the section 179 expense investment limit. Last year there was simply an error made on the 179 provision and this provision needs to be enacted just as soon as possible since it does impact the 2013 tax returns. Secondly it also deals with the 179 provision it allows an asset transfer prior to January 1 2013 to receive the full benefit of section 179 expense reduction. If you remember we coupled from the federal section on 179 expense deductions and a little bit complicated, the state taxpayer has to add back 85% of the federal deduction and then deduct the 20% back so this is correcting and clarifying those two provisions on 179. The third thing that it does it clarifies the application of the standard deduction and the $20,000 deduction for mortgage interest expenses paid and the property tax paid on real estate. The fourth thing that this section does it updates the statute of reference in GS105-160.2 which imposes income tax on the states and trust. Normally states and trusts generally receive the same modifications to taxable income and tax rates as a single individual. Under section law 2013 remove the statutes allowing the modifications of North Carolina taxable income and setting the tax rate. Moving on to section three part three and I believe that will begin on page six line forty-one through page seven line forty-two. This is the agricultural exemption certificate and in section law 2013 316 we imposed an income threshold a person must meet to qualify for a sales tax agricultural exemption certificate and effective for purchases made on or after July 1 of 2014. This part simply gives guidance to the farming community and to the department of revenue as to the administration of the income threshold and it also allows the threshold to be met through a three year adjustment income averaging to address incomes of income for the farming operations. Moving on to part number four, the prepaid meal tax and this is another part of the bill that really needs to move forward quickly because parents are already paying tuition and buying meal plans for college students so we need to put this in place as quickly as we can. The section law 2013 316 repealed the sales tax exemption for meals served to students in dining room

Legally operated by the educational institutes. The repeal of the exemption imposes the sales tax on a transaction basis; however, in practice meals are not always directly sold. Today educational institutes sell a variety of meal plans that offer choices between a number of meal swipes and sometimes called food dollars and various colleges called them different things that tie in to their campus but regardless of all of those things this part imposes a sales tax on the gross receipts derived from the prepaid meal plans and makes other changes that will greatly simplify the administrative compliance burden and that will alleviate a lot of the confusion regarding who is the retailer, what is the taxable transaction, and how the local tax revenues are sourced. Again, this is a part of the bill that is very important that we get this passed so there's clarification for the parents who began to pay those tuition and meal costs early in June. Moving on to part number five this is the admissions and I believe you will find this section on page ten beginning on line eight through page fourteen line number three. In section law 2013 316 change the taxation of live events and movies from the gross receipts privilege tax to a state and local sales tax. It also expanded the sales tax base to include other attractions for which an admission is charged and the act list five exemptions from the tax. The committee received numerous questions regarding this part of the bill and tried to address all of those questions and concerns and again this was also sent to a subcommittee of the revenue laws and that subcommittee revenue recommendation of streamlining and limiting the number of exemptions was the simplest way to ease the confusion and ensure that similar events are taxed the same, regardless of who sponsors those events. Moving on to part six I believe you will find that on page fourteen line five through page seventeen line twenty-four. Under section law 2013 316 we expanded the sales tax base to include the sales price of a service contract and this part simply removes some of the confusion and gives a very clear definition of a service contract and it addresses the concerns of the taxpayers related to who must collect the tax and how to administer refunds of the sales tax on service contracts that are later rescinded. Part seven is the retailer contract provision and you will find this on page seventeen line twenty-six through page nineteen line thirteen. Many of you have at least heard about special provisions that some of the big ?? stores have such as Lowes and Home Depot and they will do a contract if you're replacing your windows. You buy the windows at the store and you are also contracting with that same store to install those windows for you so this clarifies what items are taxed to the contractor whose doing the installation and what items that you are taxed as the final consumer and we have finally clarified that, that doesn't make any enhancement or decrease in any tax revenues but it certain clarifies..

for the Department of Revenue. Moving on to Part 8 and these are other sales tax changes and you will find this on page 19, line 15 through page 23, line 4. And, this part simply addresses various sales tax issues concerning the expansion of sales tax and it also addresses sales tax issue concerning the taxation of accommodations from some conflicting language with the Department of Revenue over the past few years. This has, under this Section 8, there's actually three separate provisions. The first being, actually dealing with occupancy tax. The bill provides that a private residence or a cottage rented for fewer than 15 days that is listed by a real estate local or agent is subject to the sales tax and occupancy tax. And, beginning in 1984, the Department of Revenue interpreted the private residence exemption to apply only to residences but was not listed with a real estate agent. In 1998, there was a memo by the Association of Attorney Generals that supported this interpretation. Then in 2012, the Department simply arbitrarily changed it's intetreptation and issued a notice indicating that sales tax exemption applied to a private residence rented for fewer than 15 days regardless of whether or not it was listed with a real estate agent. So, that eliminated the sales tax and also the occupancy tax in one ??. That was never the intent and we are simply going back to correct that provision. The second part of Section 8. This says the sales tax refund for sales tax paid on video programming and pipe natural gas. Historically the state sales tax refunds was allowed to non-profits and local governments has not been applied to sales tax paid on utilities and that simply corrects that provision and makes that clear. The final piece of Section 8 is exempt from sales tax. Fifty percent of the sales price of a manufactured and modular home. And the ?? to this issue in depth that December of 2013 and decided that the fair thing to do was do a 50% collection on these two products because under the Section Law of 2013 we have manufactured homes was made from 2% with a $300 cap to 3.5%, excuse me, 4.75% and increased the rate on the modular homes from 2.5 to 4.75. This sales tax exemption became quite clear to us that you're dealing with a modular home or manufactured home and not more than 50% of the product as a whole would be included in the material. And, again, we are not taxing services so we felt that was a fair provision to clarify and make that retroactive. The last thing is that we are moving on a very obsolete little provision that would provide newspapers tax in the same and remove obsolete sales tax exemptions for sales from vending machines of one cent sales. And, I don't think that we see any of those in today's market. Moving on to Section 9, you will find this on page 23, line 6.

Page 28, line?? 11, this is the Excise Tax changes. The committee recommended various changes to Alcohol, Tobacco and Motor Fuel Excise statues at the request of the Department of Revenue and tax payers. Part 10 is the Tax Law Compliance changes. These are requests that were made from the Secretary of the Department of Revenue requesting the committee to consider enhancing it's tools to improve the compliance with revenue laws. This part increases the budget for locator services fees and suggests the renewal of the ABC retail permits to past compliance laws. And this is no different than what retailers must do that sell lottery tickets so all of those go hand in hand. Section 11, this is the property tax changes. And you will find this on page 30, line 11 through page 35, line 22. This part provides for central assessment of mobile telecommunication equipment by experienced public service company appraisers at the Department of Revenue. And in the current law, the property is locally assessed by each county. And this change is supported by the mobile telecommunications industries, the Department of Revenue and also the local government. This part will become effective for taxable years beginning on and after July 1 of 15. On Section 12, is the Privilege License tax changes and the Revenue Law Study Committee has been presented with an overview of the local privilege license taxes system for basically the last 11 or 12 years. Simply did not take any action to address this issue. But to start with the system of taxation has been considered very outdated, inefficient and very arbitrary method of raising revenue largely because it places a tax burden on only a limited portion of businesses. And there was no set way to calculate the privilege tax. Some cities counted the number of employees, come cities counted the square footage of the business, and then some cities chose the gross revenue tax provision. So the committee made the recommendation in the past, out of the committee, that changes will be made. So effective July 1 of 15 this part repeals the current Privilege License Tax and replaces it with a broader tax base and a flat tax rate of 100 dollars up to 100 dollars per business. Although many cities may levy a Privilege License Tax less than on a dozen received measurable OF revenue from it. Many of your cities have opted not to impose the occupancy tax. But we were SEEING and have good records to indicate that a business has the option of locating within the city limits or not. And if they are in the city limits they are first paying city tax, county tax, and then occupancy tax. Remember these are the businesses that create your tax base for your cities. We were seeing the many businesses looking at the taxing scheme and they have chosen, when their leases expire, that they are simply going outside of the city limits and they are leaving a blighted area. You're seeing it in many of your cities with a lot of open storefronts that [end of recording].

