Senate floor session, March 6, 2026 (legislative day 28, part 1) Video: https://vimeo.com/1170437529 (a timestamp t plays at https://vimeo.com/1170437529#t=s) Page: https://georgiacommons.org/meetings/2026-03-06/senate-floor-part-1 This is a machine transcript of the General Assembly's video, made by a speech-recognition model. It is not an official record and can mishear words, names, and numbers. Speakers are not identified. The video is the record: every timestamp links to the moment it plays. [0:31:33] Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Happy crossover day when bills have to leave this chamber to go to the House and all the House bills have to get over here for us to be able to hear them. We got a few bills on the docket it looks like today. [0:31:56] So looks like we're gonna be here rather late tonight, rather late. But I, um, how many... Let's see, how many folks, this is the last crossover day for a number of members in here, isn't it? [0:32:09] Yeah, it is. [0:32:09] Yeah. This place is, this place is gonna look a lot different next year. So it is time to call on the senator from the 6th to do the reading of the journal. [0:32:24] Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning. [0:32:26] Good morning. [0:32:27] And happy crossover day to you. This'll be your last crossover day. Well, here anyway. Mr. President, we have an all-star group of pages here today on this crossover. We have 30 pages. 30. So we've got out of Moreland, Georgia, Topher Allman, who is the grandson of my parents, are here on the floor with us. [0:33:02] All right. [0:33:03] Making him my nephew. Out of Snellville, Georgia, we have a set of twins, Bryce and Christopher Anderson. [0:33:15] Bryce. Christopher. [0:33:15] From Newnan, Georgia, we have another grandson of my parents. My, yes, and, uh, Freeman Brass, who is also my son. And then- [0:33:30] Where's Freeman? [0:33:31] Hold your applause. [0:33:31] Where's Freeman? [0:33:31] Hold your applause. [0:33:32] Where's my man Freeman? There he is. [0:33:35] The short guy in the back. [0:33:36] Ah, Freeman's the man. [0:33:37] Like his old man. [0:33:38] Freeman's the man. [0:33:39] He's like his old man. He ain't gonna- [0:33:42] Freeman- [0:33:42] But my nephew, he's tall. Look at him. Anyway, let's keep going. [0:33:47] Freeman's- [0:33:47] From Athens- [0:33:48] Freeman, Freeman's a lot better looking than you, Senator- [0:33:50] Well [0:33:50] ... I can tell you that right now. [0:33:52] Well, this place will make you ugly. [0:33:59] Out of Athens, we have Berkeley Brim. From Milledgeville, we have another set of twins, Brianna and Brittany Brown. From Doraville, we have Leo Dositt. From Cumming, we have the great senator from the 27th's daughter, Naomi Dolezal. From Decatur, we have Cybele Fickes. [0:34:28] Richland. [0:34:29] And I've got a mouthful here and I enjoy saying it. We have Carly Rose Floyd from Willacoochee. Carly Rose Floyd from Willacoochee. That's just fun to say. From Hamilton, we have Avery Fullerton. From St. Simons, we have sisters Cassie and Celia Haley. From Atlanta, Hannah Harrison. From Newnan, Georgia, we have a son of Hap Hines, little Harris Hines, whose granddaddy was Chief Justice Harris Hines. [0:35:05] From Vidalia, Anna Hutchison. From Palmetto, Lillian Isaacs. From Alexan- or I'm sorry, from Cumming, no, Marietta, Alexander Judge. From Cumming, Paige Iacobella. From Kennesaw, Monica Lamb. From Atlanta, a friend of the Capitol, Rob Liebert, we have his kids here, Briggs and Bizzy Liebert. [0:35:42] From Sharpsburg, we have Senator Harbin's daugh- uh, granddaughter, Ellie McMichael. From Decatur, we have Nya Narain. Also from Decatur, Evie Owens. From Newnan, my neighbor and good friend's kids, Briggs Pass. From St. Simons, Evelyn Staffins. From Decatur, Charlotte Townsend, and from Alpharetta, Brayden Walker. [0:36:17] Y'all give these pages a big round of applause. We appreciate y'all being here to serve the great people of the great state of Georgia on crossover day. Mr. President, I woke up at 4:00 AM this morning, did some work, read over the journal. It has been read and found to be correct. I move we dispense with the reading of the journal. [0:36:44] Y- y'all be ashamed telling a story like that when your mom was sitting right there. [0:36:48] I really was. I was up at, I actually got up at 3:50, knocked out some work. [0:36:51] Y'all ought to be ashamed of yourself. But hey. [0:36:53] Nah, I read the journal when I came in here, but I did get up at 4:00. [0:36:57] It is good to have, thank you, Senator. It is good to have all these pages here today and, uh, we got a lot of them, but y'all picked a good day to do this because this, uh, you can be here as long as you want to today, so glad to have each and every one of you. Is there objection to dispensing of the journal? Chair hears none and the journal is dispensed with. [0:37:21] Is there objection confirmation of the journal? Chair hears none. The journal is confirmed. All senators have bills and resolutions, please bring them to the secretary's desk at this time. First reading and references of Senate bills. Mr. Secretary. Senate Bill 618 by Senator Parent of the 44th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to authorize the assessment and collection of a technology fee by the municipal- State and local government. Senate Resolution 907 by Senator Williams of the 25th and others- Insurance and labor. Mr. President, that completes the order. First reading and references to House bills. Thank you. [0:37:54] House Bill 295 by Representatives Gains of the 120th and others. State and local government, general. House Bill 376 by Representatives Hilton of the 48th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article II of- Economic development. House Bill 438 by Representatives Crow of the 118th and others, a bill to be entitled- Retirement. House Bill 961 by Representatives Powell of the 33rd and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend- Health and human services. House Bill 962 by Representatives Martin of the 49th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend code section- Higher education. House Bill 963 by Representatives Martin of the 49th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend- Ethics. [0:38:30] House Bill 967 by Representatives Ridley of the 22nd and others, a bill to- Public safety. House Bill 979 by Representatives Bonner of the 73rd and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend code section 50-2-27. Veterans. House Bill 990 by Representatives Sainz of the 180th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend- Public safety. House Bill 1000 by Representative Gamble of the 15th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 7 of Title 48. Finance. House Bill 1077 by Representatives Williams of the 148th and others. Finance. House Bill 1087 by Representatives Bonner of the 73rd and others, a bill to- Veterans. [0:39:03] House Bill 1118 by Representatives Donatucci of the 105th and others, a bill to be- Children and family. House Bill 1128 by Representatives Sebaugh of the 34th and others, a bill to- Judiciary. House Bill 1129 by Representatives Sebaugh of the 34th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend code section 30- Finance. House Bill 1133 by Representatives Dickey of the 134th and others, a bill to be entitled- Natural resources. House Bill 1134 by Representatives New of the 40th and others. Banking. House Bill 1138 by Representatives Camp of the 135th and others. Health and human services. [0:39:34] House Bill 1148 by Representatives Cannon of the 172nd. Finance. House Bill 1159 by Representatives Gamble of the 15th. Finance. House Bill 1178 by Representatives Horner of the 3rd and others, a bill to be entitled- Rules. House Bill 1187 by Representatives Hong of the 103rd and others, a bill to be entitled an act to- Judiciary. House Bill 1211 by Representatives Kelly of the 16th and others, a bill to- Health and human services. House Bill 1220 by Representatives Ballard of the 147th and others, a bill- Education and youth. House Bill 1234 by Representatives Taylor of the 173rd. Retirement. House Bill 1238 by Representatives Dempsey of the 13th and others. [0:40:06] Health and human services. House Bill 1247 by Representative Reeves of the 99th and others. Judiciary. House Bill 1266 by Representatives Ridley and others. Natural resources. House Bill 1272 by Representative Jones of the 25th and others, a bill to be entitled- Banking. House Bill 1275 by Representatives Newton of the 127th. Health and human resources. House Bill 1284 by Representatives Silcox of the 53rd and others, a bill to be- Education. House Bill 1295 by Representatives Cooper of the- Regulated industries. House Bill 1296 by Representatives Montahon of the- Health and human services. House Bill 1302 by Representatives Gamble of the 15th and others, a bill- Higher education. [0:40:42] House Bill 1303 by Representatives Kelly of the 100th. Judiciary. House Bill 1317 by Representatives Horner of the- State and local government, general. House Bill 1365 by Representative Jones of the 25th and others, a bill- Judiciary. [0:40:56] House Bill 1368 by Representatives Cooper of the 45th. Health and human services. House Bill 1374 by Representatives Hawkins of the 27th. Health and human services. House Bill 1379 by Representative Gaines of the 100th. Higher education. House Bill 1391 by Representatives Fleming of the 114th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend code section- Public safety. House Bill 1393 by Representatives Werkheiser of the 100th. Health and human services. House Bill 1402 by Representative Hagan of the 100th. Children and family. House Bill 1408 by Representatives Camp of the 135th. Agriculture. House Bill 1424 by Representatives- State and local government. [0:41:28] House Bill 1432 by Representatives Galush- Judiciary. House Bill 1435 by Representatives- State and local government. House Bill 1453 by Representative Werkheiser of the 157th. State and local government. House Bill 1243 by Representatives Martin of the- Public safety. House Resolution 1460 by Representatives Dickey of the 136th. Agriculture. Mr. President, that completes the order. [0:41:48] Secretary Reed reports the standing committee. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Retirement has had under consideration the following legislation and has instructed me to report the same back to the Senate with the following recommendation. House Bill 1020, do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Williams of the 25th District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on State and Local Government Operations has had under consideration the following legislation and has instructed me to report the same back to the Senate with the following recommendation. Senate Bill 601, do pass. Senate Bill 612, do pass. Senate Bill 613, do pass. Senate Bill 616, do pass. House Bill 1205, do pass. [0:42:20] House Bill 1357, do pass. House Bill 1358, do pass. House Bill 1359, do pass. House Bill 1375, do pass. Senate Bill 614, do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Dixon of the 45th District, Chairman. Mr. President, that [0:42:50] completes the order. It is now time for the morning roll call. Are there any motions to excuse? Any motions to excuse? No motions to excuse. All right, well, good deal. Secretary will call roll. Senators, signify your presence by voting to yay, so it's Secretary unlock the machine. [0:45:08] It is now time for the morning devotion. All senators, please take your seats. Cease all conversation. I would ask that the doorkeeper secure the chamber at this time. I now call on the senator from the 34th to introduce our pastor of the day and lead us in our pledge. Senator? [0:45:31] Good morning, Mr. President, colleagues. We'll do the president, pres- Pledge of Allegiance. [0:45:40] 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. [0:45:53] Now the Georgia flag. [0:45:55] I pledge allegiance to the Georgia flag, and to the principles for which it stands, wisdom, justice, honor, and scripture. [0:46:05] I proudly introduce Reverend William Home Robinson, a devoted pastor of Olivet Church in Fayetteville, Georgia, where he has faithfully served since April 2012. A native of Atlanta, Dr. Robinson embraced the calling of ministry attending Morehouse College. He's a HBCU man. He has or- He was ordained in '94, earning his bachelor's and his doctorate of Morehouse. Beyond the pulpit, he's a committed community leader, a chaplain, a husband, a father, and a faithful servant of God, whose life and ministry continues to inspire many, including mine. [0:46:47] Reverend Home Robinson. [0:46:49] Home Robinson. [0:46:53] Good morning. [0:46:54] Good morning. [0:46:56] Lieutenant Governor Burt Jones and Secretary of Senate James Tripp, members of this honorable body of the Georgia Senate, distinguished guests, and staff, thank you for allowing me this moment to share today. Let me begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to Senator Kenya Wicks for the invitation to serve as chaplain of the day. I'm also grateful for her faithful membership at the church I pastor. [0:47:27] I bring you greetings from the Olivet Church in Fayetteville, where I've been blessed to serve as pastor for 14 years. A thought crossed my mind this week, and that thought was some things are still worth fixing. We live in a culture now that has grown comfortable with throwing things away. When something breaks, we replace it. When something becomes difficult, we abandon it. [0:47:59] But many of us were raised by parents and grandparents who believed something different. When a chair broke, they fixed it. When a fence leaned over, they repaired it. When something valuable was damaged, they restored it because they understood something that many of us have forgotten. Just because something is broken doesn't mean it's beyond repair. [0:48:30] And that principle applies not only to objects, it applies to communities, it applies to institutions, and it applies to the work of governing. Leadership often means stepping into problems that already exist, policies that need improving, systems that need strengthening, but some things are still worth fixing. [0:49:00] This state is worth fixing. Our communities are worth fixing, and our nation is worth fixing. Scripture reminds us in Nehemiah chapter two, verse 18, that when Nehemiah saw the broken condition of Jerusalem, the people responded with these words, "Let us rise up and build." And they strengthened their hands for the good work. In other words, even in difficult moments, there are still some things worth rebuilding. [0:49:36] I'll close with a brief story. A father once came home and noticed his son had been sitting in front of the television all day. So he took a newspaper that had a large picture of the world on the back page, and he tore it into many pieces. He handed the pieces to his son and said, "Go into the other room and put the world back together." The father assumed that it would take days, but in about an hour, the boy returned with the picture completely put back together. [0:50:16] The father asked him, "How did you fix the world so quickly?" The boy said, "Dad, it was easy. On the other side of the page was a picture of a man, so I put the man back together first, and when I turned it over, the world was fixed." And perhaps that's a reminder for all of us today. If we want to fix the world, we begin by strengthening the character and integrity of the people who lead and serve within it. [0:50:52] I believe it was the high priest of pop culture, Michael Jackson, who once said, "I'm starting with the man in the mirror, and I'm asking him to change his ways. No message could have been any clearer. If you wanna make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and then make that change." Let us pray. [0:51:20] Eternal God, our creator and our sustainer, we thank you for this day and for the privilege of gathering in this place of leadership and responsibility. We thank you for the men and women who serve in this Senate and for the trust that has been placed in them by the people of this state. Lord, grant them wisdom in their decisions, patience in their discussions, and courage to pursue what is right and what is just. [0:51:57] We pray for the people of Georgia, for our communities, our families, and our future. We also pray for our nation and our world during uncertain times. Lord, where there's tension, grant wisdom. Where there is conflict, grant restraint. Where there is fear, grant peace. Guide the work that will be done in this chamber today, and may the decisions made here contribute to the good of all. [0:52:31] And it's in the marvelous, matchless, and majestic name of Jesus Christ we pray. Amen. Amen. Good job. Enjoyed that. [0:52:44] Yeah. [0:58:33] Yeah. It is always a pleasure to have our doctors of the day. We got a good one from Macon, Georgia, and I'll call on the senator from the 18th to introduce our doctor of the day. I don't know if you can make it or not. Yes. Good morning, everybody. It's a pleasure of mine to introduce a good friend, neighbor, physician, Dr. Richard Thomas from Macon, Georgia. He's a partner at OrthoGeorgia, where he does bone and joint arthroscopically and through robotics. [0:59:07] An excellent doctor and an excellent, even better person, and also a member of the 100% award in 1991 in Bibb County. Um, but if, God forbid, sh- should anybody get hurt at the Capitol today, but if they do, they are in great hands. Dr. Richard Thomas. You remember that, right? Yeah, exactly. Thank you for having me. Uh, it's always an honor and a pleasure to be here, and, uh, um, this is my third year, and, uh, I appreciate all of your service, and, uh, good luck with Cross Over Day. [0:59:40] Thank you. Thanks, Richard. How's everything going, man? Good. [1:01:13] Recognizing the senator from the 41st. Thank you, Mr. President. I ask unanimous, uh, consent to excuse the senators from the 40th, the 36th, the 44th, and the 22nd from business inside the Capitol. [1:01:28] Say those for me again, Senator. Sure. The 22nd, the 44th, the 36th, and the 40th. All right. Without objection, the senator from the 22nd, the 44th, the 36th, and the 40th be excused. [1:02:05] Does any senator wish to rise on a point of personal privilege? Any senator wish to rise on a point of personal privilege? All right. [1:02:19] Can't believe it. First time for everything. [1:02:26] You have a consent calendar of privileged resolutions before you. Does any senator wish to remove a resolution from the consent calendar? Is there objection to the adoption of the resolution on the consent calendar? Chair hears none. The resolution on the consent calendar is adopted. [1:02:50] Are there any motions to withdraw or commit? [1:02:58] You have before you a consent calendar of local bills. Mr. Secretary, have there been any objections been filed on any bills today? No objections have been filed, Mr. President. All right. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bills? Senator from the 55th, for what purpose do you rise? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. The question is on the passage of the bills on the local consent calendar. All those in favor of vote yea. [1:03:29] Opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the, unlock the machine. [1:05:12] On the passage of the bill on the local consent calendar, the yeas are 49, the nays are zero. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. [1:05:41] Recognizing the majority leader for a motion. [1:05:46] Thank you, Mr. President. I ask unanimous consent that the following bills and resolutions be engrossed: SB-410, SB-423, SB-515, SB-566, SB-568, SB-573, and SR-838. [1:06:05] The majority leader has moved that SB 410, SB 423, SB 515, SB 566, SB 568, and, uh, SB 573, SR 838 be engrossed. Secretary, read the caption. [1:06:28] Senate Bill 410 by Senator Brass of the 6th District. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 1 of Article 1 of Chapter 8 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions relative to state sales and use taxes so as to repeal the data center equipment sales and use tax exemption to allow for the continued use of certifications of exemption issued prior to the date of repeal to provide for related matters to provide for an effective date to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [1:06:54] Senate Bill 423 by Senator Bearden of the 30th and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 5 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to government transparency in campaign finance so as to prohibit candidates, campaign committees, independent committees, political action committees, and leadership committees from accepting contributions or donations from non-Georgia persons that exceed 50% of all contributions received to provide definitions to provide for the return of such excess contributions to provide for the achievement of excess contributions that are not returned to provide for exceptions to provide for injunctive relief to prohibit and provide penalties for straw man transactions seeking to avoid the contribution cap provided herein to provide for related matters to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [1:07:32] Senate Bill 515 by Senator Hickman of the 4th and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 9 of Article 6 of Chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to grants for educational programs under the Quality Basic Education Act so as to revise and streamline provisions relative to the Teacher Recruitment and Retention Tax Credit Program to provide for definitions to amend Code Section 48-7-29.23 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to tax credits for teachers and the Teacher Requirement Recruitment and Retention Program so as to provide for tax credit amounts to provide for related matters to provide for an effective date to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [1:08:07] Senate Bill 566 by Senator... [1:08:16] Senate Bill 566 by Senator Hufstetler of the 52nd and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 5 of Title 48 of the OCGA relating to ad valorem taxation of property so as to provide for the acceptance of tax digests in the event of a publication error made by a newspaper to revise required information for bills and notices of assessment for ad valorem taxation of property to provide for related matters to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [1:08:39] Senate Bill 568 by Senator Dolezal of the 27th and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the OCGA relating to elections and primaries generally so as to require that a list of eligible voters is posted and made public prior to each primary or election to provide for civil fines in the event that registrars fail to remove a person from the list of registered voters following a successful challenge to provide conforming changes to provide for related matters to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [1:09:06] Did he read them all? No, sir. One more. Senate Bill 573 by Senator Setzler of the 37th and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to primaries and elections generally so as to provide for the nonpartisan election for county officers and district attorneys in certain counties to provide for the qualifying for such of- of offices to provide a definition to provide for related matters to provide for an effective date to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. Senate Resolution 838 by Senator Dolezal of the 27th and others. A resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Georgia so as to clarify that only citizens of the United States shall have a right to vote in elections in this state to require electors to present photographic identification prior to casting a ballot to provide a short title to provide for related matters to provide for the submission of this amendment for ratification or rejection and for other purposes. [1:09:47] Mr. President, that completes the order. Uh, when is that? Next week. We got it done? Yes, sir. I believe there's objection. Yes, Mr. President. I'm also, um, asking, requesting that we divide the question in order to allow us to vote on SB 410 separately from the other bills, uh, that are in- included in the engrossment motion. Okay. So you wanna vote, uh, 410 separately than the rest of them? [1:10:18] That's exactly right. Do you mind if we take all of them up right now for a vote, and then we'll take 410 after that? That sounds great. Thank you, Mr. President. All right. [1:10:35] All right, so the majority leader has made a motion to engross. The minority chair has asked that we separate SB 410 and do two separate votes. So we'll vote, we'll vote on SB right now for engrossment. We're making it for, this vote will be on engrossment. It'll be on SB 423, SB 515, SB 566, SB 568, SB 573, and SR 838. [1:11:06] So we're gonna vote that now, and then we're gonna vote 410 right after this. All right? So all those in favor of engrossment will vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [1:12:22] On the motion to engross, yays are 32 and the nays are 20 and the motion has prevailed. Okay, now we will take up SB 410. Majority leader asked for engrossment on SB 410. There was objection from the senator from the 41st. All those of, in favor of engrossment on SB 410 will vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [1:13:00] Senator from the 2nd, for what purpose do you rise? Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President. State your inquiry. Mr. President, is it not true, uh, by voting, uh, green on the engrossment of SB 4- 410, we actually can't do anything about data centers and offering the amendments? Is that not true? [1:13:17] I believe the underlying bill is about just that, Senator. On the motion to engross, the yeas are 32 and the nays are 22, and this motion has prevailed. Moving on to the rules calendar. Senator from the 41st, for what purpose do you rise? Ask for unanimous consent to excuse the senator from the 15th, the dean. Without objection, senator from the 15th is excused. [1:14:21] Secretary Reed, SB 553. [1:14:29] Senate Bill 553 by Senator Hatchett of the 50th and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Title 43 of the OCGA relating to professions and businesses so as to repeal Chapter 14 relating to electrical contractors, plumbers, conditioned air con- contractors, low voltage, low voltage contractors, and utility contractors, and enact a new Chapter 14 to amend Code Section 48-7-38 of the OCGA relating to deduction for payments to classified subcro- contractors, disclosure of tax returns, and maintenance of list of classified subcontract- contractors so as to provide for a definition, to provide for late amounts, to repeal conflicted laws, and for other purposes. [1:15:02] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Regulated Industries and Utilities recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Cowsert of the 46th District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Regulated Industries and Utilities offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 553, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Title 43 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to professions and businesses so as to repeal Chapter 14 relating to electrical contractors, plumbers, conditioned air contractors, low voltage contractors, and utility contractors, and enact a new Chapter 14 to provide for the State Constructionary Industry Licensing Board, to provide for the Division of Electrical Contractors, to provide for the Divi- Division of Master Plumbers, to provide for the Division of Conditioned Air Contractors, to provide for the Division of Low Voltage Contractors, and for other purposes. [1:15:42] Mr. President, that completes the order. [1:15:46] Recognize the senator from the 50th. [1:16:09] Thank you, Mr. President and fellow members. Today, I bring you Senate Bill 553 on behalf of the governor as he continues to act on his promise to streamline ex- excessive regulations and get Georgians to work. This bill seeks to codify objective licensing requirements to streamline the licensing process for the five divisions of the State Construction Industry Licensing Board, including the Division of Electrical Contractor, Low Voltage Contractor, Master Plumber and Journeyman Plumbers, Division of Utility Contractors, Division of Conditioned Air Contractors. [1:16:47] This bill succeeds many bills from last year's session that accomplished necessary licensing reforms to ensure consistency and fairness for applicants seeking licensure. Currently, the majority of licensing requirements administred, administered by these five divisions rely on subjective experience standards outlined in board rule. Phrases such as, "To the satisfaction of the division," and, "Significant responsibility," lack objective definition, creating confusion, confusion for applicants seeking licensure. [1:17:18] This ambiguity often results in wasted time, money, and effort for both applicants and members of the board who must interpret and apply these standards on a case-by-case basis. As our state continues to grow, it is critical that we create the best possible regulatory environment for professional licensing, one that supports industry growth and helps Georgians get to work. We are not interested in protected, in protecting outdated or protectionistic re- regulations. Our goal is simple: ensure clear and fair pathways to licensure while maintaining strong standards that protect consumer safety and uphold the integrity of these professions. [1:17:57] I'm happy to yield for questions, Mr. President. [1:18:01] You have no questions, Senator. [1:18:02] Thank you, Mr. President. Before I yield the well, I didn't do this at the point of personal privilege, but today is my daughter's ninth birthday, Hallie Hatchett. We're excited to celebrate with her. So, thank you, Mr. President. I yield the well. [1:18:25] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Questions on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the fourth committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The fourth committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Questions on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill vote yay. [1:18:56] All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [1:20:12] On the pass of the bill, the yeas are 52, the nays are zero. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. Secretary, read SB 410. [1:20:36] Senate Bill 410 by Senators Brass at the 6th and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 1 of Article 1 of Chapter 8 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions relative to states and use sales tax so as to repeal the data center equipment sales and tax exemption to allow for the continued use of cert- certificates of exemption issued prior to the date of repeal, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date, to repeal conflicting laws for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Finance recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Hufstetler of the 52nd District, Chairman. [1:21:06] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Finance offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 410. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 2 of Title 46 and Chapter 8 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to the Public Service Commission and sales and use tax respectively, so as to require certain contract terms and conditions between electric utilities and large load customers to repeal the high technology computer requirement and data center equipment sales and use tax exemptions to allow for the continued use of certifications of exemption issued prior to the date of repeal, to provide for legislative intent, to provide for a definition, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [1:21:50] Jones II, Senator Jones II and others offers the following amendment. Amendment 1. Amend the Senate Committee on Finance substitute to Senate Bill 410 by replacing lines three and four with the following, so as to prohibit certain costs incurred by an electric utility from being included in certain rates to repeal the high technology computer equipment and data center equipment. [1:22:07] Yeah, and for other purposes. [1:22:08] And for other purposes. [1:22:20] Senator Jones II of the 22nd and others offers the following amendment. Amendment 2. Amend the Senate Committee on Finance substitute to Senate Bill 410 by replacing lines one and two with the following, to amend Title 46 and Chapter 8 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to public utilities and public transportation and sales and use taxes respectively and for other purposes. [1:22:37] Mr. President. [1:22:39] Mr. President, a minority report has been filed. [1:22:44] Mr. President, a fiscal note has been attached. Mr. Pres- Mr. President, please see order. [1:23:11] So the amendments that were read are gonna be out of order because we engrossed this bill. So even though I know they were put in this morning by a couple of members, but since the bill's engrossed, the, those amendments will be out of order. Recognize Senator from the 6th. Speak to the bill. [1:23:37] Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen, today I bring you SB 410. I wanna read a little something for you first. Today, pursuant to the Ratepayer Protection Pledge leading United States hyperscalers and AI companies guarantee that data centers' energy needs will not increase household electri- tr- uh, electricity costs for American citizens. [1:24:10] Instead, these companies will build, bring, or buy the new generation resources and electricity needed to satisfy their energy demands and pay for all new power delivery infrastructure upgrades to service their data centers. [1:24:27] Colleagues, that is from the president's executive order from March 4th, 2026. Two days ago, the president issued that order. This Bill 410, we inserted the language from Senate Bill 34 that does exactly what that executive order is seeking. The overall intentions of SB 34 [1:24:58] were the same for both sides. No matter what the language was, the intent is the same. That intent is to ensure our ratepayers will not pay for upgrades and infrastructure for data centers. So we had a little dispute over what that language would be. One language got the legislature into rate making. [1:25:31] The legislature got rid of rate making long ago and shifted it over to the PSC, which is where that is done. So that language was taken out of 34 and replaced with language that came from the House out of HB 1063, which addresses contracts, which is what the legislature does do. [1:25:58] So by addressing the contracts, we also included the intent, our intent, both parties' intent to ensure ratepayers will not pay the tab, will not pay the cost for upgrades in our infrastructure due to data centers. That intent is included in part one of what we put into 410. [1:26:31] Now, the original 410 that I introduced did away with the sales tax exemption that can be issued on equipment for data centers. We added both 68 and 68.1. So 68.1 is the high-tech computer systems servers, and then 68 is just computer servers. And the idea w- there that came out of the finance committee, we didn't want them to shift from one credit to the other. [1:27:06] So we have eliminated both, and we have left their sunset, sunsets in place for existing data centers that came here on that credit. And the reason we left that grandfather piece in was because, as you are well aware, two years ago, we passed a bill that did away with it altogether. And when we did that, the governor vetoed it. So based on that veto, we have come back and said, "Okay, data centers, you came here. [1:27:39] It's only fair that we let you keep it until the end of the sunset." That computer, uh, the computer server credit, it ends in 2028. The, the high technology server credit, it ends in 2031. So existing data centers will get that, uh, as long as they got that certificate, uh, it will be in place until those sunsets hit, and then it will be up to the legislature at that time to determine if we want to go on or not. [1:28:14] If that vote were today, I would guess it would not make it. But again, I go back to the intent of both parties. [1:28:26] And I'm gonna read it from the bill. "The intent of the General Assembly that the marginal cost of providing electric service to new large load customers will be borne by much, by such customers and not residential or retail electricity customers." We cannot make it any more clear for the courts. The president could not make it any more clear. This body cannot make it any more clear. [1:28:57] We do not want rate payers paying for the cost of data centers. It is that simple. With that, I will yield for questions. You have one question, Senator. Recognize senator from the 41st. Thank you, Mr. President. Does the senator yield? I do, for my good friend from the 41st. Thank you. I appreciate you yielding as I ask you some questions that aren't written in cursive. [1:29:28] Uh- Thank you. I voted against that, too. I know. Senator, you read, um, the language of intent, uh, from your bill. It's located on lines 12 through 14. Is that not true? I did. Also read the executive order that stated the same thing. Right. Um, Senator, is it true that language that is not underlined, that's not, um, actually code, isn't that true that that does not show up in the code? It's not actually a part of the law? That is correct. It goes into the footnotes of the, of the code section to where a judge may reference it for court. [1:30:05] Right. But it is true that we have not made that law. That those are words. The executive order's not a law. These are words that express intent, but they are not actually things that are codified. Is that not true? You're exactly right. They will not be in the code section. They will be in the notes of that code section. Right. Further, do you further yield, Senator? Absolutely. Senator, uh, just yesterday, I believe, isn't it true that we passed a bill that, um, regulated how much money goes the, um, how much money people have to pay to the telecom system as it relates to the peace officers' annuity benefit? [1:30:36] Is that not true? Um, we, that was through the contract. There would be an extra dollar on their, on their contracts. That's right. And is it not true that the PSC at one time regulated telecom industry? Is that not true? At one time. That's right. So Senator, if you further yield. I'll yield for you all day. Thank you. Would it not also be true therefore that the legislature made a decision to regulate the telecom industry through that bill just yesterday because we decided that that is what was necessary? [1:31:09] Is that not true? I guess you're entitled to that belief, but you stated earlier that the PSC regulated it at one time. Right. So I would just, I, I believe my, um, kind of concluding question, if you would yield, would be if the PSC has not regulated data centers in the way we see fit properly, is it not true that we have the right as the legislature to codify language that ensures that rate payers do not take on the cost burden of data centers? [1:31:42] Sure. Is that not true? Sure. We have the right to do just about whatever we wanna do here. We have that right. But we have an obligation to protect our rate payers, and this bill does that. And you can, you can listen to some lady who got caught stealing trade secrets and who's posting bad stuff on me online all day, and she's insane. She is literally insane. And she belongs in jail. [1:32:13] But if you wanna listen to her, you listen to her. But if you wanna read the bill and make a decision that, that this bill matches what the president said, it matches the intent of the original SB34 is very clear. Do you further yield? Yes. Senator, isn't it true that we are very careful in this body to not speak disparagingly of people and that there is a sanctity of that well that co- really does demand that we not speak in ways and call people insane? [1:32:47] Is that not true, Senator? Well, I guess that only applies to, um, if you're not speaking about the president 'cause apparently you can do that. [1:32:59] But I didn't use her name. Y'all have used the president's name frequently. Recognize the senator from the 13th. If, senator, if she still wanna take questions, I recognize the senator from the 13th. Bring it. All right. Senator, do you- Yes. Senator, senator, is it true that this bill that you- we've got here will guarantee that we keep the rate freeze in place, that Georgia Power are placed in place? I, I believe so. If, if there are... It will continue to allow them to put a downward pressure, uh, on, for our, for our retail and, and residential rate payers, absolutely. [1:33:34] That was my next question. M- downward pressure for the rates regarding this bill. But, but to be clear though, they, they're locked in. They have guaranteed the rate freeze no matter what. For three years. So if data centers were not overpaying on, on their rates, they potentially, uh, yes, they would be at a loss. But- Thank you, senator ... but this bill ensures that we can continue to keep that downward pressure. [1:34:00] Recognize the senator from the 23rd. Thank you, Mr. President. Will the senator yield? Yes, sir. Is it not true, senator, that a member of this body called a Supreme Court justice a hypocrite and a traitor in this body from the well? It is quite possible. I, I ignore a lot of the stuff that goes on in this well. Thank you. [1:34:24] Recognize the senator from the 44th. Thank you, Mr. President. Will the gentleman yield? Absolutely, and I'm sorry that you're leaving us. I will miss this. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. Um, point of clarification, isn't it true that the Fulton DA declined to prosecute in the case that you mentioned because the determination was it was the, the supposed crime was not gonna be able to be proven because the items were not actually trade secrets? [1:34:56] And this is one of the big p- points of contention between the public, um, organizations that are trying to hold Georgia Power accountable for the, uh, the customers, on the customer's behalf, that they designate everything, many things, things that are inappropriate to be designated- Actually, that's- ... trade secrets? Actually, that's not true. The, the charges were dropped because they said the, that the trade secrets were not protected enough. But to me, that's like saying I left my, my door open or my, my door unlocked at home and somebody walked in and stole my TV, but that's not stealing. [1:35:35] We saw- Yes ... the video and we also know that she graduated from a theft school. So- Well, isn't in that case- I'm not gonna continue to talk about her- Okay ... 'cause I, I've said enough about her. But is, it just people back home need to understand who this person is. If you would like to keep talking about her, we can talk about her out there to the cameras, but for here we're talking about SB 410 and we're gonna continue to talk about 410. So I will yield for a question about SB 410. [1:36:06] Um, just one. Isn't it true that there are millions of people across... I don't know why we're... I agree with you. I, I've no idea why we're talking about one person. There are million- I agree with you. Isn't it true that there are millions of people around this state who are very frustrated at the lack of accountability for Georgia Power that has been foisted upon them by the PSE and this body? I get that frustration. I, I really do. I get the frustration. But SB f- 410 is a step towards ensuring that data centers are paying their way and we're doing it in two, two different methods here. [1:36:48] We're doing away with any subsidizing of this state and we're ensuring that these infrastructure costs are not being passed on to our residential and retail rate payers, which we all agree on. Y'all actually agree with the president. This is a great day for America. We should be happy and rejoicing, but instead we, we choose to fight over words, words that clearly state our intent to ensure rate payers are not picking up the cost of data centers. [1:37:26] With that, I yield the well. Senator's yielded. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? [1:37:36] Senator from the 52nd, do you wish to speak for the bill? [1:37:56] Thank you, Mr. President. Um, this bill is, it's two different subjects, and first of all, uh, the fiscal note did not get in the booklet, but I hope everybody saw it on their desk. Um, these data centers when the last bill was around, um, and the last bill was voted on were about $100 million. Now it's about two and a half billion for these two credits. [1:38:27] Um, part of the problem is that we really couldn't get ac- accurate information because there's some confidentially ru- ru- confidential rules with the Department of Revenue that if there's so few people getting it, that would identify them. I think that's a- another subject for another day we need to look at. But it's certainly blown up because the money for the state portion that these data centers are getting is more than an entire month of the total income taxes that the state of Georgia collects [1:38:56] Now this bill makes a start at it and, um, I, my preference would be that they don't go till twenty thirty-two. Uh, I think they can stand on their own, um, and I certainly agree with the president that they should stand on their own and I agree with him that they should build their own power. And if they were in the state of Texas, they could do that. [1:39:26] In the state of Georgia, the regulated market, they can't do what the president wants them to do. So, um, I think that's, that's certainly an issue. Um, I, I certainly agree with his executive order. [1:39:42] The language twelve through fourteen that is in there is intent. That was language that I was able to get inserted into the bill. I would rather have it codified into law, not just in the preamble. I'm not sure there's any-- how much that helps, but it certainly doesn't hurt. But getting the difference between the two bills, the current language says what you do with a contract, and I believe the PSC and Georgia Power have made steps in the right direction on what you do with a contract. [1:40:21] And this basically says what they're currently doing, which I think is good. But what it doesn't answer is when these fourteen gigawatt, gigawatts of power are built and this guy uses a hundred megawatts and this guy uses five hundred megawatts, whatever, and they add up to, let's say, five gigawatts, then who pays for the other nine gigawatts? [1:40:52] There is no protection for the consumers in that situation, and that's certainly disappointing. Um, Senate research themselves in comparing the two said they both define who a large load customer is. They both require contract terms and conditions between electric utilities and large load customers, and that the version that we had that we had an amendment the other day and, and were adjourned and were not allowed to vote on prohibits an electric utility from covering certain costs incurred by providing electricity to large load customers. [1:41:33] The other version, it says it removes the prohibition against electric utilities covering certain costs incurred to preventing electricity costs from large load customers. So, so my opinion is the protection is not there. Um, I do hope we continue and, and look at other things. When you look at the cost of this sixteen billion, speaking of confidentiality, we as legislatures don't get access to that information. [1:42:08] This sheet right here, most of you probably can't see it, but there's several columns of information on all these different constru-construction projects. Every single line is redacted, redacted, redacted, except one number at the bottom, sixteen billion. So just trust us is not what I think is in the best interest of us protecting our people. We've heard far and wide from the, the other party to, uh, conservative groups to the Freedom Caucus that, you know, ninety percent of the people want some protection. [1:42:46] I don't know why we don't make this stronger and codified into law. Um, I'm gonna vote for the bill. It is a start, but it certainly does not give us the protection we need for our, uh, citizens of Georgia without a yield to will. [1:43:05] Senator's yielded. [1:43:10] Recognize the senator from the tenth. [1:43:26] Thank you, uh, Mr. President, and I appreciate our rules chair for bringing this, what I consider very limited legislation concerning what this body could do in terms of controlling the growth of the data centers across this great state. I've attended countless town hall meetings, and I can tell you that I've not heard a single constituent say, "What is the intent of the legislature?" What my constituents are concerned about is, what about the air and the noise and the water pollution from these data centers? [1:44:00] What my cons-constituents are concerned about is, what are these data centers gonna look like when they actually steamroll massive fields and create this big massive center, uh, that is unsightly in their community? What my constituents are concerned about is the noise that's being generated, the resources that are being used. And when I look at this particular legislation, the only thing that this body is, is, is expressing is essentially intent. [1:44:32] The twenty-two years that I've been in this body, I believe we can do a lot more than just express our intent on any legislation. We are essentially failing those that have sent us up here to control these kind of construction projects across the great state. This bill essentially gives the contractor carte blanche to build whatever they want to build in anybody's community. [1:44:57] And I believe that this body is so much better than just express an intent on a project that's of concern to all of us. W- you know, I recognize that these data centers may be essential to the growth of AI in this country. I also recognize that the constituents that we serve should have input into how these data centers are built, what kind of technologies used to control the noise and the water pollution that they use, and I also believe that we can go a lot further than just saying to my constituents, and your constituents as well, the only thing we can do up here is express our intent. [1:45:36] And with that, Mr. President, I'd yield the well. [1:45:41] Senator yields it. Recognize the senator from the 44th. [1:46:25] Thank you, Mr. President. I wanna, um, make sure everyone understands exactly what's going on here and what the actual numbers are. Um, one of the things that Georgia Power has to its advantage is that these things are complicated. It's complicated to talk about utility contracts. Most of us don't really understand that, and what ends up happening is they say a whole lot of stuff to confuse everyone as to what's really going on. [1:46:59] So let me tell you what's really going on. So Georgia Power has gotten approval from the Public Service Commission to double the amount of energy that, that they produce. Double. At least 80% of that is for data centers, they say. [1:47:24] Th- the Public Service Commission's own staff a month earlier said, "This is an outrageous request. In no way should you five people approve this because we don't know if all of these data centers are coming, and we don't know if they'll all stay. So you should approve a third of it and do another third conditional." Well, one month later, and let's be clear that this staff is not indepe- fully independent the way a consumer utility council will be, such as what's, um, in the bill SB94 filed by the senator from Rome, popped up the day before the commission had to vote on it with a stipulated agreement. [1:48:08] This is very common at the Public Service Commission, all five of whom have been incredibly responsive to Georgia Power, and it's unclear that they really have studied any of the issues themselves, frankly, um, and said, "Oh, yep, here's our stipulated agreement," giving Georgia Power a green light for everything it asked for, which is doubling the size of our grid. At the same time, Georgia Power said, "Great news. We have agreed that there will be 850 in downward pressure for three years." Or, or, no, "For three years after the three-year freeze." Now, we're still, we're still gonna see bills going up because we've got a fuel case coming before the commission and everything else. [1:48:47] But let's be clear about several things. 850 in downward pressure does not mean your bills go down 850. We-- Anyone, um... A lot of us were here for Plant Vogtle. I-- The exact same thing that happened then is exactly what's going on now. A lot of talking, a lot of dinners, a lot of spending, and a lot of people who don't really understand the issue and are loath to go against one of the, the biggest industries in the state and the biggest lobbying presences in the building. [1:49:20] And what, and what happened with Vogtle? We all know that history. Uh, at least, um, at least twice the cost and more, and it took over half as long, and everyone's bills have gone up a lot because of Vogtle. But here's what happened. I was here, and there was testimony telling all the, telling the Senate, I was an aide, telling the Senate when they built one and two, the whole thing went off the rails, and it cost a ton of money, and the customers paid for most of it. [1:49:52] But they claimed that would not happen again. What happened? It happened again, and that is what is going on now. So to return to the main question, they say 850 in downward pressure. That does not mean, a la Vogtle, that your bills are going down. It means they might go up slightly less, but only for three years. However, they are planning to build an enormous amount of new power plants that the customers will have to pay for for 45 years and will cost all in to build $50 to $60 billion. [1:50:36] The, quote, "downward pressure agreement," which means n- which again means very little, it means something, but very little in terms of r- actually what your bill looks like, are for three years. The, the contracts that have been entered so far, some are under the, quote unquote, "rule" [1:51:00] Put into place by the PSC, which is exactly what this bill is. This bill is the rule Georgia Power put in place at the PSC that ensures that they still have all the latitude to charge all the customers for the massive cost of building power plants for tech billionaires if the data centers don't come or don't stay. And in the process, Georgia Power makes billions of dollars. So I know it's confusing, but let me recap. [1:51:36] Customers will be on the hook for fifty to sixty billion dollars for forty-five years. The f- the downward pressure thing is for three years. The contracts that Georgia Power currently has, not all of them are even under this window dressing rule. Those that are last at most fifteen to twenty years. At most. Let me repeat, we will be paying for this for fifty to sixty years, and that is what we're talking about. [1:52:12] That is what we're talking about. You have to have a contract to make these tech companies pay for fifty to sixty years to actually cover the customers. Otherwise, the customers bear all the risk that after their contracts run out in fifteen years, for those that even have a contract that's that strong, they will leave. They might even leave before. We- we-- They might not even all come to begin with. And there's zero guarantee that after the fifteen years, any of them will stay. [1:52:46] And we will be paying for the fifty to sixty billion dollars for another thirty years. Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, for whom we are building data centers along with Zuckerberg and all the rest, are already talking about putting data centers in space. No one was even talking about this stuff three years ago, and now we are literally doubling the size of our grid and the amount of power that we can produce for these companies, not requiring them to pay for any of it past fifteen years, and, and making sure that if it all doesn't work out the way Georgia Power is telling everyone, that there's someone there to pick up the pieces and pay the bill, just like Vogtle. [1:53:31] So don't believe any of what they're saying, because that's what's going on. Three years downward pressure? You've got to be kidding me. That's just talk. You need to ask the question, if the data centers... Hi, lovely Georgia Power lobbyist. If the data centers don't come or don't stay the way you hope, who will have to pay? And most people do not understand enough about what is actually happening to ask those questions. [1:54:05] The rule at the Public Service Commission has more holes than you can drive a truck through. It does not protect consumers. This bill is the rule at the Public Service Commission. So people of Georgia are incredibly frustrated. We have all heard our power bills have gone up six times in two years. They've rivet- risen more than anywhere else in the country, basically. The Southern Company CEO made fifty, fifty million dollars last year. [1:54:37] The Southern had bigger profits than they have ever had last year. The Georgia Power CEO makes five million a year. And Mr. and Mrs. Smith in Hogan- Hogansville, Georgia, who are mad that a data center is coming to their town, are the ones paying Georgia Power salaries and making Jeff Bezos and the crew even richer. That's exactly what's going on. And Georgia Power knows the reason they are fighting this, the, the original 34, the senator from the 34th bill, is because they know that the contracts do not actually cover customers. [1:55:19] They want to make sure that they do not actually cover customers for the length of what they are entering into. Because that would mean that if the contracts, if the data centers don't come or don't stay, that their shareholders would have to pay for the excess. And maybe them taking out some of this massive salaries they're collecting. They don't want that. They want to be able to put, spread that risk away from their shareholders and put it all on all of us that pay the bills. [1:55:55] No matter how little the people make, no matter how much they're struggling, no matter in the age of a- of an affordability crisis, they just want to build all these new power plants, collect their twelve percent profit, have all of us pay for it for fifty to sixty years, and just try to fool everyone that this is some kind of good idea and really fair for them. All that's happening is Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg are getting richer and we're paying for it, and sadder, people who really can't afford it are paying for it. [1:56:26] And that is a shame. That is a shame that we have not bothered to learn the details about what these contracts really do, to ask the hard questions, to understand what these contracts really do and do not do, and are so excited, because I get it. It's hard to vote against the big lobbying industry. It's hard. They're very good at what they do. They're very good at what they do. But when you've got millions of people o- all over this state who absolutely get it, like the senator from the tenth said, they do not want these data centers. [1:57:01] They are suspicious of AI. They know it's for Zuckerberg and all the rest. And we pick Georgia Power instead of them? And we shut down the Senate to pick Georgia Power instead of them? The public needs to understand what is going on here, and what is going on is that the majority is too terrified to tell Georgia Power no, or even be straight with everybody. We adjourned the Senate. That is an embarrassment. [1:57:33] Let's be very clear. We, the votes were there because enough people understand the, the, the facade that this bill is, the shell game, and, and that just couldn't be allowed to happen, that we would actually side with the people of Georgia over a powerful lobbying industry. Just couldn't be allowed to happen. Oh, we're adjourned. Y'all, that is embarrassing. The public understands what's going on here, and we are giving them a middle finger. If I could have offered an amendment, I was gonna offer an amendment that, uh, ratepayer dollars should not be allowed to be used for lobbying. [1:58:11] Other states have that rule. [1:58:15] Captive ratepayers who have, who have no comp- no other company they can go to to get their power should not be forced to pay for lobbying efforts that undermine their financial interest at the Gold Dome. They should not, and other states don't allow it. And the whole reason we shut down the Senate is 'cause we're, we're too scared of them because of their lobbying. That is a, that is pathetic. So I was gonna offer that amendment. We have no choice who, who to pay. I don't want my money... They, they want, they don't even wanna let 94 go through, the Consumer Utility Council. [1:58:48] Every other, every other state in the country has one, 'cause they know what it would expose to have someone actually at the PSC who could really speak for the customers, who would have the right to see all the trade secret information. Do y'all not notice? If anything pops up here that would be remotely c- customer friendly, they go into overdrive to block it. They want total control. They want nothing interfering with exactly what their plan is, exactly how much money they make, and exactly the, the power they've got over this body and the PSC. [1:59:24] It's a sh- They, they're down here fighting the Consumer Utility Council. They're fighting the plug-in tiny solar bill. It's outrageous. They don't want that because the minute people are doing things like solar, it interferes with the way they make their money, which is to build giant power plants that we all pay for for 60 years. So they don't want any solar. If, if you've failed to notice that, then you're, you're getting fooled by their pilot projects that are, like, you know, for 5,000 people. [2:00:01] Um, so yeah, I would have l- I would offer that amendment. I, I don't, I don't wanna pay them to fight against my right to buy a tiny plug-in solar machine so that I can bring my power bills down. [2:00:16] I don't wanna pay for their right to lobby me against... And, and, and, and, and let me not make it about me. We need to talk about the people in rural Georgia all over this state and in urban Georgia all over this state that are struggling day to day. They should not have to pay for Georgia Power to be down here every minute of every day fighting against any bill that would help lower their costs or chart a slightly different energy future than exactly what Georgia Power wants. [2:00:50] And not one [2:00:54] majority body, Republican-controlled majority body, has stood up to them in over 20 years. They've been in complete control. So I'm happy to answer any questions or I'll yield the floor. All right, I'll yield the floor. Thank you. You did have one question, Senator, but the senator has yielded. Okay, so the minority leader and I got together and we've agreed to go ahead and close debate. So, uh, they asked that the senator from the 35th give the minority report, and then we'll let the senator from the 6th give the, give, uh, his, uh, rebuttal. [2:01:30] Senator from the 35th. [2:01:45] Thank you, Mr. President. And the crowd goes wild as if Holyfield just won the fight. But in actuality, the power companies are in great financial position, and their financial forecast looks sunny and very bright. Working and retired Georgians are still struggling to make ends meet, and their forecast is uncertain at best. [2:02:22] What an Oscar award-winning performance by this body. We pretended to debate a beautiful, a big, beautiful bill, Senate Bill 34, that looks like it just died a underdog's death. It did a wonderful job. It was getting support from both sides of the aisle. Both sides of the aisle, working folks said, "You know what? We wanna protect the little guy." And then it got stepped on. [2:02:56] It got its clothes changed, and then it changed its bill number and took the teeth out of everything, and now we have Senate Bill 410. Wow. [2:03:08] What a performance. And then the powerful among us act like we did everything that we could do. Our intentions are right here. [2:03:25] Around Georgia, we all know we can't eat good intentions. I yield the will. [2:03:37] Recognize senator from the 6th. Close debate. [2:03:49] Thank you, Mr. President. Colleagues, we all want the same thing. [2:03:58] We are all trying to accom- accomplish the exact same thing, to ensure that ratepayers will not pick up the tab of data centers. [2:04:13] This bill does that. [2:04:18] Do not let your, [2:04:22] your hate for Georgia Power cloud your judgment on what this bill actually does. [2:04:32] I don't hate Georgia Power. I'm not gonna hide behind that. I don't hate them. I've got two, two p- plants right in my district. They've done great things for, for my community. They've done great things for, for our school system. But I'm also not down here toting their water. I'm down here toting the water for the citizens that I represent. And guess what? My citizens aren't even Georgia Power ratepayers. They're MEAG, they're EMCs. [2:05:05] I'm toting the water for your citizens that are Georgia Power ratepayers. The President of the United States, by proclamation, is toting the water for your citizens, and you're letting all that cloud your judgment on doing what's right by our citizens to ensure ratepayers will not pay the cost for upgrades in infrastructure caused by data centers. [2:05:41] I cannot be more clear. With that, I urge your favorable consideration for Senate Bill 410. [2:05:58] Senator from the 37th. [2:06:04] The question is on adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. Main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary will align the machine. [2:06:33] Senator from the 37th. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President. State your inquiry. Isn't it true that every single member of the Democrat caucus who was present on- I- in 2018 to put this bill in place voted in support of this bill? There, there's, uh... In fact, the senator, the senators who spoke on the well against this voted to put this in place in the first place, and the Republican caucus is standing together- ... in support of consumers to fix it and get it right. [2:07:03] Senator knows what he speaks. [2:07:09] Senator from the 41st, what purpose do you rise? Parliamentary inquiry. State your inquiry. Mr. President, isn't it a great sign of wisdom when people learn more information and change their minds? Is that not a great sign of wisdom? You know, I think we're learning something new every day, Senator. [2:07:42] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 32, the nays are 21. This bill having received requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed by substitute. [2:07:55] Secretary will read Senate Bill 542. [2:08:03] Senate Bill 542 by Senator Robertson of the 29th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 6 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to sexual offenses so as to permit clergy members to be charged with certain improper sexual contact offenses, to provide for definitions, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Judiciary recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Strickland of the 42nd District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Judiciary offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 542, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 6 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to sexual offenses so as to permit cler- clergy members to be charged with certain improper sexual contact offenses, to provide for definitions, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [2:08:44] Senator Robertson. [2:08:49] Senator Robertson of the 29th and others offered, offered the following amendment. Amendment 1 to amend Senate Bill 542. Before the word spiritual on lines 85 and 115, insert the following, abuse of such clergy members. Mr. President, that completes the order. Recognize senator from the 29th [2:09:18] Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, colleagues. [2:09:23] I think we can bring the temperature in the room down a little bit and talk about something that I think all of us are concerned about, that disturbs all of us, and that makes us take pause [2:09:36] when we pick up a newspaper, when we watch a television, or when we listen to a podcast, and we hear once again that somebody in a trusted position [2:09:53] in a religious institution, church, nonprofit, has once again [2:10:03] taken advantage of somebody under their guidance. And friends, I'm not talking about small children. I'm talking about adult women and men. [2:10:22] During my career, [2:10:26] anytime I arrested a female or had to transport a female, whether I'm driving down Manchester Expressway and I see a lady on the side of the road with a flat tire and I had to pick her up, she got in my patrol car, the first thing I was required to do with the Muskogee County Sheriff's Office [2:10:52] gave my unit identifier, gave the name of the individual in my vehicle, and called in my mileage. [2:11:03] And then when I got her to where she was going, I called in my unit identifier, I called in the name of the individual that was in my vehicle, and I gave my ending mileage, and I got 10-8, which means I got back to work. And I had to do this because in the past, people in my profession used their authority, used their presence [2:11:29] to take advantage of people who had interpreted that authority as a fence that boxed them in, that trapped them, where they had nowhere to go. [2:11:45] And then as we move through life, we notice it's not just in law enforcement that this occurred, where adults with authority were exploiting, abusing, and mistreating other adults. It's in our schools, [2:12:05] where the math teacher, the English teacher, the science teacher, the band teacher, the choir instructor takes advantage of an 18-year-old student, who though he or she may be 18 years old, they are under the authority of an educator. And because of that, [2:12:30] and because of that, we have laws that bring punishment on the individuals in those positions of trust when they use that trust to sexually assault another human being. And over these past few years, we have seen that it has moved from my profession, from the education profession, and into our churches, into our schools of faith, and into those other areas where they lead with God. [2:13:09] And understand, when I talk about God, I'm not necessarily talking about the God that I believe in, the God that I believe is the one and only. I'm talking about whatever God you believe in, because I can promise you, when Jim Jones assisted in the murder of 900 people who thought he was God, it is not the same God that I believe in, or the God that the people in this room believe in. But he used that same power in the worst way humanly possible and in recorded history in modern times. [2:13:47] But what we have now is we don't have the Jim Joneses. What we have is we have the big churches, the small churches, the little groups, where men primarily, and let's be clear on that, primarily these are men, and primarily these victims are females. And they are looking for spiritual guidance. They are looking for someone to walk them through the darkest times of their lives. [2:14:17] And that individual, that predator, sees an opportunity, and he exploits that pain and uses it against that person. And listen, not everybody's going to love this