Laserfiche WebLink
• <br /> • <br /> . . <br /> ... ..• •• •.•. .•• . . . <br /> TRANSCRIPT OF SB 216 (2001) May 8, 2001, 11:21 a.m. through 12:07 p.m. <br /> Clerk: Reading of the bill (too fast to understand) <br /> Chairman: Rep. Spradley. . <br /> Rep. Spradley: Thank you Mr. Chairman I move SB 216 and I move the appropriations <br /> committee report. <br /> • <br /> Clerk: To the appropriations committee report, Rep. Spradley. <br /> Rep. Spradley: Thank you Mr. Chairman. The appropriations committee report did one <br /> thing and that was they shortened the titled and deleted the words "in making an <br /> appropriation therefore ". I am going to ask you to reject the appropriations committee <br /> report because what that will do for the title and for the shortening in the last step of this <br /> process, send it back to the senate in the last 24 hours for concurrence and I just think <br /> this is a step we don't need to put the body through, so I am going to... It is not like the <br /> bill is moving through the process further and that this would have any impact on how the <br /> bill is assigned or anything else, this is the very last step and so I would ask for a no vote. <br /> Chairman: Further discussion? Representative Young. <br /> Rep. Young: Thank you Mr. Chairman. I checked and there really is no reason that we <br /> • have to change the title at this point_ Under g p er normal circumstances the bill goes through <br /> when the IBC staff appropriations committee staff looks at the bill and tries to make sure <br /> they are absolutely 100% correct. They look for these kind of differences to make sure <br /> that the title meets with exactly whats in the bill and under this situation they looked and <br /> said there should not be this language in the bill title thing appropriations. It doesn't need <br /> to be done, it is not absolutely necessary given the late nature of the bill right now. I <br /> think that is a good idea and just go ahead and get. rid of this amendment so that it can go <br /> back to senate and does not have to go through another step in the process to get the bill <br /> adopted. So I also would encourage a rejection of the appropriations committee report <br /> and ask for a no vote on its adoption. <br /> Clerk: Further discussion on the appropriations committees' report. Representative <br /> Plant. . <br /> Rep. Plant: I would ask for an I vote on the appropriations committee report This is <br /> kind of.ixiteesting — this came to the appropriations. committee.yesterday, passed. . .. . ... . . . <br /> unanimously. At the time it was considered, it was a staff amendment, and Rep. Young <br /> had said that staff said we don't need this, but that was what I was understanding you <br /> saying but this amendment was prepared by staff which indicates to me that it is needed <br /> and necessary in order to be consistent with our rules down here. So I would urge. a yes <br /> vote on the appropriations committee report. <br /> 1111 Chairman: Rep. Young <br /> • <br /> 1 <br />