There's no occupant in there so that was one of the major reasons that we made the motion that we did. You will also be reminded that a lot of the cities did receive an enhancement with the expansion of the sales tax under the bill that we passed last year and most recently with the agreement with Amazon that will also enhance the revenues of your cities. Moving on to the next section and that is the license plate agent compensation and you will find this on page thirty-seven, line thirty-seven through page thirty-nine, line twenty-seven and this in your ?? the compensation for the license plate agents recognizing that this was a new job responsibility under the tax and tagged together program and the state began the implementation of tax and tagged together program September of 2013 and under the program a motor vehicle operator receives one bill and makes one bill for both property taxes and vehicle registration and under the legislation, and this was in 2013 372, under the legislation the transaction rate for the transitional period of the six months of the program was set at a dollar six. The rate was then set at seventy-one cents thereafter. The legislation directed the department of revenue study committee to study the transaction rate that was applicable and the chair's appointee to the subcommittee to review this changes and this part sets the rate at the transitional rate of a dollar six and clarifies the increased rate applies to all transaction where a license plate agency collects property tax as of July 1 2014 and allows the retroactive portion of the fee increase to be paid over a three month time period. Moving forward to the next section is technical clarifying and administrative changes and actually those are purely technical and clarifying and you will find those changes on page thirty-nine line twenty-nine through page fifty-one line seventeen. The next part of the bill is section fifteen and this is the tax vapor products and prohibit the use of vapor products in jails. This is a new concept and this is a new product. I believe within the next two days, three days you will hear of an announcement of a new industry, not a new industry, not new in name to us, but a new opening of a factory in North Carolina that will provide about close to three hundred new jobs for us and for the first time since I've been here this industry is asking that we set the excise tax, that we tax them so that we heard the bill in revenue loss and we had a good long discussion and I hope everybody understands what it is. It's the electronic cigarettes that has a nicotine component and people now are using these opposed to the tobacco cigarettes that they've used in the past. We were able to negotiate a tax rate, five cents per milliliter of the liquid component. The entire product is manufactured in the United States including the tobacco and it's all of the components are sealed and you can't open it and put other..

products in there to be used as, might have been suggested that it actually is not factual and we believe that this is a, it's a new, it's a new jobs, it's a new concept for North Carolina of which we welcome. The final push into the bill, Mr. Speaker, on page 56, lines 5-7, is just the effective dates when certain components, certain parts of the bill become active. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to send forth an amendment but Representative Howard, we have received a special message from the Senate so if you would not mind we'll displace that temporarily. Special message from the Senate, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Special Message from the Senate, SJR 796, the joint resolution expressing gratitude and appreciation to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Pursuant rule 32a, calendar, the clerk will yield, ladies and gentlemen of the House, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to the teachers, chaperones, and especially the students from Burlington Christian Academy in Alamance County, welcome. [APPLAUSE] SJR 796, the Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] SJR 796, the joint resolution expressing gratitude and appreciation to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. The Senate resolves, the House concurring. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Clerk will read in the entirety. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A joint resolution expressing gratitude and appreciation to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces whereas in the month of May is National Military Appreciation month and honors, remembers, recognizes, and appreciates all military personnel. Those men and women who have served throughout our history and all who now serve in uniform and their families as well as those Americans who have given their lives in defense of our freedoms we all enjoy today. Whereas North Carolina is the home of six major Department of Defense , Dot, Deparment of Homeland Security, DHS, installations. Coast guard station, Elizabeth City, Fort Bragg, Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, Marine Corps Air Station New River, Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, and Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, as well as North Carolina National Guard and other DoD, DHS activities and organizations. And whereas North Carolina is home to nearly 800,000 veterans and has the third largest military force in the nation with nearly 120,000 active duty personnel and another 12,000 members of the North Carolina National Guard and whereas the United States Military's the second largest sector of North Carolina's economy, accounting for 10% of the North Carolina Gross State Product, worth 48 billion dollars. And whereas more than 540,000 individuals are either directly employed by military or work in jobs providing goods and services that support the military's presence in North Carolina, and whereas businesses with defense related contracts operate in 87 of North Carolina's 100 counties, contributing to an excess of 3.4 billion in defense procurement contracts in North Carolina during 2012. And whereas the observance of events recognizes the contributions of the Armed Forces is a tangible and highly effective way of sustaining morale, improving quality of life for service members and their families. And whereas North Carolina prides itself as being the nation's most military friendly state and whereas veterans, service members, their families, and their communities have shouldered a heavy burden exemplified by repeated combat deployments for their nation

And whereas the support of the families of service members enhances the effectiveness and capabilities of the Armed Forces; and Whereas North Carolina is committed to supporting and promoting the military within the state; and Whereas, the continued long-term military presence in North Carolina is directly dependent on DOD/DHS's ability to operate not only its installations but also its training and other readiness functions critical to the national defense; and Whereas, it is therefore of paramount importance to the future of North Carolina to maintain the best possible relationship with all branches of the United States military and to promote practices that maintain North Carolina's preeminent position as the best location for military bases and training installations; and Whereas, to those ends, it is critical for all North Carolinians, all North Carolina businesses, all sectors of North Carolina's economy, and especially all branches and agencies of North Carolina's State and local governments to acknowledge about not only the military's presence and contributions to our State but also of the military's special and unique requirements that are critical to carrying out its national defense mission; and Whereas, North Carolina also seeks to promote the economic development, growth, and expansion of other industries within the State, such as the agriculture/agribusiness industry, the renewable energy industry, and tourism/outdoor recreation industry, and the fisheries industries; and Whereas, North Carolina has a vested economic interest in the preservation and enhancement of land uses that are compatible with military activities. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring SECTION 1. The General Assembly expresses its profound gratitude and appreciation to all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces for their selfless service and pays tribute to those who paid the ultimate sacrifice. SECTION 2. This resolution is effective upon ratification. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cleveland, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We again have the extreme pleasure of recognizing our Armed Forces and what they do for our country. The men and women of our Armed Forces do things that most civilians wouldn't even consider doing. They're on call 24 hours a day. They get paid the same amount of money whether they work two hours or 24 hours. They give of themselves unselfishly in our defense to make sure the United States of America remains a free, viable country throughout the world. We owe them more than you'll ever be able to pay them. Many of us here have served. And you know what I'm speaking of. The price of freedom isn't free. For those of us who have defended freedom, we know its costs all too intimately, and it is something most of us don't ever want to face again. But we are fortunate in that we have men and women who continually take up the cause to ensure our freedom. To ensure that our citizens can get up every morning and be comfortable in the knowledge that our country is safe. They go about their business. They don't have to worry about any intrusions on our shores. It is something we have to be eternally grateful for. It is something, as I said earlier, that you cannot pay for. The sacrifices given by the Armed Forces, the National Guard, the reserve units are just not compensatable in any way. We must keep them in our minds. We must keep them in our hearts, and keep them in our prayers every day to ensure that we stay free. To ensure they know that we do not