legislation. [2:14:35] There's going to be some attorneys who represent some shockingly religious organizations that are going to be concerned, and they should be. And there's going to be some pastors and some others that are going to be worried, and they should be, because they're going to have to educate their ministers. They're going to have to educate their staff. They're going to have to put policies in place. They're going to have to put SOPs in place to make sure that there's a bright line between their job as a spiritual leader [2:15:11] and their responsibility as a friend, neighbor, or fellow congregant. [2:15:19] This law leans on the reasonable person standard. And if you don't know, I'll read you the legal description. The reasonable person standard is used to determine how an average careful person would act in a similar situation. So whether you're going through voir dire and being impaneled on a jury, whether you're determined to be a reasonable person there, they will use that and say, "In this case, would I have acted the same way?" And I promise you, to these abusers, those reasonable people would say, "No, I would not." Law enforcement uses reasonable standard every time they investigate a crime. [2:16:04] Is it reasonable? And believe it or not, myself and the senator from the 30th, though at times we may not look that bright, we are bright enough to understand in an investigation most of the time to determine [2:16:27] an abusive relationship or just a general run-of-the-mill relationship. We can make those determinations, and we give those opinions in our reports, and we give those opinions in our investigations. So if you look at the bill in front of you and you look over to line 40, and I'll start at the word where, or I tell you what, I'll start at 38. Pastoral counseling or spiritual authority relationship means a relationship in which a clergy member provides spiritual guidance, pastoral care, religious instruction, confession, mentoring, or emotional or spiritual support in circumstances where a reasonable person would view the clergy member as exercising influence, trust, or authority over another person's spiritual, emotional, or personal well-being. [2:17:21] It's very clear. And then what we have done, if you look on 67, knowingly engages in sexually explicit conduct. And if you look at 68, knows or reasonably should have known it contemporaneously, which means in conjunction with. [2:17:44] If I'm somebody's spiritual counselor, I cannot at the same time counsel that person spiritually when they're in distress and manipulate the situation in order to have sex with them. And the most disgusting part of the entire process [2:18:06] is the violators will come out and say it was consensual, because at the time they were manipulating that person, they told that person that it was of God, that their conduct was ordained, that it was a spiritual relationship. And the entire time they're manipulating, they're trapping, they're isolating, and they're assaulting their victims. [2:18:31] All this law does is put clergy in the same category as cops like me and teachers like the teachers in this room. That's all it does. It holds them to the standard they should have been held to a long time ago. And I'm gonna tell you, offered up an amendment to this bill. I was gonna change a word, and I sat down and talked to some people. And when I get back to my desk, I'm gonna ask for unanimous consent to withdraw that amendment. [2:19:07] And I need your support. And I also need your support to pass this legislation. [2:19:14] Because every one of us in here has a family member that we love. Every one of us in here has, has had a mother, a sister, a wife, or other female in our life that we care about. And while we know abuse exists in this state and in this country and around this world, it should never exist in our house of worship. It should never exist in a room where somebody's there to comfort us spiritually and to talk to us about our God. [2:19:50] And with that, Mr. President, I'll yield for any questions. [2:19:55] There are no questions, Senator. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I'll yield the well and be ready to make that motion when I return to my desk. Thank you. I recognize the senator from the 37th to speak to Senate Bill 542. [2:20:26] Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, um, I'd like to thank the senator from the 29th, um, for his attentiveness to this issue. Uh, we do have circumstances in which there's violations of the pastor's trust, and I think this is, this is a, this is a proposition that the sen- that this body needs to be addressing substantively. Um, honored as a House member, uh, from 2015, '16, '17, and '18 to work for four years to craft the current code section. [2:20:59] This addresses OCGA 16-6-5.1. This is the most carefully crafted section of code I think I've worked on in my 22 sessions in this General Assembly, because the nature of these relationships, um, are so delicate. And what we did in 2018 was bring together this issue of employees and agents in schools. But we recognize in this case it's not a matter of 16, 17, 18-year-olds in our schools, but it's a matter of [2:21:30] People in their 40s who would otherwise be consenting adults. And how do we cr- how do we craft something that the idea of consent doesn't matter because one so dominates the other in their, in their power? Um, I thank the senator from the 29th. He's committed to work on this bill through the process. Um, the definitions are very broad. I'll tell you one of the reasons it took us four years to get to the current se- code section after working hours and hours and hours in House committee is because the definitions are so nuanced and matter so much. [2:22:04] One single word, um, can change the, the complete meaning of this. So appreciate the senator from the 29th agreeing to work with me in the House on, on the language of this. There's definitely some victims who've been just, just horri- horrifically treated by people in authority over them that, uh, have brought this and I'd like to thank them for their work. But I will tell Hou- d- will tell members of the Senate there is, there's nuance and there's work to be done. [2:22:35] I think we need to move this through the process, keep this going. I appreciate the senator from the 29th's commitment to do that. And with that awareness that this is a work in progress this legislature, but an issue we cannot ignore, I would yield the well. [2:22:50] I recognize the senator from the 41st to speak to the measure. [2:23:08] Thank you, Mr. President. I rise as an ordained Episcopal priest who has served in the church faithfully for over 15 years, and I have watched my church denominations and denominations across the nation struggle with this issue. And we've put in rules and tried to have trainings for clergy around the importance of these boundaries, and we've threatened and even taken people's ordinations away, but it still hasn't stopped this type of abuse. [2:23:45] And so I am grateful to the senator from the 29th for standing up and helping give more teeth, yet another tool in the toolbox for clergy education to make sure that clergy stop these types of abuses. The reality is clergy hold a sacred responsibility to care for the people who are under their cure. And when we abuse that, the punishments for that should be grave. [2:24:21] There's some of you in this body who know I don't believe in creating more felonies. I am very careful and cautious when it comes to incarcerating more people. But this is a moment where I stand firmly behind this bill and urge you to vote yes, because we have to have tools to hold clergy accountable for not just inappropriate behavior, but I'll even say for sinful behavior. So thank you, senator from the 29th, and for all who've worked on this bill. [2:24:54] I am grateful and I encourage the House to, to work on continuing to tighten the language of what it means to be clergy so that we can make sure we are targeting exactly the right people. But I am so grateful that now we will have some additional tools to stop this heinous behavior. With that, I yield the well. [2:25:17] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? [2:25:23] I recognize the senator from the 29th for a motion. Senator, [2:25:31] do your motion first. Yes. C- I'll let you close after you... [2:25:48] Mr. President, I ask for unanimous consent that Amendment 1 of SB 542 be withdrawn. [2:25:58] Senator from the 29th has asked unanimous consent that Amendment 1 to Senate Bill 542 be withdrawn. Is there objection? Without objection, the amendment's withdrawn. Now, per sena- Senate rule, I'll let the senator from the 29th close debate. [2:26:19] Thank you, Mr. President. I wanna thank the two senators that stepped forward. There are many bills that we deal with in this chamber that we're not gonna agree on. It may be about money, it may be about education, it may be about life, and it may be about death. But this is one bill that I think we can all agree on. I sit in committee meetings every day in this building, and we do not have a single committee meeting that we do not start out by praying to our God, where we claim to be His servant. [2:27:02] And that we walk through this life letting His light shine through us, and I ask today that you let His light shine through you. And with that, Mr. President, I yield the well. [2:27:17] The question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? The chair hears none and the main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill will vote yay. Opposed, nay. The secretary will unlock the machine. [2:28:20] On the pass of the bill, the yeas are 55 and the nays are zero. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. Well done, Senator. [2:29:04] Well done. And thank you, Sen- thank you, Pro Tem. [2:29:12] Yes. [2:29:12] Moving on. Senate Bill 442. [2:29:29] Senate Bill 442 by Senator Dixon- Dickerson of the 21st and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 5 of Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to driver's licenses so as to provide for revocation and expiration of commercial driver's license for non-citizens to provide for testing requirements for renewal of commercial driver's license for non-citizens to amend Chapter 36 of Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to verification of lawful presence within the United States so as to make conforming changes to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [2:29:59] Committee recommendation? [2:30:02] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Albers of the 56th District. Chairman. [2:30:09] Thank you. [2:30:11] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 442, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 5 of Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to driver's license so as to provide for revocation and expiration of commercial driver's license for non-citizens to provide for testing requirements that for, for the transfer of commercial driver's license for non-citizens to amend Chapter 36 of Title 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to verification of lawful presence within the United States so as to make conforming changes to provide for related matters to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [2:30:40] Please order. Please order. [2:30:42] Mr. President, I complete the order. [2:30:44] Recognize the senator from the 21st. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Is this your first bill, Senator? [2:30:53] No. [2:30:53] You've been up here before? [2:30:58] Yes. [2:30:58] I thought we were gonna have some fun. Really? This is his fir- this is his first bill? [2:31:05] No. [2:31:05] Thank you, Mr. President. I appreciate it. [2:31:09] Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, I rise today to present Senate Bill 442, a simple and common sense measure that helps ensure the integrity of Georgia's commercial driver's license system and protects the citizens of our state. Commercial driver's licenses allow individuals to operate some of the h- largest and heaviest vehicles on our roads. Because of that responsibility, it is important that our licensing system remain clear, secure, and tied to lawful presence in the United States. [2:31:39] Senate Bill 442 does three straightforward things. First, it ensures that when a commercial driver's license is issued to a non-citizen, that license will expire or be revoked when the invid- individual's legal authorization to remain in the United States expires or after five years, whichever occurs first. Second, the bill requires that if a non-citizen transfers a commercial driver's license from another state to Georgia, they must take and pass Georgia's commercial driver's driving knowledge and skills test. [2:32:10] And third, the legislation makes a few conforming updates to state law to ensure our verification processes remain consistent. Members, this is simple legislation. It protects our families, protects the citizens of Georgia, and ensures that the individuals operating commercial vehicles on our roads are properly qualified and lawfully authorized to do so. It is common sense policy that strengthens the integrity of our licensing system and promotes public safety across our state. I respectfully ask for your favorable consideration of Senate Bill 442. [2:32:41] Thank you. Mr. President, I will yield for questions or I yield the floor. [2:32:46] You do have one question, Senator. Recognize Senator from the 42nd. [2:32:50] Thank you, Mr. President. Senator yield? [2:32:52] I will most certainly yield to my friend of the 42nd. [2:32:54] Senator, isn't it true that while this may not be your first bill, that obviously your first performance in the well fell so flat that the president didn't remember you doing it? [2:33:05] The senator knows of which he speaks. [2:33:07] I don't remember. Recognize Senator from the 44th. [2:33:13] Thank you, uh, Mr. President. Will the gentleman yield? Just, um- [2:33:16] I most certainly will [2:33:16] ... I wanna make sure I'm clear on a couple things, um, Senator. So if you are a green card holder, are you eligible to get, uh, to obtain a commercial driver's license? [2:33:29] If you are a, uh, lawf- if you're, uh, allowed to be here lawfully, then depending upon the state, but this is a federal, federal process. The commercial driver system is, is a federal, um, program that's put in place, and every state can test for it slightly differently. Uh, so if you are lawfully here, you are, and you're here on a visa, you are allowed to, um, to request and take the test for a commercial driver's license. [2:33:51] So, so y- isn't it true, I, I believe the answer is yes, you, you can get one. [2:33:56] Yes. [2:33:58] Are, would you be, you do of course, um, isn't it true that, that, uh, on a green card you do need to renew it every so often and, and of course you would have the opportunity to, to go through the citizenship process. But you do, it does not go on in perpetuity. You ha- you do have to renew it. [2:34:16] W- an individual on a green card in Georgia, would they have to take the entire test again? And p- and all the classes again when they went to renew their green card if it had been five years? [2:34:37] Okay. So I- I'll see if I can kind of unpack that a, a couple different ways. So, uh, whenever you go to, uh, when you originally take your commercial driver's license, you take a written test and a driving test. That's two things you do. So, um, what we're saying is if you transfer your license from another state to the State of Georgia, you have to retake the written test and you have, you have to retake the driving test, but it's only that first time to obtain your, your Georgia driver's license. [2:35:03] So the, the l- lawful green card holder that does need to renew a green card to have it still be, be operable would not have to retake the entire test and classes every time they renewed? [2:35:16] That is correct. [2:35:18] Thank you. [2:35:23] Well, all right. Recognize senator from 26 for a question. [2:35:34] Gentleman yield. [2:35:35] I will most certainly yield to the gentleman of the 26th. [2:35:38] Isn't it true that a lot of farmers who have folks working for them and who have five-year visa or work permit- [2:35:52] Mm-hmm [2:35:53] ... normally go to Nuevo Nura- Nu- Nuevo Laredo, which is Texas, and recruit volunteers to come back and work here in United States? [2:36:14] And isn't it also true that some of them have gotten commercial driver's license so that they are able to speak the language as they recruit folks and bring them back across the border who have been certified to be able to cross the border and come on a work visa? [2:36:39] You don't understand that, do you? [2:36:40] So I, I, I do not, Senator. I really do not. I apologize for that. [2:36:48] Senator from the 41st. [2:36:50] Thank you, Mr. President. Does senator yield? [2:36:52] Yes, ma'am. [2:36:52] Uh, senator, isn't it true that we have a shortage of, uh, commercial d- drivers available to us right now across the United States? [2:37:02] Uh, the senator knows of which she speaks. [2:37:03] Uh, do you further yield? [2:37:05] I will most certainly yield. [2:37:07] Isn't it true that if you are a citizen under this bill, you would have to renew when it's time to renew and you would only take the skills test? Is that not true? [2:37:19] You do not. If under normal circumstances when you renew your license, you don't have to retake the written test or the driving test, but you will have to retake if it's a hazmat endorsement, then you have to retake the hazmat portion of the test. [2:37:32] Senator, do you further yield? [2:37:34] I most certainly will. [2:37:35] Can you explain to me what problem you're trying to solve by making non-citizens go through an arduous process of renewal? Can you explain- [2:37:44] I'll- [2:37:44] ... what problem you're trying to solve? [2:37:45] I will most certainly do that. I was trying to keep this short and sweet, but I will most certainly do that. Whenever you have non-citizens come to the United States, one of the industries they most, uh, that they go into most of the time is transportation. And so we've identified that the commercial driving system is a federal program, and the federal government sets that process of those testing curricu- curriculum and the requirements. What we have is, um, back around 30 years ago, all around a lot of the states in the United States set up independent third-party authorization and testing facilities, so that way it would take the burden off the local DMV and the Department of Driver Services. [2:38:22] Typically, what would happen is whenever an individual would go to one of those testing locations, they would pay $500 and they would conduct a written test and a driving test, and then at that particular point in time, that third, independent third-party authorization, they would complete the form, sign off on it. That applicant would then go back to the DMV. The DMV would then give them a commercial driver's license. What has happened over the last 30 years to some various states around the United States is some of these authorized third-party testing locations that are independent, they've gotten to be more in the capital market. [2:38:55] So instead of doing a fair test, now what they do is they prey on the non-citizens coming in. They'll charge them an average between 10 and $15,000 for the test, but they will not make them, they're not gonna require them to take it. They will complete the form that says that they've s- passed the s- the, uh, written test and passed the skills test. That applicant will then take that, that paper back to the local DMV and get a CDL whenever they are not, they did not actually take the written test, did not take the driving test. So being this is a federal program, we can't really control what's done in other states around the United States. [2:39:29] I think we all agree upon that. But what we wanna do is this is really a simple public, public safety measure. We wanna make sure that if anybody comes to the State of Georgia, and most of the time the, the victims of this wind up being non-citizens. When they come to the State of Georgia, we just want to ensure that they actually can read, they can write, and they can actually, uh, drive a tractor-trailer. Uh, hopefully that clarified your, your question. [2:39:54] Do you further yield? [2:39:55] Yes, I will. [2:39:56] So isn't it true by your own testimony that you're essentially adding a $10,000 renewal fee for every- [2:40:03] No [2:40:03] ... non-citizen who is trying to work as truck drivers, which will ultimately a- add to the cost of goods and services being moved across this country? [2:40:12] No, ma'am, that's not correct, and maybe I misspoke on that. So on an average, anybody can go to a normal testing facility, and the average test is 250 to $500. What I wanna clarify is the 10,000 to 15,000 that I was, uh, referencing was there are some nefarious individuals out there that still operate in, in, um, an authorized testing location for various states, and they're charging some of these, uh, non-citizens coming in 10 or $15,000, uh, in order to basically falsify the test information- [2:40:44] To allow them to get a CDL. And, and I think what we've seen over the last several years and the last couple of months, we've had quite a few accidents here in the state of Georgia to where it involved a tractor-trailer, to where it wound up being to where the driver of that tractor-trailer, uh, could not speak English, they couldn't write English, they couldn't actually drive and operate the tractor-trailer, uh, but they were operating that tractor-trailer without a license. And so the, the victims that they hit and then subsequently killed, there was no insurance to, for them to recover damages from. You have no further questions, Senator. [2:41:15] Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question be in order? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. The question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the ado- adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the order of committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The order of committee is agreed to. Is there objections to the main question be in order? Chair hears none and the main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill. [2:41:45] All those in favor vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [2:42:58] On the passage of the bill, the yays are forty-one, the nays are fourteen. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. Secretary, please read SB 445. [2:43:17] Senate Bill 445 by Senator Dolezal of the 27th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Code Section 20-14-27 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to required reports and publication format relative to education accountability assessment programs so as to provide that public schools with a statewide attendance zone and certain charter schools shall not be included in the separate list of public schools annually reported by the Office of Student Achievement for purposes of the Georgia Promise Scholarship Act to provide for an effective date to pr- repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Education and Youth recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. [2:43:47] Respectfully submitted, Senator Hickman of the Fourth District, chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Education and Youth offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 445, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 2 of Chapter 2B of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to Promise Scholarship accounts so as to clarify provisions relative to participating private school accreditation to repeal the authority of the State Board of Education to authorize qualified ed- education expenses and for other purposes. Mr. President, Kemp of the 38th and others offers the following amendment. Amendment one, amend the Senate Committee on Education and Youth substitute to Senate Bill 445 by inserting after authority on line 15 the following, to establish accountability measures for private schools participating in the Promise Scholarship Program to require the Education Savings Authority to establish an academic performance standard for participating schools, to require the Education Savings Authority to conduct annual eligibility reviews of participating schools and for other purposes. [2:44:38] Mr. President, that completes the order. [2:44:45] Recognize the senator from the 27th. [2:45:00] Thank you, Mr. President. I feel like we're moving at a snail's pace here, so I'm gonna try to go quick. Um, this is a cleanup bill that Georgia Student Finance and GOSA worked together on essentially after the first process of enrolling students in the Georgia Promise Scholarship Act this year. They just learned stuff going through the process and brought a number of suggested changes to us. All of those changes are encapsulated in this bill. Rather than going through each one of them, I'll just answer questions if there are any questions. Uh, this bill passed with unanimous bipartisan support out of committee. [2:45:31] Um, and as it relates to the amendment, I just received the amen- amendment at my desk a few moments ago when y'all did. And, uh, GOSA is actually opposed to the amendment. I would be opposed to the amendment as well. Let's move the agency bill through without putting a bunch of ornaments on it. Um, Mr. President, be happy to answer any questions. And if there are not any, I will yield the floor. You have no questions, Senator. You said one or no? You have zero questions. I'm sorry. [2:46:06] Recognize the senator from the 38th to speak to his amendment. [2:46:24] Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, colleagues, uh, this amendment, uh, aims to strengthen accountability and transparency requirements for the private schools that are participating in the Promise Scholarship Program. Uh, it hopes to ensure that funds allocated through the Promise Scholarship pr- accounts are used effectively to promote student achievement and fiscal accountability. Um, so I'll just run through a few things that it does. Uh, it adds some accountability standards, um, so that by December 31st of 2026 to ensure, um, very fairly, uh, that schools demonstrate that at least 50% of the students that are on this Promise Scholarship are, are performing at or above grade level or showing measurable academic growth. [2:47:12] Uh, it allows for an annual review, uh, so that we can make sure that the schools are meeting those benchmarks. And then it has some fair progressive enforcement measures. Uh, for example, after the first finding, the school must submit a student improvement plan. After the second finding, the school will enter into probation and must report progress. The third finding would be the enrollment of new scholarship students would be limited to 50%. And then finally, the fourth finding, uh, if students are not showing academic, uh, progress, would-- that school would be barred from enrolling new students for three years, uh, with a reapplication required thereafter [2:47:52] And then finally, it allows for some, uh, accountability in terms of financial oversight. Um, so, you know, in closing, I just want to share that this amendment is aiming to ensure that participating schools are held to measurable academic standards and financial accountability. It balances school choice with, with student protection, aiming to improve educational outcomes while maintaining transparency in the use of public dollars. Um, so that is very simply what, uh, this amendment will do. [2:48:24] And Mr. President, I'm happy to yield for any questions if there are any. [2:48:30] You have no questions, sir. [2:48:31] All right. And with that, I'll yield the will. [2:48:34] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? [2:48:39] Senator from the thir- twenty-seventh, would you like to close? You're good. You waive. All right. So we're gonna take up amendment number one authored by the senator from the thirty-eighth. Is there objection to amendment number one? [2:48:52] Yes. [2:48:52] There is objection to amendment number one. All right, we'll just put it up on the board. All those in favor of amendment one will vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [2:49:14] Order. [2:49:14] Senator from the forty-fourth, what purpose do you rise? [2:49:16] Parliamentary inquiry. [2:49:17] State your inquiry. [2:49:18] Pre- Mr. President, isn't it true that amendment one would simply provide the accountability for, uh, Promise Scholarship schools that is pr- that is provided for, for public charters and all public schools, and that Georgians want to make sure that their tax money is being well spent? [2:49:34] That's for each and every senator to decide. Re- recognize the senator from the twenty-seventh. What purpose do you rise? [2:49:40] Mr. President, is it not true that the Georgia Promise Scholarship Act is the only school program that we have in the state of Georgia with annualized norm-referenced testing that does not exist in charter schools or public schools? [2:49:52] Senator knows what he speaks. [2:50:06] On the adoption of amendment number one, yays are twenty-one, the nays are thirty-two, and amendment, that amendment has failed. [2:50:16] The question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the reporter committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The reporter committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill, vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [2:51:57] Order. [2:51:58] On the passage of the bill, the yays are fifty and the nays are two. This bill, having received requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [2:52:11] Secretary, read SB 555. [2:52:18] Senate Bill 555 by Senator Williams of the twenty-fifth and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 2 of Article 2 of Chapter 4 of Title 38 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to war veterans homes so as to authorize the admission of eligible non-veteran residents to a Georgia war veterans home under certain circumstances, to provide for definitions, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Veterans, Military, and Homeland Security recommend that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Payne of the fifty-fourth District. Chairman. Mr. President, that completes the order. [2:53:00] Recognize the senator from the twenty-fifth. [2:53:17] Thank you, Mr. President. This bill will allow a non-veteran to be admitted to the Georgia War Veterans Home in Milledgeville, and that, but that non-veteran would have to be a dependent, a spouse or a dependent child of this veteran. It would not displace any veteran. Uh, this person would only be there, um, to be in the room, to share a room with their mate. [2:53:48] Uh, be glad to answer any questions. They would be a private pay. This would not be of any, uh- uh, taxing to the Veterans Administration. It would be a private pay or there would be their own private insurance would be paying for their, their room and board there at the veterans home. [2:54:10] You have any questions, Senator? [2:54:12] Thank you. I ask for your favorable consideration for our veterans. Thank you. [2:54:16] My senator, my favorite senator. [2:54:24] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Is there objection to agreeing to the reporter committee which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The reporter committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Questions on the passage of the bill? All those in favor of the vote, yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [2:55:56] On the passage of the bill, the yays are fifty-four, the nays are zero. This bill, having received a requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed. [2:56:06] Recognize secretary for Senate Bill five six six. [2:56:20] Senate Bill five sixty-six by Senator Hufstetler of the fifty-second and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter five of Title forty-eight of the OCGA relating to ad valorem taxation of property so as to provide for the acceptance of tax digests in the event of a publication error made by a newspaper, to revise required information for bills and notices of assessment for ad valorem taxation of property, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Finance recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Hufstetler of the fifty-second District, Chairman. [2:56:49] Across the state and for other purposes. [2:56:52] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Finance offers the following substitute to Senate Bill five sixty-six. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter five of Title forty-eight of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to ad valorem taxation of property so as to pr- provide for the acceptance of tax digests in the event of a publication error made by a newspaper, to revise required information for bills and notices of assessment for ad valorem taxation of property, to revise definitions, limits, and procedures related to a statewide base year homestead exemption, to provide for annual submissions and review of homestead information across the state and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [2:57:25] Recognize senator from the fifty-second. [2:57:37] Thank you, Mr. President. I will be brief, but I will also answer any questions. You just got something on your desk recently from Paulding County and you're probably going, "What the heck is that?" Well, it's actually what we want the new local assessment bill to look like. We worked with the tax assessors who their, uh, chief is, uh, from Paulding County and worked with them on how we wanted to make it more consumer friendly. And then we actually wrote the legislation from what we want it to look like. [2:58:09] So we kind of did it backwards, but this would be the new bill look. Now, the description in the caption talks about a publication error made by a newspaper. That's a very small part of the bill, but we've had sometimes newspaper get the size a little bit wrong on the first. They print it three times and, uh, we, some of these counties that only have a newspaper once a week, it delays them for a week. So we're saying you got to fix it, get it online, get it corrected in the other two, but we're not gonna hold you up a week if there was a error made by the newspaper through no fault of their own. [2:58:41] But there's two things that go out. There's your assessment on your house. The assessors do not tax you. They simply say, "This is what we think your house is worth." And then there's the property tax bill that comes from your city, from if you're in a city, your county, your school board. That's a whole separate issue. This is just the notice of assessment. So what we did on this was set this up where it lists on the left side what all exemptions you're getting, what exemptions you might be eligible for, all the contact information, phone, email, website, everything on, um, how to contact them. [2:59:23] And then in clear language, in big print, here's your current value and your previous year value, and then it tells you the four ways that you can appeal if you don't like that value. So, um, it's still pretty wordy, but I think it's a lot cleaner than wh- what we had before. Uh, and, uh, we were trying to do estimates on taxes and stuff that were usually, at least in my area, incorrect. And so, uh, that was just making people mad at all of us. So this is the new, um, design of what we want the, uh, tax bill to go out from locally. [2:59:59] Um, I s- I shouldn't say tax, the assessment because this is just the assessment. The tax bill is later on. This is your assessment that goes out later on. If there's no questions, I'll yield the well. [3:00:13] You have one question, Senator. Recognize senator from thirty-six. [3:00:22] Thank you, Mr. President. Does, uh, Senator yield? [3:00:26] Certain- certainly yield for the, uh, future dean of the Senate. [3:00:32] Optimistically, yes. Uh, thank you for, uh, for bringing this bill. It's very consumer friendly and, uh, I think is, i- is, uh, is, is, uh, it, things needed fixing and this is, takes us a long way in the right direction. Uh, I, I did have a question about, uh, the income producing properties. Uh, the, uh- A- a- in my county, um, commercial p- properties are vastly under-assessed. [3:01:05] Uh, and, uh, d- do you think that there's some ways that we can address that, uh- [3:01:11] Well, no, I- [3:01:12] ... going forward? Not in this, not with this bill, but, uh- [3:01:15] Right. I don't, I don't think on this bill, but I think we had bipartisan support when that issue came up in committee the other day, that we do need to address where people simply won't turn in the information. And I believe, uh, there was a bill passed out that meant some of them had to turn in the information, but as you pointed, not all of them, and we need to address that in the future. [3:01:36] Thank you. And, and one further question. I- i- isn't it true that the, the way the formulas work, uh, if, if a county is under-assessing commercial properties, then it's a, it's a, it's a fair statement to say likely that the, uh, um, non-commercial property, uh, owners could be bearing the brunt of, uh, the taxes that are levied on their properties as a result? [3:02:02] They're, they're gonna get it from, from everybody, and if they're not getting a certain amount from one, then it will shift the burden to others. You're correct. [3:02:09] Thank you very much for bringing the bill. Thank you. [3:02:12] Thank you, Mr. President. No other questions, I yield the well. [3:02:14] You have no more questions, Senator. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. The question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the reporter committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The reporter committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. [3:02:44] The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill will vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary will unlock the machine. [3:04:11] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 53, the nays are 0. This bill, having received requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [3:04:24] Secretary read Senate Bill 423. [3:04:36] Senate Bill 423 by Senator Bearden of the 30th and others. A bill to be entitled in act to amend Chapter 5 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to government transparency in campaign finance, so as to prohibit candidates, campaign committees, independent committees, political action committees, and leadership committees from accepting contributions or donations from non-Georgia persons that exceed 50% of all contributions received. To provide for definitions, to p- provide for the return of such excess contributions, to provide for the assessment of excess contributions that are not returned, to provide for exceptions, to provide for injunctive relief, to prohibit and provide penalties for straw-man transactions seeking to avoid the contribution cap provided herein, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [3:05:13] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Ethics recommend that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Watson of the 11th District. Chairman. [3:05:28] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Ethics als- offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 423. A bill to be entitled in act to amend Chapter 5 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to government transparency and campaign finance, so as to revise registration and reporting requirements for certain political action committees, to revise certain disclosure requirements for independent committees, to provide for violations and penalties, to prohibit candidates, campaign community- committees, independent committees, political action committees, and leadership committees from accepting con- contributions or donations from non-Georgia persons that exceed 50% of all contributions received, and for other purposes. [3:05:59] Mr. President, that completes the order. [3:06:10] Senator from the 22nd, for what purpose you rise? [3:06:13] Thank you, Mr. President. I ask for unanimous consent to excuse the senator from the 26th for business inside the Capitol. [3:06:20] All right. I guess, I guess we can excuse the senator from the 26th. What do you think, senator from the 12th? [3:06:29] Without objection, senator from the 26th excused. Recognize senator from the 30th to speak to the bill. [3:06:52] Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, today I present Senate Bill 423. This legislation promotes greater transparency in campaign finance, curbs the influence of dark money, and ensures that Georgia elections are driven by Georgians, not outside forces. So to walk briefly through the bill, in Section 1, lines 26 through 29, [3:07:17] this section eliminates conflicting language from Senate Bill 119 last year to make it clear small PACs under the $25,000 expenditure threshold in a calendar year are not, not required to report like they did before. But once that PAC exceeds $25,000 in annual expenditures, it must comply with full reporting requirements from that point forward until the PAC is dissolved. If you continue in Section 1, lines 64 through 72, this section that really targets undisclosed dark money flowing into Georgia elections through independent committees. [3:07:54] So any independent committee making expenditures to elect or defeat a candidate via broadcast media, cable, radio, electronic communications through the internet must disclose all information required under applicable federal statutes. Non-compliant cons- constitutes a violation for each improper expenditure This means or this measure promotes transparency without prohibiting speech, aligning with federal disclosure standards. [3:08:27] Section 2 of the bill, which is the core, is what I call Georgians electing Georgians. So basically lines 76 through 90, 96 defines what non-Georgians persons and out-of-state business entities are. [3:08:43] If you go down to lines 97 through 107, this is the, uh, 50% cap on non-Georgia contributions. Candidates, campaign committees, independent committees, political action committees, and leadership committees may not receive more than 50% of their total contributions from non-Georgian persons or entities in a given period. If the threshold is exceeded, excess funds must be returned to the contributor within 45 days or by the end of the reporting period. [3:09:16] Unreturned excess funds is shipped back to the State of Georgia. This is a modest pr- this is a modest limit, more conservative than other state approaches like Hawaii, who has a 30% cap, designed to preserve the integrity of Georgia elections while respecting constitutional bounds. Lines 108 through 112 has some carve-out exemptions. Uh, enforcement lines 113 through 120, complaints may be filed by the attorney general on his or her own motion at, or at the request of the Ethics Commission. [3:09:56] Any Georgia resident can file a complaint on this. They must-- petitions are filed with the Superior Court of the county where the relevant committee or candidate is, is dosy- domiciled. And finally, the last portion of the bill prohibits the straw man donations, prohibits arrangements where out-of-state individuals or entities funnel money through Georgia residents to circumvent the law. This bill will constitute a, a felony, be punishable up to one to 10 years imprisonment, a $10,000 fine, or both. [3:10:27] So at the conclusion of this bill, this bill offers a common sense, balanced approach to protect Georgia election, elections from undue outside interference while promoting transparency and accountability. It addresses the real concerns about dark money and disproportionate non-resident influence without imposing absolute bans or overly restricted dollar amounts. This is truly a transparency bill to make sure Georgians are electing Georgians. [3:10:58] With that, Mr. President, if there's no questions, I will yield the floor. You do have a couple of questions, Senator. Recognize the senator from the 55th. [3:11:10] Will the distinguished gentleman yield? To what? I will. Yes. Is it not true that, uh, the senator from the 55th, uh, was not able to go to, to great colleges here in the Unit- in Georgia and went to, uh, the great Howard University in Washington, DC? Is that not true? The gentleman says yes. And is it not true that, uh, if I have gone to school and to other institutions and have friends outside of Georgia, they should be able to assist me in representing the great State of Georgia? [3:11:51] And they most certainly can under this bill. And if I have more friends than some of the people in here, and they give me 51%, you're telling me that my friends cannot support me representing the great State of Georgia? No, they can, but that 1% will be, uh, s- given back to them. But, but I won't be able to use those funds under the, under your current, uh, legislation. Is it not true? You're absolutely correct, that 1%. Now, now if I had gone over to University of Georgia, which is a great place, I know I'd have a bunch of friends 'cause I'm that kinda guy. [3:12:28] But is it not true that I only went to Emory and I had a few other friends, but I have more friends when I went to Harvard and when I went to Howard? Is that not true? That's true, and I can say you're a great friend from our days in the House that we worked together. And, uh, and is it not true that I respect the gentleman in the well? But is it not true that just because I have more friends outside of Georgia, who are individuals now, is it not true that you have engrossed this matter so that I cannot exempt my friends? [3:13:00] I don't have a problem if you have these, uh, PACs- Mm-hmm ... and other people, what you call dark money. I agree with you, that hidden money. I agree that we need to repeal citizens. But at the same time, is it not true that individuals, my personal friends, should have the right to support my election? Did you just say we need to repeal citizens, or are you talking about Citizens United? Citizens United. Okay, just m- wanna make sure. [3:13:31] But is it not true that my friends who I have more friends outside of Georgia, I just may have more friends outside of Georgia who have money? Because that's what we're talking about, isn't it? What we are talking about is making Georg- sure that Georgians' elections are not influenced by outside dollars and that Georgians' voices are heard and not from those millions of dollars that come into this state every year. So we need to make sure that we protect Georgians for transparency, and this is exactly what this bill does. [3:14:03] Is it not true that my friends would disclose who they are and they will say they've known me 30 years, 40 years, and that that is not fair that your friends who may live in Georgia and my friends who may live in wherever in the, in California? [3:14:22] If they want to give to my campaign, is it not true that that's an unfair advantage? To my friend of the 55th, we can debate this back and forth all day long, and it's gonna be the same answer. They can give money to you, and as long as your campaign committee does not accept 50% of money outside this state, they are absolutely fine to donate you money. Thank you. With that, Mr. Speak, um, daggone, I did it again. I'm sorry, Mr. President. I'm gonna start writing it down. Uh, my bad. Mr. President. [3:14:54] Oh. I was so close. Wow. How long have you been in the Senate now? Dang. Long enough to- Good Lord ... long enough to know better but to do that. That shows you how bad they