… take them for granted, and they know that they have our entire support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Grier Martin, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Gentleman’s recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Mister Speaker. The Gentleman from Onslow, Representative Cleveland, talked about many folks in this chamber who have served. There are a couple of us I’m thinking of, Representative Whitmire, who still are serving, but I also want to talk about an important angle that maybe sometimes goes unnoticed. Representative Cleveland talked about the sacrifice that those who are serving make, and there’s not much scarier, Representative Cleveland knows, than going off to war, but one thing I can think of that might actually be scarier is sending a child off, and I want members to know and I want North Carolinians to know that we do have a few members here who actually have children serving in the military. I’m thinking of my friend Representative Pittman, and Representative Moffitt and probably several others out here, and I just want the folks of North Carolina to know, as they send their children off to war, that we also have some members here who are making that sacrifice. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Horn, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Gentleman’s recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Speaker. One August the 8th of 1962, I learned three words that have forever helped me achieve any success I may have had in life. August the 8th of 1962 is when I raised my right hand and swore allegiance to the Constitution of the United States, to uphold and defend, and put on a uniform for the United States Military. Those three words I learned that day were “Sir, yes Sir,” translated “Ma’am, yes Ma’am.” Those three words have been an invaluable help to me the rest of my life, and I would encourage all of us to probably make more use of them. The lessons of the military are many, broad and important. The opportunity to serve your country just kind of does something for you. It kind of does something for you when the flag comes by. It kind of does something for you when you see a man or a woman in uniform, standing straight. I’m so happy to see how we now treat our military. It wasn’t always that way. When I left for my first overseas assignment, first of two, there weren’t many people standing around waving goodbye, and not everybody with whom I left came back – at least not standing up – and not everybody came back with all their pieces and parts like they left, and not everybody received us particularly well when we returned. I’m so happy that that has now changed and I am so honored to honor you all. I, although born in 1944 – don’t do the math – I’m not a member of the greatest generation, but I am a member of the grateful generation, and I am grateful for your service, the lessons I’ve learned, and for the opportunity to honor you today. Mister Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of Senate Joint Resolution 796 on its second reading. All in favor, vote “Aye”. All opposed, vote “No”. The Clerk will open the vote. The Clerk will now machine record the vote. 119 having voted affirmative, none in the negative, Senate Joint Resolution 796 has passed its second reading and without objection will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate resolves, House concurring. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of Senate Joint Resolution 796 on its third reading. All in favor, say “Aye”. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed, “No”. The Ayes have it. SJR 796 has passed its third reading. Resolution will be enrolled. Ladies and Gentlemen, upon motion of Representative Cleveland from Onslow County and on behalf of all the members, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to the military leaders from bases across North Carolina who have gathered at the General Assembly today for Military Appreciation Day, all active duty military service members, reservists and veterans, and members on the floor who are either active duty or are veterans, if the other members will stay seated and they will all…

-rise with those in the gallery who are either active duty or veterans, please stand and let us show our appreciation. Thank you. Thank you very much for honoring us with your presence. Ladies and gentlemen, the chair, upon motion from representative Pipman[???] and all[???] members, the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Lt. Samuel Pipman[???] with the fourteen fifty two transportation company out of Winston-Salem. He is an executive officer in his unit, he is the son of representative Larry Pipman[???], and he’s served two tours of duty in Iraq. Please stand and let us welcome you. Ladies and gentlemen, I think I welcomed this group before they were able to get in to the chamber, the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to a group of high school students from Beddingfield[???] high school, and Wilson. Welcome. Thank you for attending today. Representative Enscope[???] please state your purpose. Ladies and gentlemen, upon motion from representative Enscope[???], and representative Meyer[???] from Orange county, the chair is happy to extend courtesies of the gallery to the members of the North Carolina Science Festival Advisory Board at UNC’s Moore[???] planetarium and science center, and to exhibitors and partners across the state who are here today to celebrate Stem[???] day at the legislature. Welcome and thank you. Representative Meyer[???], please state your purpose. Ladies and gentlemen, the chair upon motion of representative Meyer[???] the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Bryson Smith[???] from Redford[???] county. Bryson[???] is at Lenore Run[???], he is student government chief justice. Bryson[???], welcome. Ladies and gentlemen, we had a – I wouldn’t call it an abbreviated version of the tax bill. We’re going to bring that back before us. That’s HB 1050, it was temporarily displaced. The chair will allow some brief questions, if there are clarifications on the baseline bill, and if not the chair would ask if the members would be ok with us considering what are, I think, seven or eight amendments before we discuss the debator[???] bill. Is that acceptable to the members? Representative Howard[???] is [unintelligible]. The clerk will read. [speaker changes] Representative Howard moves to amend the bill on page four line ten, and on page five, line eighteen by inserting the word “corporation” between the word “partnership” and the words “ex[???] corporation” end. [speaker changes] The lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [speaker changes] Thank you Mr. Speaker, and members of the house. This amendment does make several technical changes. And I’ll be glad to go through the changes, it’s a two-page amendment, actually two and a half. And I’ll be glad to go through this, but they are purely technical changes. Lines-

and this is to clarify that a mass set transfer occurring prior to January 1 of 13, with which ?? depreciation deductions remain the transferee is allowed to take the remaining deductions on the 2013 tax return if the asset has been disposed of or has no remaining life or use for the depreciation purpose. The second thing that the amendment does is page one and lines four through page two lines 30, amends the language in the part of the bill reference service contracts to clarify how refunds are calculated and to clarify that the gross receipts derive from a service contract for a lease or a rental motor vehicle is subject to sales tax. It is not subject to the highway use tax. Third thing, on page two lines 28 they said, there are special reference to the most recent streamline sales tax agreement. The fourth thing is on page two, lines 33 through page 3 lines 14, this doesn't change the substance but it's a clarifying statement of the new procedure to issue a temporary tag and finally, on page 3 lines 16 through 18 just quick says statutory reference. Mr. Speaker I would move that we accept the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion for the debate on the amendment? If not the question before the House is the passage of the amendment sent forth by Representative Howard for the House Committee Substitute of House Bill 1050. All in favor vote "I," all opposed vote "no," the Clerk will open the vote. All members wishing to record please do so. The clerk will ?? record the vote, 117 having voted affirmative, none in the negative, the amendment passes. Representative Hamilton is recognized to send forth an amendment, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hamilton moves to amend the bill on page 35, line 41, which by writing the line to read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If I may, could we temporarily displace this, we're still working out the language. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The amendment will be temporarily displaced. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brian Brown is recognized to send forth an amendment, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative B. Brown moves to amend the bill on page 56, line 5-7, by rewriting the lines to read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a very straightforward amendment. We actually discussed this last session and we had your full support. I hope to have your support again today. This is reinstating the debt set off provision for our university healthcare system, UNC North Carolina healthcare system as well as the ECU health facility practice plan. What it does, is it allows those two institutions to be able to collect past due debt that's more than 120 past due without having any payment arrangements made via a individual customer's tax returns, state tax returns or any lottery receipts that they may achieve. This is, at it's current form without them being able to continue to allow themselves to go through this debt set-off process to reclaim these past due debts, it is a 13.9 million dollar hit to our university system, going all the way to a 15.7 million dollar hit through year '17-'18. This is a vital portion of keeping our university systems whole and I hope that we can support this amendment and move this forward. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To briefly speak to the amendment, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Gentleman's recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I likewise support the amendment and just to clarify, I think that Representative Brown said this is a hit to the universities, it's actually revenue enhancement to the universities of 13-15 million dollars. So I think it's a good thing and it really does go to offset some of the cuts that have had to happen to both ECU and UNC in the education and health and human

services budgets. I support the amendment and ask everyone to do so, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion for the debate on the amendment? If not, the question before the House is the amendment sent forth by Representative Brian Brown for the House Committee Substitute of HB 1050. All in favor vote "I," all opposed vote "no," the clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote, 119 having voted affirmative, none in the negative, the House Committee Substitute to House Bill, the amendment to the House Committee Substitute has passed. Representative Fulghum is recognized to send forth an amendment, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fulghum moves to amend the bill on page 51, line 21 through page 56, line 3 by rewriting those lines to read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to defer to Representative Carney who had a amendment that she wished to run before mine, is that correct Representative Carney? Thank very much. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection, the amendment will be temporarily displaced. Representative Carney is recognized to send forth an amendment. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Carney moves to amend the bill on page 51, line 19 through 56, line 3 by deleting the lines and renumbering the remaining section accordingly. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker and ladies and gentlemen of the House. I rise today to what I'm, this amendment would do would be to remove the section on vapor products from the Omnibus tax bill. The reason that I rise to ask you to support this is because I serve on revenue laws study committee and we covered every bill that has before us in it's entirely, fully vetted, within this Omnibus bill except this particular bill, this section. This bill was brought to us last Tuesday before we reconvened on Wednesday and it was presented in the committee by the industry. No one else was invited to speak or was there to speak because when I left, apparently the committee, it hit the airwaves that this bill was before us. This is a huge step that we're about to take in North Carolina and I do think that it merits the debate as a separate, stand-alone bill. And I could go in to why but I do think that, several things, this product that we are talking about, and there will be lots of debates around it because it's going on around the country, right now in other states. The industry came and said, "tax us at five cents the vial," and when they presented to us they said, "a vial is compared to the equivalent of a pack of cigarettes." So put that in perspective, we charge, we tax cigarettes at 45 cents a pack, we will tax this vial on the e-cigarette at a nickel. That's a loss of 40 cents for each pack we don't sell, we are gonna lose 40 cents. That's just an issue and it's more complicated and, yeah, there are other components to that. That's the physical piece. If you're gonna raise your hand to vote for a tax on a nickel, a nickel on this product, why not raise it a little higher? Or why not go to, like in North Carolina, we have the lowest percentage, the wholesale price, of tobacco and tobacco products at 12 and a half cents. Other states have taken this industry, the e-cigarette, and they have taxed it at anywhere from 80 to 95 cents on the wholesale price. It's a fiscal issue. If we're gonna tax something are we doing it to our greatest advantage? Yeah, a nickel is great for the industry, of course, that's low, but what about those revenues in North Carolina that we potentially will lose and this could bring in. The other piece is the policy. The FDA has not ruled on whether this is, this should be a regulated industry

They are in the process of looking at it, and do we want to jump out there ahead of all the other states and clarify and classify in statute that this vapor product is not a tobacco product when indeed it was defined that it is a tobacco product? Is it a better product for smokers, for consumers? Maybe. I don’t know. They’re not required because they’re not regulated to reveal to disclose, or rather to reveal to us what is in the product. So far as some of the chemicals that have been identified, of the 65 compounds that are found in the e-cigarette arsenal, 26 are listed on the FDA established list of harmful and potentially harmful substances. Are young people going to be lured in by the word “vapor product” when “vapor” can innocently mean it’s a water product, that you’re just smoking vapor, when we know and have been told and it is in your bill summary that it is defined as a derivative of nicotine? So at what point? I’m a very health-conscious person and I’m all for preventive measures, and before we just arbitrarily say “This sounds good. 5 cents, it’s a little bit of revenue,” the industry wants it, but have you really stopped to listen and think about what the impact’s going to be? Have you talked to people within the healthcare system? I’ll tell you that they’re… I just, I don’t want to belabor this. I’m asking you to reach down and think this through. These omnibus bills, Representative Howard did a great job of going over everything in here, and that it was fully vetted through the committee process. This particular Bill was not. The Committee voted unanimously on – the Finance Committee did on Thursday – to pull out the apportionment piece of a bill section in this omnibus bill because it really needed more work. It needed more understanding by members. We unanimously voted. I brought forth this same amendment and it was defeated 14-14, but there were people that have come up to me afterwards and said “I didn’t know that piece was in there.” I’ve already had someone reach out to me, and maybe someone’s bringing that amendment forward – I don’t know – but there’s apportion in there of transporting. This affects businesses. They get a rebate of 2 % if they deliver these goods in a timely, safe manner. Well it says “tobacco products”. Well they want vapor products added to that, so there’s an impact there on the fiscal. There are all sorts of moving targets. I’m just asking that we take this Bill… if we’re going to move and support this industry, let’s do it proudly, and let’s do it in a stand-alone bill, and let’s answer all those questions so that the consumers in this state and particularly the young people… there’s still some ambiguity here that we may have… we have two bills now. Well we have one that we passed last year that Representative ?? and Representative ?? worked on, and that was to make it illegal to sell these e-cigarette products to minors. Well we clarified in the statute that that is a tobacco product. Now we’re coming along and saying they aren’t tobacco products in this Bill. I think there’s a lot of clarifying language that has to happen, a lot of debate, but at this point, I’m not sure that I can support moving this forward in the omnibus bill from a policy standpoint. I’m not sure that I’ve been convinced that this is good policy. Maybe I want to be. I’m not convinced that it’s good fiscal policy. Maybe I want to be, but is there a better way? Can we charge more? Can we collect more, and more revenues when this state is hurting? If you’re going to raise your hand on a tax, make it count. And the third is the health component. What is the impact? What is it that our young people, adults are going to be inhaling into their system? What is in that vapor? I ask you to please support this amendment and have it removed from the omnibus bill, and let’s move it back to committee and let’s have it fully vetted, and let’s make it a stronger bill than it is right now. Thank you, Mister Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ??, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the Bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mister Speaker.

I admit to the same flair reaction last week when I read the initial language in this budget bill as Representative Carney and I owe Representative Howard an apology for being upset that I was kind of being sidestepped a bit on some of the language here. As I begin to work on the bill a little bit and try to figure out how to make it better I came up with an amendment that's been agreed to by the health advocates for the most part, nobody's happy with everything, and the industry advocates for the most part. And I think it's a cure to the movement that addresses Representative Carney's concerns that I'll speak to next but I do not support her amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Howard please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker and I regret having to stand here and debate. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The lady has recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker, sorry. I regret having to go against the grain of my good friend Representative Carney but the 2% discount is not applicable to the provision as written that was mentioned and it is an alternative to tobacco, smoking tobacco, and we looked at many other ways to have an intake of nicotine. Many of my friends who are trying or have tried or have quit smoking, there's something called a nicotine patch. You buy it over at the pharmacy, you pay sales tax on it and that's it. There's a nicotine gum that people chew, direct hit of nicotine. I'm sure my pharmacist friend back there understands these products better than I do. Right now these electronic cigarettes are being sold in North Carolina. A new and different product is going to be announced in the state of North Carolina in the next few days. I believe a safer component of an electronic cigarette is going to be announced in North Carolina. Right now the only thing we can do is collect a sales tax. Comes in a little plastic box. We are putting this provision in the bill for the excise tax. We are going to be able to collect, without the provision in this bill, we are not going to collect the excise tax. It's not a lot of money, it's 1.4 million dollars, but without passing this in this bill we are not able to collect that additional excise tax so with all due respect to my good friend Representative Carney I ask that you vote no on this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Glazier please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] To speak to the amendment Mr. Speaker [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. I stand, and first to thank Representative Howard for an extraordinarily excellent presentation on the full bill which was really very helpful and staff are doing that in our caucus as well. But I do, I want to talk about the amendment and support Representative Carney's amendment for several reasons. First, I was part of the group with Representative Stam actually and Representative Folgium last year that looked at an attempt by the industry to try to create definitions that would have bound us in. And to the industry's credit, they were part of a negotiation team that did what we were supposed to which was to find a compromise and the compromise as you recall had two components to it. The first was to make sure that we barred the product from children and to call it what it appeared to be which was a tobacco based product, but second to realize that what we didn't know was a whole lot more than what we did know and to punt on the tax issue to really study it, to see what was happening in other states, to see what the FDA was going to do, and to try to figure out..