train, they w- they brainwash them over there in the House, you know, so. But anyway, uh, with that being said, this is clear-cut. I appreciate your favorable support on the bill, and I yield the well. Senator, did you say you, 55, you wanted to table the bill? Is that what you want to do? No, I'm kidding. I'm, I'm kidding. [3:15:24] I was just hoping, I just want my friends to be friends, you know, Senator. So we need to get you some more friends in state here. [3:15:37] All right. Recognize the senator from the 14th. [3:15:56] Thank you, Mr. President. You know, in the Garden of Eden, when they realized they were naked, what did they do? They covered, they covered up with a fig leaf. That's this bill. This bill is a fig leaf for a much larger campaign finance picture. It pretends to be serious about limiting undue influence by money in politics, but it does no such thing. And I would submit to you, as a quick overview of my remarks, uh, that it is worse to pretend to do something about a problem than to do nothing at all. [3:16:30] This bill is aimed at the fact that there are Democrats who have been successful in convincing national donors that Georgia is in need of democratic renewal, with a small D, democratic. Uh, that Georgia is gonna de- determine the direction of the country, both at the federal level and in terms of the state policy for which we are a laboratory as well. So this is a bald attempt to say that if any Democratic candidate has national support, they gotta cut it out. [3:17:04] That's the main motivation of this bill and the reasons why line 97 through 107 exist. And they might say, "Well, this doesn't apply to this year's gubernatorial election," but there might be a runoff. And if there's a runoff after January 1st, it might apply. So we're, we haven't exactly escaped this year's political implications with the bill either. Um, there's two things about this bill that I find to be badly constructed. First is the family exception. [3:17:34] I don't see a definition for family. So that's, again, one small issue, but, and that's line 112, but it's indicative of the fact that this bill is not meant to be a serious technical regulation on outside money. It has been sort of thrown together in such a manner as to make it look like this is a serious regulation of campaign finance. And the second thing I find a lot more troubling is that we have a process for ethics in campaign, uh, finance. We have a process for violations of ethics in campaign finance, and that's to go through the State Ethics Commission. [3:18:07] In fact, we just passed a bill recently to empower the State Ethics Commission to send subpoenas in the event that there are outside actors who are influencing our politics in the wrong way. But lines 113 through 120 do something pretty incredible. I'm looking at my attorney friends. It allows superior courts to take action on the motion of not just the attorney general, not just the ethics commission, but any resident of this state, line 116, can bring a motion in any superior court to ask the superior court to get involved in campaign finance and ethics. [3:18:47] Folks, that is novel. That's crazy. Superior courts are used to looking at ethics and election issues only after we have administrative remedies that are exhausted, and then people appeal to the superior court with deferential standards of review. This would allow any resident of the state to enter a Georgia superior court and obtain discovery on any campaign that they are hostile to. And you s- may say, "Well, not any campaign. It's only those campaigns where 50% of the contributions come from national donors or more." Well, if you allege in your complaint with the superior court that 50% of donations come from out of state, then you may be able to get discovery. [3:19:28] You don't have to attach everything to the complaint and allow the court to do a judgment on the pleadings. You can just get discovery and start a campaign of harassment against any political campaign. We've seen something comparable with voter challenges in this state, that in various counties, there has been an attempt to do mass voter challenges with no evidence or probable cause to try to throw sand in the gears, get people unregistered, and interfere with lawful elections processes. This is quite similar because any resident of the state can go into superior court and say, "This campaign is probably not following the rules." Again, I can't stress enough, Mr. [3:20:05] Ahmadi does a good job in terms of fielding complaints and processing them, and to circumvent his jurisdiction entirely and the State Ethics Commission's jurisdiction entirely is a novel move, which again, just like the family lack of definition, suggests that this bill is not a technically tight attempt to regulate campaign finance. It is a vehicle for harassment- [3:20:29] ... of campaigns that derive political support in part from national support. And there's a claim by the author that this is constitutional, but I'm just not so sure that it is. Do you all remember in the 1970s, I wasn't around for it, but it was a case called Buckley v. Valeo. That is the real heart of campaign finance issues because in 1976, the United States Supreme Court ruled erroneously, in my opinion, that money is equivalent to speech, that any expenditure of money is the same as political speech. [3:21:03] And Citizens United was basically just Buckley v. Valeo on steroids. The reason we have Citizens United is because once you have decided that money is speech, unlimited money is just the same thing as free speech. And so it has been protected, and it has distorted our elections at the, the local, state, and national levels. So let's look at lines 121 to 133. I would submit to you that this is the last sort of fallacy in this bill that we can examine, this idea that there's really gonna be any way to enforce this legislation. [3:21:37] The idea that PACs will not be stood up in the state of Georgia to circumvent exactly these 50% requirements, the idea that there's any serious threat of a felony for anybody who does that, there's not, because it's very easy not to tie an expenditure to one of these PACs to a specific campaign. It's very easy not to make it a quid pro quo. People do that all the time. So if this bill passes, there'll just be a bunch of weeds popping up of new PACs in Georgia whose express purpose is to wash money from out of town. [3:22:09] It's a fig leaf. [3:22:14] And the last thing I'll say is this: It's deeply ironic to be pretending to be the uniformed police officers of campaign finance in a year like this when the governor's primary on the other side of the aisle from me has at least two candidates who are gonna be spending eight figures of their own money to run for governor of Georgia. So why is it that $10 million or $50 million from out of this state distorts elections, but $10 to $50 million of money within this state somehow does not distort elections? [3:22:52] Is there something about the, the peachy or the peanut quality of that self-financing $10, $50 million that's uniquely more Georgian just because those big bucks come from here? Can you smell the New Jersey on $50 million that comes from elsewhere? Waffle House hash browns for this $20 million, but Philly cheese steaks for this $20 million? Money is money, y'all, and big money distorts politics, and this bill does nothing about that. [3:23:23] I'll yield for questions. [3:23:24] You have a question, Senator? Recognize the senator from the 19th. [3:23:28] Thank you, Mr. President. Senator, you yield? [3:23:30] I do. [3:23:31] Senator, are you not bothered at all that Georgia elections are distorted by more money coming from non-citizens, non-Georgians than from Georgians? [3:23:39] I, I think I would like pre- I would prefer for Georgians to determine the outcome of our own elections in terms of money and votes. But again, the US Supreme Court decided in 1976 that money is speech, and once you've decided that, you have, you have opened the floodgates for money from anywhere in, in the United States to influence the outcome of elections. And the point I'm trying to make by cheekily using the word cheese steak is that I don't know that $50 million from one person really has a less distorting effect because it's from Georgia as opposed to somewhere else. [3:24:10] So I'm just trying to make the point that this bill is largely a fig leaf to cover for bigger problems. [3:24:14] Will the senator further yield? [3:24:15] I will yield. [3:24:16] I'm just trying to understand the line. If you're not bothered by money coming in from non-Georgians, would you be bothered by votes coming in from non-Georgians? In other words, voters being able to be out of state and not just- [3:24:26] Absolutely, I don't want people outside of Georgia to be voting in Georgia elections. That would be absurd. [3:24:30] Just wanted to figure where the line was. Thank you. [3:24:32] Right. But, but let's, you gotta talk to your, your homies on the Supreme Court in 1976. They're the ones who decided that money, unlimited money is free speech, and that is the distorting effect of politics in the United States. We need to be addressing that instead of pretending that national Democratic support is somehow destroying Georgia elections. Any further questions? [3:24:51] You have no further questions. [3:24:52] Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor. [3:24:54] Is there any other senator who wishes to speak for or against the measure? [3:25:00] Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the reporting committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The reporting committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill, vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary will unlock the machine. [3:26:38] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 33 and the nays are 21. This bill, having received requisite constitutional majority, is, is passed by substitute. [3:27:20] Secretary will read SB 572. [3:27:24] Senate Bill 572 by Senator Strickland of the 42nd and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Article II of Chapter 3 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to justification and excuse in defenses to criminal prosecutions so as to provide for an additional justification for use of force in defense of self or others. To amend Code Section 51-11-9 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to no duty to retreat and immunity in certain instances of threat or use of force so as to extend immunity from civil liability in justified use of force cases to legal representatives and heirs of the person against whom force was used. [3:27:55] To provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Judiciary recommends that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Strickland of the 42nd District, Chairman. Mr. President, a minority report has been attached. Mr. President, that completes the order. [3:28:15] Before I recognize the senator, I did want to recognize we have a former senator from Hall County in the room here. It's, uh, former Senator Shelley Echols is here today. [3:28:32] Shelley, you look, you look happy, you look younger, and I mean, I wonder why we all do this, you know? I mean, tell you what, good to have you here, S- Senator, and your husband's doing a fantastic job in your, in your place. So glad to have you. Recognize the senator from the 42nd. [3:28:59] Thank you, Mr. President, members of the Senate. I bring to you Senate Bill 572. This bill creates a new process to address claims for immunity based on self-defense in criminal cases. This bill confirms that someone charged with a crime can assert a self-defense claim early in the criminal prosecution process, as early as arraignment, so this issue can be addressed prior to them spending tens of thousands of dollars on a lawyer, waiting for years in confinement for a trial calendar. Bill also confirms something that we already know. [3:29:31] This immunity does not apply when it's asserted against a law enforcement official who's properly identified and acting in his or her official capacity. But this bill is not about a particular case, though those on both sides of the issue may try to make it that way. We don't legislate on a case-by-case basis. With this bill, we are ensuring our criminal justice system has the balance where the accused is provided the presumption of innocence and due process, and our prosecutors have all the tools they need to keep our families safe. [3:30:05] With that, Mr. President, I'm happy to answer any questions. I have no questions, Senator. Thank you. I'll yield the well. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there object- Shay. Wow. Good gracious. Y'all all right back there? Who, which one of y'all wanna speak? Y'all lit it up all at once. So recognize the senator from the 22nd. Would you like to speak to the measure? [3:30:41] All right, Senator. Well's yours. It won't be, it won't be long, Mr., Mr., Mr. President. Yeah, uh, obviously one of the things we would want to have happen is everybody has the opportunity to actually to be able to defend themselves and certainly use deadly force if required, and that is pretty much covered. The problem here is that you're actually going to give a person that, a right to have deadly force and w- with a rebuttable presumption. That's a high bar to beat, and to actually be able to actually be able to assert that at arraignment and do a motion, pretrial motion, that's an extremely difficult bar for the prosecution actually to beat and actually get over to provide that. [3:31:20] And certainly f- if you have a, somebody who's i- in a justifiable shooting, that may not be as high to beat or certainly would be something at least you would want. But when you start talking about having these gang murders, when you start talking about having these gang shootings, and that they walk in there with a rebuttable presumption that their use of force was actually correct, that becomes extremely problematic. And when you start talking about places even like Augusta, Columbus, and certainly the metro areas of all the different type of crimes that they have, murders that they actually have, and to say that each one of those defendants can file this pretrial motion and say that you have to show by the rebuttable presumption that that use of force was not correct, that's gonna cause a tremendous problem, and I think a burden on the prosecution. [3:31:59] And that's really why we're actually opposed to this particular legislation, is we believe that it's actually causes a burden on the prosecution. This is actually to me an anti-prosecution bill. It's actually one that's anti-law and order, quite frankly, because those who are really within their right, they'll be protected under the current law. The problem is, I think we're basically only gonna start protecting people who are not within their rights, that we're actually developing another layer here that if somebody who really should not be using their force, that they're gonna get another layer of protection here that's actually gonna protect them. And unfortunately, in many of our areas, we still have these gang problems because we have some of these drug issues, and this is gonna cause a tremendous, um, I think a backlog. [3:32:37] It's gonna cause tremendous issues of, of proof, and that's not a good thing. What we wanna make sure is, under the current law, a person has a right to self-defense. I think the current law is working well to p- persons who r- rightfully use their right to self-defense. That is good. That's working well for them. And those who do not have the right to self-defense, it is working in a way that we can get over that and actually find them guilty of murder. I think this actually makes it more difficult to find a person guilty of murder. And with that, I yield the well. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. All right. [3:33:07] That was the minority report. The, the minority had filed for that. So, uh, Senator, would you like to close debate? Senator from the 42nd? You good? You wave? All right. Does it ... Is there objection to the previous question be in order? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Is there objection- [3:33:26] To agree into the report of committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill. Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill. All those in favor of vote yay. All opposed nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [3:33:49] Senator from the 41st, what purpose do you rise? Parliamentary inquiry. State your inquiry. Senator, isn't it true that if this bill had been law, it would have made it very difficult to prosecute those who are the murderers of Ahmaud Arbery? Isn't that true? Senator's entitled to what she speaks. On the 42nd, for what purpose do you rise? Parliamentary inquiry. State your inquiry. Mr. President, isn't it true that those that murdered Ahmaud Arbery were found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, even though they tried to raise this defense, the jury still said they were guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? [3:34:21] Senator knows what he speaks. [3:34:43] On the passage of the bill, the yeas are 30 and the nays are 23. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed. [3:34:59] Secretary, read Senate Bill 439. [3:35:14] Senate Bill 439 by Senator Still of the 48th and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 2 of Article 15 of Chapter 1 of Title 10 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, the Fair Business Practices Act of 1975, so as to provide for regulation of referral agencies for assisted living communities and personal care homes, to provide for disclosures to, to prospective residents and acknowledgments of receipt, to provide for charging and collection of fees, to require verification of licensing of assisted living communities, personal care homes by referral agencies, to provide for definitions, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws for other purposes. [3:35:44] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Watson, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 439, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 2 of Article 15 of Chapter 1 of Title 10 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, and for other purposes. Mr. President, Senator Still. Mr. President, Senator Still of the 48th District offers the following amendment. Amendment 1, amend SB 439 by deleting to provide for charging and collection of fees in lines four and five by replacing line 17 with, "Authorized representative means an individual who is directly involved in the search for, is responsible for a resident entering into, or may become a party to an agreement for a resident to move into an assisted living community or personal care home. [3:36:29] Personal care home means any dwelling, whether operated for profit or not, which..." Mr., and for other purposes. Mr. President, I complete your order. Recognizing the senator from the [3:36:54] 48th. Thank you, Mr. President. Colleagues, I present Senate Bill 439, along with an amendment that is in your binders, that has been the culmination of a tremendous amount of work by people from assisted living agencies, from senior living association, from people on the referral agency side. Why is this bill important? In the world of senior healthcare, there is a symbiotic relationship between referral agencies on a fee-for-service to make recommendations for private pay, not Medicare-based, not federally funded, no state or federal dollars, so don't, not nursing homes, but assisted living, independent living, Alzheimer's units, where they are paid usually one month's rent for that placement referral. [3:37:54] There's been a lot of discussion, and I'm sure you all have heard this from constituents and folks at the ropes, about what that means. How long are they able to hold out that referral? In what timeframe does that referral need to be paid? And so this is all spelled out in LC4434A2S, and then also supported by the amendment that is in your binder. It was passed out on your desk yesterday, and it is in your binders today, uh, and that is the language that has been agreed upon, uh, by both sides of this industry. [3:38:33] This bill is about protecting our seniors. It is about ensuring the best quality of care that we can give them, and this bill is about making sure that there is transparency in how those referral placements are made. Happy to answer any questions. [3:38:54] I have no questions, Senator. Thank you for your consideration. I yield the walk. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. Previous question is ordered. Question is on the adoption of amendment one. [3:39:17] Adoption on amendment one, authored by the senator from the 48th. Is there objection to it? Without objection, amendment one is approved. Question is on the adoption of, of the committee substitute as amended. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute as amended? Hearing none, the committee substitute as amended is adopted [3:39:38] Is there objection to agreeing to the report of committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of vote yay. All opposed nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [3:40:02] Senator, senator from the 24th, what purpose do you rise? Mr. President, isn't it true if we have a working lunch, we'd get out of here quicker? You know, Senator, it's hard to explain these things to people sometimes, but- Let's do a lunch and- A lunch and learn? ... lunch and learn today so we can get out of here. Thank you. [3:40:33] We might work through dinner, Senator. [3:40:38] Senator from the 33rd, for what purpose do you rise? Isn't it true, sir, that lunch and work is a good thing? Senator, you look like you headed to work right now with that, that mask on, man. [3:41:09] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 53, the nays are zero. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [3:41:20] All right, moving on to SR 838. [3:41:33] Senate Resolution 838 by Senator Dolezal of the 27th and others. A resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Georgia so as to clarify that only citizens of the United States shall have a right to vote in elections in this state. To require electors present to provide p- photographic identification prior to casting a ballot. To provide a short title. Pr- pr- to provide for related matters. To provide for the submission of this amendment for ratification or rejection, and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Ethics recommend that this resolution do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Watson of the 11th District, Chairman. Mr. President, a minority report has been attached. [3:42:05] Mr. President, that completes the order. [3:42:09] Recognize the senator from the 27th. [3:42:24] Thank you, Mr. President. Colleagues, I bring before you the State Assurance of Voter Eligibility Amendment, otherwise known as the SAVE Amendment. And for those of you that are aware of the SAVE America Act that has passed out of the United States House of Representatives and has seemed to stall out in the United States Senate, uh, this really is the same idea, uh, but done at a state level. And I would actually personally love to see all 50 states follow suit, but we'll see what happens. This amendment, Mr. President, just does two things. [3:42:55] It ensures in the Georgia Constitution that only individuals who are citizens of the United States and residents of Georgia will be allowed to vote in our elections, and that in order to do so, those same individuals must use a photographic ID when they vote in our elections. Mr. President, that's what this resolution does. I'd be happy to answer any questions. If there aren't any, I will yield the well. You have one question, Senator. Senator from the 2nd. [3:43:27] To my good friend, the senator from the 27th, uh, Senator, do you yield? I do. Uh, Senator, under Georgia law today, can a non-US citizen vote in an election in the State of Georgia? Under Georgia law today, they cannot. However, as the State Election Board in Cobb County have just adjudicated over the last couple of months, we are actually seeing cases where non-citizens are registered to vote, and in the Cobb County case, that particular non-citizen voted over 20 times. [3:43:58] Now, this resolution, to be fair to your question, would not change those cases. You would s- probably still have to ensure that we had enforcement mechanisms that ensure that Georgia law was followed. Uh, but Senator, this measure is an attempt to enshrine the very things that you just asked me about in the actual Constitution as opposed to just in state law. And Senator, do you further yield? I do. And I brought my glasses with me. Uh, the State Constitution on page 10 says in paragraph one that elections, method of voting elections by the people shall be by secret ballot and conduction in accordance with the provisions provided by law. [3:44:33] And paragraph two says, "The right to register and vote, every person who's a citizen of the United States and a resident of Georgia as defined by law, who is at least 18 years of age and not disenfranchised by this article and who meets the residency requirements as provided by law shall be entitled to vote in any election by the people the General Assembly shall provide for by law for the registration of electors." Uh, so Senator, is it not true that that is already in the State Constitution? Senator, uh, it's actually the same area of the Constitution we're seeking to change, so the, you didn't need to get your Constitution out. [3:45:05] It's right on the page. But Senator, the def- the definition of every is def- is different from the definition of only. And so while we have inclusive language currently in the Constitution that states that, yes, every citizen of the United States shall be allowed to vote in our elections, it does not say only. And so only ensures that no one tries to pass a law that would comply with the Constitution, that would allow every legal citizen to vote, but would also allow non-citizens to vote. [3:45:37] You see, Senator, right now by the plain reading of the Constitution, this General Assembly could pass a law [3:45:44] that would allow non-citizens to vote. And in fact, members of your party all over the country have advocated for non-citizens voting in elections. Now, typically what they will advocate for is non-citizens voting in local elections, and the logic usually goes something like this. Well, they're paying property taxes through their rent or through home ownership, or they're paying local taxes, and they should have a voice as to who their local board of ed member is or who their county commissioner is, and this would ensure that that does not happen in the state of Georgia, Senator. [3:46:14] Senator, do you further yield? [3:46:15] I do. [3:46:16] I'm so glad that you brought that, uh, issue, uh, to my attention, and it also says that the general assembly shall provide by law for the registration of electors. So I'm not certain that we would need a constitutional amendment to provide for the registration of electors when we could define that registration of those electors by general law. Is that not true? [3:46:36] Senator, you're merely agreeing with what I just stated, and that is that, yes, the general assembly under the current constitution could legally write a law that allowed non-citizens to vote in our elections. And so if, if changing every to only is something you would object to, then you certainly can press the red button, but I certainly believe that you know the difference between the words every and only, and I also believe that you know the intent of this bill, uh, this resolution, I should say, and I certainly would hope to have your support on it, 'cause I do believe you're a freedom-loving good American and that you, Senator, while you have not told me this before, but knowing you as I do, I would actually believe that you do believe that only non-ci- uh, sorry, only United States citizens should vote in our elections. [3:47:19] Senator, you further yield? [3:47:20] I do. [3:47:20] This is my final question. Uh, when we talk about paragraph two and the right to register to vote, it says every person who is a citizen of the United States. So Senator, is it your belief that members of this body can change the definition of who a US citizen is from the Georgia General Assembly? Is it, is that your belief? [3:47:38] Of course not, Senator. My belief, though, is that when it says that every person who is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Georgia as defined by law, who are at least 18 years of age, are not disenfranchised by this article, et cetera, et cetera, shall be entitled to vote, that you could write a law that allowed every United States citizen to vote, but that had a second section in that law that allowed non-citizens to vote. [3:48:08] However, if you change the word to only, that would not be allowed. So that is the attempt of this resolution, Senator. I appreciate your friendship and your questions. [3:48:18] Recognize Senator from 38. [3:48:21] Thank you, Mr. President. Does the gentleman yield? [3:48:23] I do. [3:48:24] Uh, is it not true that Joe Biden won the 2020 election? [3:48:30] Senator, it is true that the 2020 election resulted in the certification of Joe Biden as president. But if you will allow me, since you wanna bring up 2020. [3:48:39] Yeah. [3:48:41] 3,930 double-scanned ballots in Fulton County. 39,000 residents of Fulton County who had filed a national change of address form with the US Post Office voted in that election. We kn- we know that 84% of those 39,000, either by their own admission or the filing of a new voter registration, were likely ineligible to vote in that election. We know that 315,000 ballot tapes were not certified or maintained the chain of custody as they were supposed to, and we know that there are thousands of missing ballot images from the 2020 election. [3:49:21] The data also shows us that it appears that those 3,930 double-scanned ballots was done intentionally. Now, I've told the story in this well of Gabriel Sterling before, but I'll tell it again, because Gabriel Sterling purchased his home in 2018 from an individual who then moved out of the state of Georgia. Gabriel Sterling, as you know, Senator, was the chief operating officer for the secretary of state in Georgia. Gabriel Sterling was shocked to receive a piece of mail from Fair Fight telling him to return his ballot, or sorry, r- that Gabriel Sterling received a piece of mail addressed to the individual who had sold him the home, who was living out of state, from Fair Fight, and Fair Fight was reminding that individual who lived out of state to return their ballot because it was requested by the mail. [3:50:11] Sterling then does a little investigation of his own and discovers this individual who had moved out of state voted in the 2020 presidential election illegally. That vote was counted, it was re-scanned and counted again in a, in a recount, and it was counted in the hand count, Senator. So I would tell you, due to the shenanigans of 2020, I don't believe that we can say we know who the rightful winner was. We do, of course, know that Joe Biden was certified, but I do not believe that we know due to the small margin of error who the actual winner was. [3:50:45] If you may, t- just two more questions- [3:50:46] Sure [3:50:46] ... if you mind. So based upon your logic there, you do not agree that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. Is that accurate based upon what you just shared? [3:50:55] Senator, I've given you my answer to... You're just asking an inverse of the same question. [3:50:58] Okay. [3:50:58] My, my answer will be the same. [3:50:59] Okay, my final question. So you, you shared some numbers. I'm gonna share one with you, 11,780. That is what Donald Trump called into this state and asked to find. So based upon this bill, are you trying to fix that of those 11,780 votes, there's possible, it's possible that those, there were some, um, non-citizens that are in that number that he was asking to find those votes. Is that what you're saying you're trying to fix possibly? [3:51:29] Well, in the answer that I gave to the senator from the second, I referenced the state election board cases from just last month where I believe that it was two counties un- of their own accord acknowledged that there were non-citizens that were registered to vote on their voter rolls, and then I referenced the Cobb County case where we have confirmation that a non-citizen voted over 20 times in Cobb County. Now, I will acknowledge to you that that is, A, an exception, and B, a violation of current law. So my attempt is not to change current law. [3:51:59] My attempt, Senator, frankly [3:52:02] Since there's been so much discussion by members of your party about finding ways for non-citizens to vote in local elections, I want to ensure that never happens in Georgia. And the best way that I know to do that is to change the Constitution so that if Democrats ever do wanna change the law so that non-citizens vote in our elections, they're gonna have to put that on the ballot and let the people vote. So, so that's accurate. So when Donald Trump asked for 11,780 vote- votes, it's possible that there were non-citizens that were in that number, correct? [3:52:35] I, I really don't understand the question. If y- is your, if your question is did non-citizens vote in the 2020 election, I certainly believe it's likely that they did, yes. Okay. So that's my point. It's possible that they were in that number that he was asking for. I, I believe that there's numbers of it, people that vote illegally probably in every election in the state, Senator. Thank you. Thank you. Recognize the senator from the 25th. Thank you, Mr. President. Does the gentleman yield? Yes, sir, I do. Is it not true that I served as the chief registrar in elections for 16 years? [3:53:05] You know, I learn something new about you every day. I did not know that. And, and I appreciate this bill. I know from experience there have been people that were non-citizens of the United States that actually voted in Baldwin County in a couple of elections. I appreciate you bringing this bill forward, and I support it 100%. Thank you, sir. Chairman, thank you. [3:53:33] Senator, you, uh, wanna keep taking questions or- Uh, we'll just do one more, and then I, I know we've got other bills we gotta get to. All right. Recognize the senator from the 35th. Thank you, Mr. President. Senator, do you yield? I do. Um, in the language here, I wanna make sure I understand the intent here. Is your, is it your intention to include citizens of different faiths, including are Muslims ci- citizens of the United States? Of different states did you say? I'm sorry, I'm having a Does the senator [3:54:31] further yield? Senator, after I finish my sentence- Thank you ... I'd be happy to yield. So Senator, if you disagree with me that you don't think that only citizens should vote in our elections, the red button's on your desk there, but if you agree with me, then the green one's there as well. Does the senator further yield? I do. Does the senator believe that Muslim citizens are in fact citizens of the United States? I believe that, do I believe that citizens are citizens? Yeah, I believe citizens are citizens regardless- I said Muslim. You can say it out loud. Sure. Muslim citizens of the United States, do you believe that they are actually citizens of the United States? [3:55:04] Well, of course, Senator. That's an illogical question. I just wanted to double-check intention and double-check the language. Thank you. Context matters. Thank you. You have no further questions, Senator. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the well. [3:55:22] Recognize the senator from the 2nd. Thank you, Mr. President. This morning, colleagues, uh, I will be, uh, brief. Like Elizabeth Taylor said to her fifth husband, I won't be with you long now. Uh, Senate Resolution 838 is duplicitous in its intent because this is already enshrined in Article 2, uh, Section 1, uh, of our state constitution. [3:55:53] And so I just take issue, uh, with a couple of things, and if the senator from the 27th had talked to me, uh, about this resolution before he introduced it, we may have been able to talk a little bit more about those who are falling under paragraph three, uh, which is not in this bill, that says exceptions to, uh, exceptions to right to register and vote. No person who's been convicted of a felony involving moral turpitude may register or remain registered to vote except upon completion of the sentence. [3:56:26] And so, uh, we still have yet to figure out what moral turpitude actually might be, um, and it is still in our state constitution. And so while our Constitution says in paragraph two every person who is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Georgia as defined by law, uh, I would think it would be the posture of just general assembly that those who have paid their debt to society should absolutely have the opportunity, uh, to vote in elections because many of those folks that have paid their debt to society are, are essentially falling under taxation without representation, uh, because they do not have the right to vote, and they have to go and secure a pardon to get their right to vote restored back to them. [3:57:05] And so that is a much greater issue, where those folks are citizens of the United States and citizens of this state, and they're not allowed to participate in the democratic process of this state because the definition of moral turpitude bars them from doing that. So, uh, one of the other issues that I found in this resolution, and I draw your attention, uh, to line 17. It says, "Photographic identification, the forms of which the General Assembly shall provide by law prior to casting a ballot in any election." And one of the reasons I'm fundamentally opposed to this change is, uh, as the senator from the 27th, uh, alluded to, uh, wa- [3:57:42] What happens if the minority party becomes the majority party? Well, then we could absolutely just go by general law and change the required identification, uh, because that is do- done by general law. We don't define what photographic identification will mean at this point in time. And so it could very much so be that if I decided to go buy a printer and print these badges with pictures and names on it, this would be allowable photographic ID because this is an ID, it is photographical, uh, and it bears information on it, and so then that would then be an acceptable form of ID. [3:58:14] And so while I understand the intent of the resolution, uh, it does not actually do enough, and in fact, it would put us in the posture where we could absolutely move to a banana republic. It's something that I know the senator from the 27th does not want, but it could very, very much so happen because it says that the General Assembly shall provide by law, prior to casting a ballot in any election, what the photographic identification should be and could be and would be. And so therefore, it would not be prudent of us to vote on this resolution today because what if we decide before the election to change what photographic ID actually would be? [3:58:51] We would be in the majority and we'd be convened before primary and we decide that at the last minute we will change what that ID will be. Again, that will cause confusion in an election because that would be a change before the election, and we have not prescribed in this Constitution, that is not included in this resolution, that certain changes to elections should not happen before the election is about to be called. And so if we're going to enshrine these protections in the Constitution, then we should do so wholly, uh, with intentionality and not be vague. And so, uh, the last question I would ask was how will voters obtain one? [3:59:25] One of what? One of whatever the photographic identification would be. Uh, and so as we know that there are barriers to get your birth certificate in this state. If you try to go get one, you gotta be there at a certain day above a certain time, and if you lose the original one, thank God my mother kept my original birth certificate under the mattress in the envelope that she got when she first got it with my Social Security card. But if one was to lose that, uh, how would they go and obtain that birth certificate to then go and get whatever this new ID would be? Would we prescribe those free? Uh, it doesn't say subject to appropriation. [3:59:56] So these are just many issues with this resolution. And so colleagues, I would urge you to vote no, again, because this, uh, does not really do anything but move some words around, but it does codify that photographic identification, the forms of which the General Assembly shall provide by general law, by law, which is general law, prior to casting a ballot in any election. And so, uh, I just draw issue with that, and I think we should all have some consternation about that because it is not defined. There's no definition to what photographic identification would mean and could mean. [4:00:29] So therefore, colleagues, I urge your favorable consideration to vote no on this resolution, uh, as it just moves some words around like monopoly pieces on a board. And if we wanted to do this, we would absolutely address those citizens of the United States that cannot vote, that should have the right to vote because they pay taxes. So therefore, we are, uh, ensuring that those, uh, returning citizens who paid their debt to society experience taxation without representation. And I know we all agree that that should not be happening, uh, in America, and certainly not in the state of Georgia. [4:01:01] And so with that, Mr. President, I yield the well. [4:01:06] All right. Senator has yielded. Senator from the 55th, I believe you have the minority report, correctly? [4:01:18] No? [4:01:27] Thank you, Mr. President. [4:01:31] I rise today to oppose Senate Resolution 838 for several reasons. Senate 838 is designed to amplify the Trump regime's, hmm, I hate to say that, to amplify the lie about non-citizens voting and provide cover for federal pushes to restrict voting access. [4:02:01] Georgia already has strict voter eligibility rules. Voters must present photo IDs, and the law already limits voting to citizens. This resolution does not change who can vote in Georgia. State and federal law already limits voting to US citizens. It exists to justify new election rules that remove eligible voters from the rolls, and it makes it harder for people to cast a vote right here in my home state of Georgia. [4:02:38] This amendment creates political justification for rewriting election rules by claiming a crisis in the system. Lawmakers can argue that new restrictions on voter registration and voter rolls that change who is able to participate in elections, who can stand in long lines and not even get water. The SAVE Act, ironically the name itself, is ironically and very hypocritical because it's not saving not one thing. [4:03:15] It would impact all of us, but would especially burden military voters, tribal voters, rural voters, survivors of natural disasters who have lost documentation, communities of color, and millions of married women in Georgia who have changed their name. That simple thing, a married woman. [4:03:43] And it requires this whole notion of changing, being in the pocket of the general assembly, putting it in the Constitution. I, I, I, I'm troubled because before an election, we shouldn't be changing any of the rules because one party may be in power and changing rules to their advantage is dangerous for democracy. I stand against resolution, Senate Resolution 838 because it speaks, it casts a shadow that has fallen on our state. [4:04:23] A shadow that's not just a matter of partisan debate, but a direct assault on the constitutional sovereignty of the State of Georgia and all states in our nation. Because Georgia, it, um, is a battleground state and as Georgia goes, ironically so many others follow. I say this because that shadow comes because recently the President of the United States took to social media to revive the same tired debunked lies over voter fraud that has been laid to rest by our courts and audits over and over and over again. [4:05:07] But this time, the rhetoric turned even more sinister. He didn't just spread misinformation, he called for Georgia officials. And that's why I stand here today because this guy called for our governor to be jailed. This guy called for the Secretary of State to be jailed. Even a poll worker, this Black woman called Ms. Ruby Johns- Ruby Freeman, calling for them to be jailed. [4:05:41] And this is the type of rhetoric that's casting a shadow on our state and threatening democracy itself. Think about that. In a republic governed by laws, we now have the highest officer in the land calling for the gov- imprisonment of those who simply dared to certify an election he did not like. Governor Kemp is not my kin, but he is my kind. [4:06:13] Raffensperger does not have my skin, but he does have my integrity. Ruby Freeman, please leave these Black women alone. This is a lie we must not allow to go unopposed as we are seeing that rhetoric turns into terrifying reality. Last week, weeks ago, just weeks ago in late January, we watched as the FBI acting on the orders of this administration raided the Fulton County Election Office, seizing ballots and voter rolls. [4:06:49] This is not an isolated incident. It's a blueprint. When you combine calls for the nationalization of elections with federal raids on local offices, you are looking at the systemic dismantling of voting rights. This isn't about election integrity. It's about one intimidation, sending a message to every election worker that if you don't produce the right results, the FBI will be at your doors. [4:07:20] It's about voter suppression, creating a pretext to seize voting machines and disrupt the 2026 election midterms. It's about takeover, usurpation, stripping the State of Georgia of its right to manage its own elections. As a member of this body, as an attorney, I cannot sit by while the federal government attempts to take away the very thing before me fought so hard, fought so hard by those that came before me to have. [4:08:02] If we allow this administration to criminalize the ballot box today, we lose the republic tomorrow. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand up for Georgia sovereignty. We must reject the language of jail cells for public servants because there are people out here that take that thing serious. That's why people have been killed who look like us, who's trying to just serve the public and there are some crazies out there will get their gun and attack us. [4:08:37] I stand because this past, recently, Dr.