In what tax category, if any, this product should be. Well I think that was a good compromise and my recollection is it passed pretty close to unanimously in the house and became law. So we've lived up to the first part of the bargain but now with very little time for everybody to look at this issue and quite frankly with more questions unanswered than answered, we are about to put it in a category, tax it, and on top of that as Representative Howard said we're going to have a new product in four days and we don't know what it is or what it's content is but we're going to tax it before we can figure out what we're taxing. That to me just doesn't make any sense in the rush to judgment even if we will lose a million dollars. I'd rather lose the million dollars here and get it right, both for the consumer, for children, and for the state than put something into law that we know will be very difficult to change and let me give you just a few pieces of data in support of this. The electronic cigarettes right now, there are about 200 companies in the United States that produce but only about five make up 80% of the market and I suspect that's not going to change a whole lot. Wells Fargo a few months ago estimated the e-cigarette market at two billion dollars in the United States so assuming that a significant portion will emanate eventually from North Carolina, losing a million dollars this year to get it right probably in the scheme of things is not a big issue because we're looking at a big issue that we need to make a very good health policy and tax policy decision on. Their bill says we should tax the product at five cents per milliliter as I recall. The advocates on the health side want us to come closer to making it an equivalent to the forty-five cents. I'm not sure either side is right, in fact I suspect given the advocacy on both sides that like many things, somewhere in the middle is where we ought to end up but we don't know enough to know that. There's an interesting point made in an industry article that I think has to be taken into account and it says think about the reason that you're taxing. The typical rationale for taxing in the tobacco realm is to recover the societal cost of those products and if anything there should at least be, maybe for this product, a different category that speaks to the fact that e-cigarettes are different than tobacco products. They may be, they may be not. Part of that is we don't know what's in all the contents and we certainly don't know the contents and how to label them on a product that's coming out in four days that we don't know what the product is. And so at a minimum, the waiting until we can at least get some data and figure that out, particularly when the nation is divided. There are a number of states holding back waiting to see. There are a number of states that are taxing at different states and Minnesota's probably the one that's gone the further. There are a number of states that are looking to call it a tobacco product, nine of them actually I think so far, and I think there are four that call it something else. We ought not be in a rush to judgment here and all I think Representative Carney's amendment says is this tax bill with the exception of the issue we're all having or a bunch of us are having with the license issue, the privilege issue is pretty well thought out in a consensus bill. This is not a consensus item, not right now and at least we ought to say let's put this off for a policy decision and a tax decision when we have the information and data in front of us which may not be this session, it may be the long session, or maybe it can be later in this session depending on how long we go at least to see what's happening. But what ought to be clear at least from all the data we have is that we know is a whole lot less than what we don't know and for that reason Representative Carney's amendment makes extraordinary good policy sense and I would urge the body to support the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Pittman please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. First thing occurs to me is as I read the bill as it stands, there's nothing there that prohibits raising the tax later on. This is a place to start and I think it's good enough. Plus I would say that, as far as I understand, we're talking about a legal product and as an old country boy that used to hang tobacco when I was teenager, worked for some good people, I think we've kicked the tobacco industry around enough and maybe we owe them a little deference so I think this is enough of a tax to get started with, if you want to raise it you can do it later.

Later. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Floyd, please state your purpose. Representative ??, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to support Representative Carney's amendment. We really are not ready to vote on this bill. Especially my concern has to do with the low tax. Of course we can raise the tax sometime later. Do you know how many years it took us to raise the tax on regular cigarettes? Years and years and years, and we still haven't raised it enough. It still needs to be raised to be more equal to what other states are doing. What happened when we raised the tax on cigarettes? Not enough, but some, teen smoking went down, as it has in every state where they've raised the cigarette tax. There's evidence that e- smoking electronic cigarettes lead to regular nicotine addiction and smoking regular cigarettes. We don't need to go down this road again, we've been there already. Let's vote yes on this amendment, get this provision out, have an adequate debate on it, hear from all the parties, and make a reasonable decision based on good information. Vote for the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stone, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Speaker, ?? Dr. Folgum for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Doctor Folgum, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do we have any indication that this product causes cancer or lung problems, or anything connected to the cigarette industry? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Nicotine is an addictive product in certain concentrations, but we do not have any indication that this is a cancer-causing product, like cigarettes and other mostly tobacco products. No, that's the truth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Wells, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I expect it would be impossible to talk about tobacco in a general assembly in North Carolina without a lot of emotion getting involved. In the prior eight generations of my family are buried in Red Clay Hills, that weren't good for much else but tobacco. And I didn't have many family gatherings that didn't involve a discussion of the fields or the barns, or even that I got to ride in the occasional sled in drawn by a mule from the fields. But I made great efforts to avoid it as soon as I could because I didn't like the nature of the heat and the sweat and all the work that went into it. So I chose another industry. And that's one I want to talk about. What we're debating is does our nicotine delivery device need to be battery driven with a vaporizer or have a fire on the end of it? A burning fire. Fires cause problems. Here's one: instead of going into the tobacco industry, I went into the furniture industry, and spent ten years in a furniture factory. Back in the 80s we had a little issue caused by the state of North Carolina. The furniture industry still has an issue, this one caused by the federal government. If you, anybody here, God forbid, goes home tonight and falls asleep with an on-fire nicotine delivery device in your mouth, and burned yourself to death, whose fault is it? According to the federal government, it's the fault of the sofa manufacturer. So that industry has for decades struggled with how do you make a furniture product that is affordable and comfortable, fashionable, and fire-proof? And it really can't be done! But the fire-proof thing keeps hanging in there. We're still dealing with that. I come from a community called Hickory. Furniture's a big deal. We've lost 30,000 jobs in that four-county MSA since 2000. Those were manufacturing jobs and more than a fair share came from the furniture industry. We're still struggling with this whole issue of how do you make flame-proof households? We're not going to do that. Should there be a spread in pricing between a nicotine delivery device that is battery driven and doesn't burn, and one that is on fire? In your house, around your kids, in your car, tossed out of your car window and starting forest fires? How do we want to do that, and should there be a spread? I think there should be a price spread. I think we should encourage people to use device that's not on fire.

?? So I oppose this amendment. [Speaker Changes] Representative Samuelson please state your purpose. [Speaker Changes] To Speak in opposition to the amendment. [Speaker Changes] The lady is recognized to debate the amendment. [Speaker changes] You know when your last, people gradually sort of take all your points and I’ll have to admit representative Whales, that one about fire safety was my last one. But I do want to sort of just summarize one, is the misconception when people have talked about the equivalency between a pack of cigarettes and the patch that their selling on the vapor products, they’re talking about equivalency in nicotine. Not the equivalency in tobacco, not the equivalency in anything else. So it’s the equivalency in the nicotine which, as representative Howard brought, up you can get through patches, you can get through gum, all sorts of things. So let’s don’t get confused with that comparison of a pack of cigarettes to these vapor products. Another thing that was brought up was you got a sheet here on all these states that are considering it. I went through with someone else and my understanding is of the list, 10 of them decided for right now that they actually wanted to wait and see what other states were going to do. And so it’s not like we’re falling way behind these other states in fact, when it comes to tobacco products, we've usually been in the lead. We've usually sort of set the standard so I think that that would make sense. I think only Minnesota has actually done one at this point. As representative Howard also brought up, right now, these products are being taxed no differently than everything else. It’s a sales tax. Now, I’ll agree that they’re not as dangerous, from what I can tell, as regular cigarettes, but I also agree that I don’t think they’re just totally benign, and we ought to have some sort of tax on it. So when you go back to the argument that Representative Glazier brought up about the comparison of five cents versus forty cents right now its zero. If we do absolutely nothing it’s zero. So let’s go ahead and put something in place. Put the five cents on there. If we do decide later that because of some action that the feds take, I’ll remind you the feds are notoriously slow, if they actually do make a change that impacts what we've done, there’s nothing to stop us from coming back and reflecting that in future sessions. But for right now I think we need some sort of recognition that this is a different product. I think the five cents proposal is fair and relevant based on what we’re doing, and we are a state that, in the tobacco industry, has lead the way, and I think it’s time for us to do that on this. I urge you to vote against the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Representative Wilkins please state your purpose. [Speaker Changes] The speak to the amendment Mr. Speaker [Speaker Changes] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I really didn't think I had a dog in this fight until I started listening to the comments. I’m not sure we’re getting exactly what it is the amendment trying to do. The amendment is not about being fireproof. I’m not sure it’s about addiction. I think the amendment is about transparency. And if you want to walk away from here at the end of the summer, or whenever we’re through, and say I took a swing for transparency, then you’ll vote for this amendment. Thank you. [Speaker Changes] Further discussion, further debate on the amendment? If not the question before the house is the passage of the amendment sent forth by Representative Carney for the house committee substitute of house bill 1050. All in favor vote Aye, all opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will ?? record the vote. 41 having voted affirmative, 76 in the negative, the amendment fails. Representative Hamilton the Chair understands that you intend to bring your amendment forward tomorrow and not today. Representative Folgam your amendment is before us. Is the gentleman ready to carry the amendment? The Gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Last year we considered the bill HB 864 that morphed itself into the SB 530. This was about prohibiting sales of e-cigarettes to minors. We had a long discussion at that time in committee and on the floor about pros and cons of what this product was. As far as waiting till more clarification occurs we can wait and more products come out and pass more bills and be back here in special session. The FDA is now considering in the comment period specifically how to regulate these products nationwide in regards to labeling, milligrams per cc of the product. The interesting thing was heard when this thing was discussed in the finance committee was the staff said the average…..

taxation on this unit and as a sole equal, as far as usage is concerned, a pack of cigarettes would be in the 30 cent range. So we're not talking about 5 cc's total tax if we tax it under this new regimen. I did not understand the implications of what we were trying to do with this finance committee bill. I thought it was in conflict with the bill we passed last year in regards to calling vapor products a tobacco product, which we did. This seemed to say it wasn't a vapor and tobacco product int he same sentence. My amendment cures that, I think, it calls it out. It says it is a tobacco product for the purposes of both social policy and taxation policy. It is a new product. It can't be taxed under the same regimen that we do with excise taxes on, for example, chewing tobacco and snuff, cigarillos, cigars, and cigarettes because it's not that. It is a cartridge ?? liquid that contains nicotine that's used up as we've heard, by putting it in an electronic device that heats it up and turns it into a vapor. It ain't perfect but it sure beats smoking a cigarette and that's what we're after. Whether this leads to more addictions and more cigarettes I just don't think the data will show that. There's some danger here but there's a lot more danger than not doing something. The amendment length is due to the conforming nature of the language that's required to make sure it conforms with the tax policies that we want to have it conform with, with all the things that are in that particular section of the bill, but it simply says that vapor products are tobacco products and this is for the purpose of sales, direct sales, vending machines, and internet sales. Now, we're getting all kinds of products into this country from outside our country, like China and so forth, and some of these things are a little suspect about how much nicotine they contain per cc and so forth and I think the Clean Drug Administration has that pretty much under control about what they're gonna demand be revealed on the package. So I ask for your support and I think this is a good amendment. I think it cures my questions, at least, and help many others that has ?? of the industry and as I said most of the health advocates think this is an improvement on the situation and I ask for your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion for the debate? If not, the question before the House is the adoption of the amendment sent forth by Representative Fulghum to the House Committee Substitute for HB 1050, all in favor vote "I," all opposed vote "no." The Clerk will open the vote. The Clerk will out machine record the vote, 115 having voted affirmative, 4 in the negative, the amendment passes. Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair is happy to extend a greetings and welcome to the teachers, chaperones, and especially the students from Pinebrook Elementary in Mocksville, Davie County. Thank you for being here. [APPLAUSE] Ladies and gentlemen, upon motion of Representatives Moore and Hastings from Cleveland County the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Dr. Dennis Reno, a chiropractic from Shelby. Dennis, welcome. [APPLAUSE] Representative Glazier's recognized to send forth an amendment, the Clerk will read. Representative Glazier does the gentleman wish to have one read before the- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes Mr. Speaker, I'd like to withdraw the one that tries to allocate and simply the one that's the one sentence amendment was only one I wanna run. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Chair understands that to be 80T133? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I don't have it on my screen, Mr. Speaker, but I believe that to be correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It's the shorter one, right? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, yes Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier moves to amend the bill on page 54, line 41, by rewriting the line to read: [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman's recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and ladies and gentlemen I believe this is an amendment that really, actually, simply restates what the law is, and to make sure that we're all clear and I've run it past Representative Howard, I believe she consents to the amendment and it simply says that nothing that we're passing should be construed as circumventing any FDA regulation that may occur

of tobacco products,other products, of vapor products, however it ends up classifying so we are not at odds or having a preemption problem. I know of no opposition to this amendment. Thank you. [speaker changes] Further discussion further debate on the amendment? If not the question before the house is the adoption of the amendment sent forth by representative Glacier for the House Committee Substitute HB 50 all in favor vote I all opposed vote no the court will open for the vote. The court alot machine will count the vote as 117 having voted in the affirmative two in the negative, the amendment passes. Representative Bill Brawley writes note sent forth an amendment the court will read. [speaker changes] Representative W. Brawley moves to mend the bill on page 35 line 32 by inserting the words located and between the word business and the word operated. [speaker changes] The gentlemen rise now to debate the amendment. [speaker changes] Thank you mister speaker there's also a second portion to re-write to say that a business that manages rental properties, that the individual rental properties will not be considered a separate location for the purpose of privilege license tax, but only the office that does the rentals, the actual homes in which people lived are not location taxable. This is designed to nail down with certainty that a privilege license will only be collected from businesses within the town limits of a city that does it. And the history from this is that--I got a very interesting database from a WSOC reporter Alisso Lados said it had spent 350 dollars to buy all the data from the city of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County. I knew there were businesses in my home town of Mathews that were paying privilige licenses to the largest city in Mecklenburg county, often at a considerably higher rate than they were paying to the town. What I discovered with negotiations back and forth with said city to make sure information I had was accurate that 440 business in Mathews and Mint hill pay a privilege business license to the largest city in mcklenberg county. In Mathews, its higher than Mathews charges, in Mint Hill, there is no privilege license tax, the only one they pay is to the largest city of Mecklenberg county. There are also several towns in the north of mcklenberg county. Huntersville has never charged a tax, Cornelius used to but now they no longer. Their businesses pay a privilege tax to the largest city. Davidson businesses pay both. In Pineville they also pay. If it stayed within Mecklenberg county this just might be a fight among sisters but--the phrase used sometimes to describe North Carolina is that it spreads from Murphie to Manthea. Well in Murphy three other businesses in Representative West's district are Charlotte privilege business license, I'm sorry I didn't mean to say them but the largest city in Meclenberg county. Also representative ?? are two of the businesses in your district that pay a business privilege license in fact 82 of 99 businesses in North Carolina have business paying for the privilege of selling to people that live in the largest city of the state. For instance representative Hamilton Katlin and Davis thank you for the thirteen businesses in New Hanover. Representative Ayler for the ten in Brunswick. Pit and Wilson for representative Farmer Butterfield and Susan Wiltson with four and seven respectively. The 23 in Cumberlan County representative Lucos representative Floyd and representative Glacier and representative Zocka. We thank you for your contribution to fire service in our largest city. Joe Sam queen, eight businesses in Haywood Jackson Swain. Lewis seven in Harnet Mike Stone two in Lee. Representative Baskerville in Wilkins. In Granville and Vance three businesses support our largest city. Thank you. Representative Ensco seven in Orange Country. Representative Greg Meyer welcome to the general assembly and thank you along with representative Larry Hale representative Lupki and representative Michoff for the thirty eight businesses that support the largest city in the state of North Carolina. From Wake county, one hundred fifty nine, from Gilford, thank you, one

365, Alamance 23. Caberas, representative Johnson representative Pittman. [change of speaker] representative Lewis please state your purpose [change of speaker] May I say gentleman from Mecklenberg in question. [change of speaker] Representative Brawley does the gentleman yield? the gentleman yields [change of speaker] Representative thank you, are you aware of anyone that is opposed to this amendment that you are proposing? [change of speaker] Actually I thought several people were but if you think that this is gonna pass without further, I'll be happy to stop, because the list is quite long reaching all 49 states and a foreign country [] R Floyd does the gentleman have any comments. Further debate further discussion on the amendment if not the question before the house is the amendment sent forth by representative Bill Brawley to the House Committee Substitute for HB 1050. All those in favor vote I all opposed vote no, the court will now open for vote. The court alot machine will now record the vote. 114 having voted in the affirmative and three in the negative. The eyes appear to have it, the ayes do have it, the amendment passes. Representative Glacier, the chair understands that the other amendment has been withdrawn, is that correct? [change of speaker] That's correct Mr. Speaker[change of speaker]??? has sent forth an amendment the court will read. The chair stands corrected the gentleman has withdrawn the amendment. Representative Burt Jones has write note sent forth an amendment, the court will read. The chair understands you have withdrawn your amendment as well. Ladies and gentlemen the chair is understanding that with the withdrawal of those amendments there are no further amendments, and other members wishing to send forth an amendment. If not we're back with the bills of the senate representative Howard please state your purpose.[change of speaker] Thank Mr Speaker to who debate the bill a final time [change of speaker] the lady has raised a note to debate the bill as amended. [change of speaker]Ladies and Gentlemen of the house, it's not perfect but I will tell you there been hours and hours of work that has been put forward with this bill and it still has another vote tomorrow morning and then it will travel over to the senate and I'm sure that they will put their special touches on it. So I would today that you would give us the benefit of the doubt if you have any further doubt and--I ask you that you support this bill it's very important that we move it further quickly, thank you very much.[change of speaker] Representative Lupki please state your purpose. [change of speaker]To speak on the bill [change of speaker] the gentleman has raised the note to debate the bill as amended. [change of speaker] Thank you Mister Speaker, members of the House, I rise because I've heard no one talk about the harms to cities in terms of the financial impact of this bill. In the House Finance Committee there was a staff that prepared document that showed between 14 and 25 millions of dollars that would be lost, state-wide, to cities. That the Privilege License Tax has multiple problems in the way that it is implemented, I don't think anybody really disagrees with that in this chamber. But over the years when we have done things as a house and as a general assembly to have some impact on the financial situation of our cities, we have strived to set the bill in a way that is called a hold harmless bill, a bill that in other words does not harm the city in terms of their financial situation. With the change in the privilege business license to a limit of a hundred dollars per enterprise, we do not hold the city harmless. I ask my city to provide some data on what will happen to the city with the exiting system of nor raising any city that's taxed by 50, and Max said

Maximizing the tax at 100 dollars. And if we do that in this bill as it looks like we're inclined to do, there will be an impact of 2.2 million dollars for Durham alone. Durham should not have to take that kind of hit. I wish revenue laws had developed a bill that showed ways in which the privilege tax could be cleaned up and raised revenue for our cities. And it's not just Durham. It includes Hickory, it includes Lumberton, it includes High Point. Those are among the top seven. All of these cities and many many more are hurt by the fact that the privilege tax has not been set up in a way to hold the cities harmless. I think that's a big mistake. It's a reason enough to vote against the bill. I encourage people to vote against the bill, because I think it simply is unfair to our cities, that we do not hold them harmless when we make a change. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Howard, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Question to Mr. Luebke, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Luebke, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Representative Luebke, you heard us say both in the debate with the revenue laws and also in the finance committee that we had made many overtures to the league, asking them to come to the table with us. And that offer still remains open. I will tell you at ten minutes to one today, we received a proposal from the league, and I will certainly encourage and work with the senate once the bill goes over to the senate. We simply did not have time to look at their proposal ten minutes before we came to the floor, and we will continue to do that, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Raleigh, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I recognize the concerns that Representative Luebke has raised. I do want to address those with two things. First, the effective date of the changes is July 1st, 2015, so there will be more than a year before this goes into effect. Discussions of ways to hold cities harmless will have ample time and we will have the long session to explore it. But also, as you probably have gathered, I really dug into this issue and with a large city close to mine, they've gone through an exercise recently called add-deletes. They've taken their property tax and other sources of revenues and they put some into services, some into debt service, and something called paygo, which is an accumulation of money to spend on capital projects without having to borrow money. The paygo account is funded by more than the total amount of receipts from privilege license, from property tax revenues. But part of the service funding is all privilege license. And we're told that if the privilege license goes away, services must be cut. I would submit that's not really accurate. Priorities have to change. And it's a fairly easy swap. You take 18 million dollars of property tax out of paygo, put it in services, you take 18 million dollars of privilege license out of services, put it into paygo. If we take the privilege license away and don't replace it with additional money, it does impact some of the capital projects that they would like to pay without borrowing money. But it does not require the loss of a single firefighter, a single policeman, a single ambulance. So this is a manageable situation, for a fiscally prudent city council. And it is a manageable situation for this body to negotiate in good faith with our cities, to help them continue to provide the services they need to. And I would ask your support for the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Wells, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. There's an interesting twist in this.

...poll, privilege tax idea. If you support the sales based privilege tax, you support a tax on food purchases by poor people. How it works is this: the cities, some cities, a few cities, have greatly expanded their privilege tax reach and they have started taxing businesses, locally based locally located business, based on their sales. When it comes down to business there's not much higher sales volume than a grocery store, a store that sells food. They have the high sales, they probably have the lowest margins of any, it's all about volume. That's why they're bombarding us with ads in the papers and the television, come shop here they need that volume, they don't make much margin. So it's only common sense that if a local government hits them with a twenty or twenty-five thousand dollar tax they have to pass it on to the customer, but I took it beyond common sense. I actually asked how a North Carolina based chain how they dealt with it and they pass it on to the customer. Their aggravation is not that they have to pay it, they're just passing it on. The big aggravation is they have to figure out how to tax the customers in one city and not tax the customers in another city so they end up with cost and varying prices across the cities of North Carolina so it's an aggravation but the people are still footing the bill. Now we have a convoluted tax system, we've made great strives in improving it but we're not through it with it yet, at the state level and at the local level. Like the finance chair, I've talked to the lig, I've talked to city managers, I've talked to elected officials. What do we do to fix the mess of the local tax system? And I haven't gotten a lot of responses, but I'm still open for that conversation. But what we don't need to be doing is taxing food purchases by poor people. As a state we've elected not to tax food sales so even a rich guy can go into the fresh market and buy a $20 steak and not pay a sales tax. We do allow the locals to apply the local 2% tax on food purchases, but we have specifically stated in the general statutes that even that 2% is not subject to purchases by folks on food stamps. The lower ?? lines, our lower social economic tiers, if they're eligible for food stamps they are not subject to any sales tax on their food purchases. But what if it's a hidden tax? What if that $25,000 tax is buried in the price? It's not on the bottom of a receipt, it's not measurable, it's just up in the price. We can't exempt poor people from that kind of tax, they're just stuck with it. So what we're saying is even though the state of North Carolina has decided not to tax food purchases, even though the state of North Carolina, granted with some encouragement by the federal government, has allowed the local government, the county governments to tax food purchases, we're still allowing the municipalities in this state to tax food purchases by poor people. Passing this bill will eliminate that, I urge your support. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative ??, will you please state your purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGE] To peak on the bill, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Members of the house, I've spoken with Chairman Howard and it's my understanding, and as she stated on the house floor this afternoon, that there's going to be an ongoing discussion about how we can address the issues that local governments have. I have three municipalities in my district that will be impacted if there's a $100 cap, there's two municipalities in my district that really did not use the privilege tax as a revenue source. I served as a county commissioner from 2000-2008 and in 2002, the state of North Carolina withheld three-hundred and fifty million dollars from cities and counties. We came down and it was fairly apparent there was nothing we can do to stop the state from taking those dollars and at the end of the day there was a fix that was created so it's my understanding that that's in process..

[0:00:00.0] …Support this bill this is because I think if we get together in a good faith effort we can obeys the concerns of local government and create a privilege tax, a business tax, it’s consistent across the state and treats all businesses fairly and it does not have some of the aberrations that have been noted here this afternoon. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion further debate? If not the question before the house is the passage of the house committee service 2, HB 1050 as admitted has second reading, all in favor vote, ‘I’ all oppose vote ‘No’ and vote. The ___[??] machine record the vote, 83 having vote affirmative, 35 the negative, the house committee service 2, the House Bill 1050 as admitted has pass the second reading and will remain on the calendar. Ladies and gentlemen the Chair will accept amendments tomorrow, the intend of the Chair to move this bill to the senate this week so if there are amendments that the road material then we will have a vote on Thursday so that we can move it out and I would say that for two reasons we are planning on Thursday in honor of the 220th Anniversary of the General Assembly’s first session on the State House, we are gonna be back down the street at the Historic State House. So, if we have I remember road material we will carry on business otherwise it will be a no vote session. Also, just for your planning purposes on Friday since we have a holiday on Monday we will have a no vote skeleton session at 09:00 AM on Friday in order to allow you to communicate or commute back either like Monday or Tuesday morning for session on Tuesday for your planning purposes. If the ___[??] would please come forward so that we may properly introduce you and while the pages are coming forward the Chair would happy too and extend a welcome to the teacher Cheprons and especially the students from Penn Book Elementary from Mocksville and David County, welcome. [Applause] Pages welcome we had a skeleton session last night which meant that we didn’t have many members here but we wanna to properly introduce you today as your name is called if you will please stand forward and give us a way so we can connect the name with the face. The Shaun Anis, Shaun Anis, Mathew Anthony, Richard Baker, Hanna Bolen, Angelica Brice, Taylor Dickson, Kella Dyson, Cory Goss, Cara Hartsfield, Douglas Hayward II, Margaret Henniker, Shayne Richard, Shaun Little, Simon Weeks, Julian Overmon, Victoria ___[??], Jonathan Poolshack, Anthony Snoopily, Rodney Strickland, Hanna Ben Abdesslem, Emma Baldock, ___[??] Walters, Mathew Wilder. Pages I wanna welcome you to the house and I think you saw today, you saw some interesting debate that’s good these are really in the session and we also have the opportunity on Thursday to join us in the Historic State House but in the meantime I hope you have learned from your interactions with the house members and your timing committees and back on the floor welcome you and thank you for your service, members let’s welcome them properly. [Applause] [0:04:59.8] [End of file…]

Thank you. You may return to your stations. Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Notices and announcements. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Special message from the senate. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Special message from the senate Mr. Speaker ?? informaton that the senate ?? report of the country ?? HB 6088. A bill to ?? the continuing education requirements for certified ?? contractors with appropriate action taken by both chambers. The bill will be ordered enrolled. Respectfully, Sarah Lang, principal clerk. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Noted. Representative Hardister, the chair understands that you are the chair of that conference committee, so please take note, HB 688. Representative Jeter, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The house will come to order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized, for a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to congratulate my seat mate, who's getting ready to seat down. Yesterday was his 41st wedding anniversary, which means he's been married longer than I've been alive. So congratulations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Bill Brawley, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The house will come to order. The gentleman is recognized for a point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. A few months ago, or a few weeks ago, I had the privilege of meeting a seven month old baby named Ryan, who was the younger brother of Elliott. Both of these young men have the honor of being the children of my fellow Matthews representative, Representative Tricia Cotham, who is the only representative in the history of the house to give birth twice while serving in the general assembly. I wanted to congratulate her on her newborn. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Ford, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for a point of personal privilege. The house will come to order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Today is MekDec Day. Meklenburg Declaration of Indepence. You folks from Meklenburg, I shouldn't be doing this. You should be. It's on our state flag. It's on our state seal. When 27 men signed the Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence, and told that large tyrannical government in England to go jump in the lake. We are first in freedom in North Carolina, and I'm proud of it. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Carney, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, maybe it's personal privilege. Tomorrow, ladies and gentlemen, is Hypertension Day and you will be able to get your blood pressure checked tomorrow so, probably a good thing today it wasn't out there for a lot of us. But that's tomorrow and also tomorrow is Arts Advocacy Day. There will be arts groups from almost all counties in the state here tomorrow in the legislature coming up to meet and greet you all. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members, just out of curiosity, would any member who's had their blood pressure checked over the last three months, please turn their light on. So hopefully the members who didn't will be able to turn their lights on next week. Representative Starnes, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] There will be a Republican caucus 15 minutes after session in room 544. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further notices and announcements. Representative Moore is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, subject to rereferral of bills and resolutions, I move that the house do now adjourn, to reconvene on Wednesday May the 21st, at 3 o'clock PM. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And Representative Moore, the chair understands that will be subject to rereferral of bills and resolutions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That is correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore moves, seconded by Representative Bill Brawley, that the house now adjourn, subject to the rereferral of bills and resolutions, to reconvene on Wednesday, May 21st at 3PM.

All in favor say aye. All opposed no. The ayes have it the house stands adjourned.