- Reverend Jesse Jackson passed and we'll lay him to rest this weekend. He stood and tried to call what is called the Rainbow Coalition, bring us together and this politics of division is attacking the United States of America. One nation under God, not a divided States of America. And that's why I am so honored to stand here to say as one of those who will remind us to be our best, to call us to consciousness as we approach this Sunday, 61 years ago, it was Bloody Sunday. [4:09:26] It, it cr- it w- it, it required the blood of people that look like me to have the right to vote. And I hope I can get over to Selma because I wanna be up there with Jesse Jackson this Saturday. But it took the blood of people and this Senate Resolution 68 just cast another shadow to put doubt on our election laws. [4:09:52] And to say that we don't have the right to freely exercise the right that we all should have. So colleagues, I simply ask that you oppose this Senate Resolution 838. Bloody Sunday, John Lewis didn't get the knots up against his head for nothing. And here we are again trying to restrict that simple thing that is the foundation of our democracy, the right to vote. [4:10:23] Ladies and gentlemen, please vote against SR [4:10:28] 838, and I yield the well. [4:10:33] Senator has yielded. [4:10:37] Apparently I was mistaken. Apparently the senator from the 22nd is giving the minority report. Is that correct? [4:10:54] Thank you, Mr. President. I'll be brief. It's not that anyone wants, um, non-citizens to vote because no one is advocating for that or ever has, and certainly this, persons in this chamber have not. The key thing is when something starts actually within a lie, you don't want to actually continue that lie, and of course when the law is already on the book that they cannot vote. But the key really is when you start on something based on a lie, no one wants to actually continue operating on that lie. And the lie actually started as far as 2020 election is concerned in Antrim, Antrim County, Michigan. [4:11:26] Antrim County, Michigan was a small little county in Michigan where they had a voter question that has, took place where Biden got a few more votes, got more votes than he initially would anticipated because it was a Republican county. So immediately the Trump administration and others went down there and started saying that this shows that the election was tainted and the election basically was fraudulent. Immediately the clerk of court, clerk, county clerk of Antrim County said basically it was her problem, it was her fault, it had nothing to do with any kind of fraud, and they corrected it, and they did a hand count and got the c- a- got the votes corrected. [4:11:59] And what happened after that was all of the, this that's taking place now started right there in that one little small county, a Republican county, where the Republican actual electoral, election clerk said, "There's nothing going on here. The, this is what happened. It's my mistake. It was my error." And the problem is every single Republican knows this story. They know exactly how all of this started, and they know exactly that they went to that small little county and lied about what took place. And they know that that's started this, uh, rolling ball of lies and deception. [4:12:29] And so what happened from that point forward was very simple. They would go to different states, Georgia included, and it was almost like a pattern, and this is why you actually had the RICO charges that came here and other places, quite frankly. And so it was this pattern of conduct. The pattern of conduct was simple. Start off by calling high elected officials, which happened here in Georgia, call them up and tell them all sorts of crazy stories about what, what they think had taken place in the election. It happened in Georgia, it happened in Arizona, it happened in Michigan. Call them up and do that. Then get them to encourage them to actually call a hearing and actually try to have a hearing on the election. [4:13:03] That's exactly what happened in, in Georgia and other states. You have a hearing in the election. At the hearing, they say the most wild, crazy stuff that you ever heard of. For instance, in Michigan, they talked about that there were wheelbarrow full of, full of ballots going into the, um, center to actually count, which is easily disprovable. If you remember here in Georgia, not only did they talk about the young lady they accused of doing certain things, but they also I be- believe had our senator from the 44th, had her in supposedly in a picture talking about she was actually counting ballots. But they give all these kind of crazy stories, all which can easily be shown to be untrue. [4:13:35] They don't care about that part. And then after that, they have this particular hearing, and then they ask the state to do actually these quasi electors or these fake electors. It was a pattern that they took from state to state. They initially called the high elected officials, give them all kind of crazy comments, and say, "Now what we, we want you to do is call a hearing." The hearing then would get called. They go there and say all m- all kind, other crazy stuff, and then from there they would ask for fake electors to be appointed. It was a complete pattern of conduct that took place. And not only were indictments done in Georgia, indictments have been done in other states, and those indictments actually are still standing. [4:14:10] And the problem is Republicans know all of this. They know about all of those indictments. They know about the people who are still indicted. They know about the persons who are going to have to go to court on similar charges that were occurring in Georgia. And they still come up here, and that gets the other pattern that's taking place. So now we have a new pattern, and the new pattern is to ignore all the different recounts that have taken place, to ignore all the different court cases that have taken place, to ignore all the different investigations that have happened, all saying there was no fraud in any of the election, whether it was in Georgia and other states. They, now the new pattern is ignore all of that, act like it never actually took place, and now continue to spread these lies. [4:14:45] So we're not gonna support any type of legislation that is rooted in a lie that started with a Republican electoral clerk, where she had nothing to do with in Antrim County, Michigan. Look it up if you don't believe me. Thank you, and I yield the well. [4:15:01] All right. So that was the minority report. Senator, would you like to close? You waive the close? All right. Is there objection to agreeing to the reporter committee, which is favorable to the p- adoption of the resolution? Chair hears none. The reporting committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the adoption of the resolution. All those in favor of the resolution will vote yay, opposed nay. Secretary will unlock the [4:15:59] machine. This is a constitutional amendment, so it has to have thirty-eight votes in order to pass. [4:16:06] On the adoption of the resolution, the yeas are 32 and the nays are 23, and this resolution has failed to reach the necessary two-thirds vote to pass. [4:16:46] Okay, so here we are. This is the posture we're in right now. If I could have everybody's attention real quick. If I could have everybody's attention real quick. I understand the House had some cute comments to make the other day about us adjourning early just because we get our work done and they can't seem to get a whole lot of things done. But, and I also reminded my friends over there in the House that quantity does always, doesn't always mean quality, you know? [4:17:18] But they have taken a two-and-a-half-hour lunch break right about now. [4:17:24] So that thing, they took it an hour, about 12:30, I think, they broke for lunch. Said they're gonna get back in about, I don't know, 3:00, something like that. So maybe it's a little more than two and a half hours. But you know what? I, I know they're, they need a little naps over there, you know? They got some older members over there, so they need some naps. But, um, but instead of keep working, I'm gonna give you a little bit of a break. It's not gonna be two and a half hours, but I'm gonna give you about 30 minutes. [4:17:56] And, uh, and, and I just hope that y'all can find the energy to come back, 'cause, uh, apparently, the House is having a hard time with, uh, getting through the day right now. But recognize the majority leader for a motion. [4:18:14] Mr. President, on that note, I move that the Senate table the remaining legislation on the Senate rules calendar. [4:18:20] All right. Majority leader has moved that we table. Secretary, is there objection? All right, without objection, they are, the motion prevails. All right, let's break for lunch for about 30 minutes and we'll be, uh, we'll be back here, and appreciate all of your hard work this morning. [5:22:21] All right, the Senate will come back to order. Senate will come back to order. [5:22:57] I recognize the senator from the eighth for a motion. [5:23:02] Thank you, Mr. President. Pursuant to Senate Rule 7-1.10B, I give notice that on the next legislative day, I intend to move that the Senate consider House action on SB 59. And Mr. President, I have the wonderful Ms. Carly from Willacoochee, Georgia, here, and she asked for the same. [5:23:19] She, Georgia- [5:23:20] Glad to have you with us, Carly. The senator has, uh, secretary read the motion. Read the bill. [5:23:28] Senate Bill 59 by Senator Watson of the 11th and others. A bill is to be entitled an act to amend Code Section 48-5-7.4 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to per- referential assessment, assessment for bona fide conservation use property and bona fide residential transition property so as to remove a limitation on leased property so as just, so as to certain entities to provide for related matters, to repeal, provide for effective date to, and applicability to repeal for cli- conflicting laws and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [5:23:56] All right, the senator from the eighth has given notice that we will take action on Senate Bill 59 on Monday. [5:24:06] Thank you, Senator. [5:24:08] This is the new- [5:24:25] I recognize the senator from the [5:24:32] 11th for a motion. [5:24:35] Thank you, Mr. President. I move that Senate Bill 551 be, uh, removed from the table. [5:24:43] Is there objection? Hearing none, Senate Bill 551 is removed from the table. Secretary will read the caption. [5:25:03] Senate Bill 551 by Watson of the 11th and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 2 of Title 26 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to standard labeling and adulteration of food so as to repeal provisions relative to eggs, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Consumer Affairs recommend that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Goodman of, Senator Goodman, Chairman. Mr. President, that completes the order. [5:25:33] I recognize the senator from the 11th to speak to Senate Bill 551. [5:25:41] Thank you, Mr. President. Members of the Senate, this bill is about red tape rollback and freedom. Um, and we have a age-old egg candling law in our state, uh, that we need to repeal and take off the books. The candling of eggs is a grading issue. It's not, it's not a food safety issue. So, uh, we're allowing folks back home in our communities to be able to sell eggs to the public without having to go through the state process of candling eggs. Uh, that's what the, uh, bill does, Mr. President. I'd be glad to take any questions if there are any. [5:26:13] If not, I'll yield the will. You do have a question, Senator. I'll take one. Recognize the senator from the 41st. Thank you, Mr. President. Senator, does senator yield? I do. Senator, will there still be a licensing requirement for those who sell eggs in, in, as a part of the cottaging industry? Or is all paperwork taken away and they're all free to sell? If you're considered a, a large scale producer, you will fall under the federal, uh, food safety rules. So you will, uh, obviously have to abide by different laws. [5:26:43] But if you're a backyard flock at home, you will not have to have a candling license from the state of Georgia. Thank you for setting our chicken eggs free. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Mr. President, I'll, uh, yield the will. Senator's yielded the will. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question be in order? The chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Is there objection to agreeing the report of the committee which is favorable to pass the bill? Chair hears none. [5:27:13] The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question be in order? The chair hears none and the main question is ordered. Question's on the pass of the bill. All those in favor of the bill vote yay. Opposed, nay. The secretary will unlock the machine. [5:28:28] On the pass of the bill, the yays are 45, the nays are zero. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. Chair recognizes the senator from the 37th for a motion. [5:28:42] Mr. President, I'd like to move, uh, uh, Senate Bill 573 from the table. Secretary will read the caption to Senate Bill 573. [5:28:58] Senate Bill 573 by Senator Setzler of the 37th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to primaries and elections generally so as to provide for the nonpartisan election for county officers and district attorneys in certain counties, to provide for the quality in qualifying for such offices, to provide a definition, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. The senator from the 37th has moved that Senate Bill 573 be removed from the table. Is there objection? [5:29:29] Hearing none, Senate Bill 573 is removed from the table. [5:29:36] Will the secretary read the rest of the caption, please? [5:29:46] Senate Bill 573 by Senator Setzler of the 37th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 2 of Title 21 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to primaries and elections generally so as to provide for the nonpartisan election for county officers and district attorneys in certain counties, to provide for the qualifying for such offices, to provide a definition, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Ethas- Ethics recommends that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Watson of the 11th District, chairman. Mr. Pres- The- Minority report is attached. Mr. President, minority report has been attached. [5:30:18] Mr. President, that completes the order. Senator from the 6th, what purpose do you rise? Parliamentary inquiry. State your inquiry. Mr. President, is it not true that you have to be at your seat to be recognized to be called to the will? [5:30:33] That is, uh, in the rules, Senator. That is true. [5:30:42] Chair recognizes the senator from the 37th to speak to Senate Bill 573. [5:30:58] Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, I bring today Senate Bill 573, a bill that establishes nonpartisan elections for county commission, DA, solicitor, clerks of court, tax commissioner, and if there's an elected surveyor in counties that have the complexity and size and scale to have eliminated their elected coroner position, instead in place the medical examiner. Um, as we know, the core metro counties, uh, in Atlanta are complex, large. [5:31:29] They represent, uh, nearly 40% of the state's population, more than half the state's gross domestic product, and essentially form the parts and pieces of a global city. Uh, we recognize that over time the cities across our state are nonpartisan, um, because the responsibilities that's really, uh, concentrated in the hands, both legislative power, executive power, policing power. Um, and again, these, uh, core metro counties have consolidated not only the, the traditional county powers but also have county police forces. [5:32:04] They have medical examiners, uh, that are not under, again, police forces don't fall under the, the sheriff. Medical examiner functions don't fall under a coroner. Uh, they're consolidated under a county commission. And because of the complexity, size, and scale of that, we believe the best approach to this are nonpartisan elections. Um, there are some proven benefits to this we talked about in committee. And, uh, Mr. President, uh, would lo- love to hear some debate on this. I'm su- I'm sure there will be a couple opinions, and glad to take questions as we wrap debate. Thanks, Mr. President. [5:32:57] Chair will recognize the senator from the sixth. What purpose do you rise? [5:33:02] Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President. [5:33:04] State your inquiry. [5:33:06] Is it not true that the earth just shook because the senator from the thirty-seventh got out of the well in less than two minutes? [5:33:14] It's a pretty rare occasion there. Yes, sir. Uh, Chair recognizes the senator from the forty-fourth to speak to the measure. Senator from the forty-fourth. [5:33:46] Thank you, Mr. President. So that the public understands, at a minimum even, and possibly some members of our chamber, um, this legislation would use sort of a legal workaround to attempt to make the elections for the district attorneys in Fulton, DeKalb, Cobb, Gwinnett, and Clayton nonpartisan, and all the other DAs, which are forty-six other DAs, would stay partisan, and only the five would have their elections impacted, and all five are Democrats, and all five are Black women. [5:34:37] There are a few problems with this. So first of all, it, it would require a constitutional amendment to actually be effectuated. Uh, the Georgia Constitution provides that district attorney elections will happen, quote, at the general election. And nonpartisan elections at the general election, end quote, nonpartisan elections happen on the day of the primaries. So by mandating nonpartisan elections for district attorneys in only some counties, the bill unlawfully changes the election framework mandated by the Constitution. [5:35:17] It is settled law that when legislation passed by the General Assembly conflicts with the Georgia Constitution, it's the Georgia Constitution that controls. So the only way to make this change is through a constitutional amendment. [5:35:31] Further, there's no rational connection between whether a county has a medical examiner and whether district attorneys should be partisan or nonpartisan. District attorneys are constitutional officers whose authority derives from the state constitution and not from county level status, including medical examiner status. This is, uh, why forty-one, all DAs that responded to inquiries about this, forty-one out of the fifty-one said that every single one of them is opposed. [5:36:08] They all agreed that all DA elections should be treated the same, and we had testimony to that effect. Um, in committee, two of the impact- the DAs who would be impacted by this legislation testified against it, as did two DAs who would not be impacted by this legislation likewise testified against it and said we have to all be treated the same. [5:36:35] Eh, I didn't, I didn't hear it just now, um, from the senator from the thirty-seventh, but my understanding is that, that a claim has been made, um, during committee and at other times that these particular five DAs are selectively enforcing laws, and that that was the stated rationale for the bill. So I'm very happy to report to you that the two counties that I represent, DeKalb County and Clayton County, each have a whip-smart, tough district attorney who is laser-focused on keeping their community safe and putting away the bad guys. [5:37:17] Let me give you a couple statistics from Atlanta. Homicides are down in Atlanta forty-two percent over the last three years. Non-fatal shootings are down in twenty twenty-five, from twenty twenty-five seven percent. Homicides down twenty-one percent. Motor vehicle thefts down thirty-four percent. Thefts of items from motor vehicles down fifteen percent. The five women being targeted by this legislation are the tip of the spear of law enforcement, putting away the bad guys who commit armed robbery, homicide, human trafficking, assault and battery, and the list goes on and on. [5:38:06] Hundreds of criminals are successfully and fiercely prosecuted by these five women DAs every day. [5:38:17] Frankly, instead of wasting these women's time, these whip-smart, tough women's time by having to run down here with this nonsense bill, we should be thanking them for the work they are doing to keep our community safe. [5:38:37] It is also, finally, very curious to me that the party who says it stands with law enforcement is directly attacking those who have dedicated their lives to it. However, I did see the news That yesterday another criminal who assaulted police officers on January sixth and received a blanket pardon from President Trump was sentenced to life in prison in Florida for the molestation of several children. And he is just one of at least thirty-five pardoned January sixth insurrectionists who have been re-arrested, charged, or sentenced for other crimes. [5:39:17] If we wanna make sure law enforcement can do its work in these five counties, we need to support all of the district attorneys around this state, not target some and play games with the, the, their dedication to their jobs. We should also pass a bill that we have later on the calendar that would provide for a new judge for the Clayton County Judicial Circuit, the circuit that has the highest workload per judge in the state, prosecutes the crimes coming out of Hartsfield-Jackson. [5:39:47] And with the World Cup coming, law enforcement in Clayton, including District Attorney Tasha Moseley, needs to work harder than ever to prevent and prosecute all crimes, especially sex trafficking. And this, that legislation would help move prosecutions expeditiously through Clayton County, helping keep our whole region safe. So if we're gonna talk about how we can keep our whole region safe, we need to be talking about measures like that, that support the, the hard work of Tasha Moseley, all of the assistant district attorneys in that c- in Clayton County, all the judges, instead of, you know, tossing up silly, unconstitutional bills that are an affront to people who have absolutely dedicated their lives, spending every minute putting away the bad guys while we sit in the ivory tower debating silly measures like this. [5:40:46] Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I will answer any questions or yield the floor. [5:40:50] No questions, Senator. [5:40:51] Thank you. I yield the floor and I urge, uh, voting no. [5:40:56] Recognize the senator from the fourteenth to speak to the measure. [5:41:11] Thank you, Mr. President. I'm gonna say the meanest possible thing that I could say about the senator from the thirty-seventh's bill. This bill is unprincipled. Thank you, Mr. President. [5:41:31] Chair recognizes the senator from the seventh to speak to the measure. [5:41:45] Thank you, m- Thank you, Mr. President. I rise to speak against this bill. I proudly represent Gwinnett County. Senate Bill five seventy-three is not about reform. It is not about fairness. It is not fooling anybody. As mentioned by the senator from the forty-fourth, this bill targets only five counties in Georgia, Cobb, Clayton, DeKalb, Fulton, and Gwinnett. Only five. Out of, out of fifty-one district attorneys in this state, this bill singles out just five offices and says their elections should be run differently from the other forty-six. [5:42:25] And what do those counties have in common? By an as- astonishing coincidence, every one of them is led by a Black Democratic woman district attorney. So let's stop pretending that this is some neutral exercise in good government. It is a targeted political attack. It is selective, it is deliberate, and yes, it reeks of racial politics. In committee, the author of the bill seemed deeply offended that anyone would notice the obvious. But if this is not about targeting these women, then where is the real explanation? [5:42:58] What is the consistent statewide principle? What is the logic that applies in these five counties but nowhere else in Georgia? There isn't one. Instead, we got a rambling theory about medical examiners, police departments, county commissioners, coroners, sheriffs, and concerns about partisian- partisanship in law enforcement. But none of that explains the basic question before everybody. Why are only these five district attorneys being forced into a different kind of election? [5:43:30] And while we're at it, what does having a medical examiner have to do with whether a district attorney should be elected on a partisan or nonpartisan ballot? Nothing. It is a weak excuse for a bill with a very obvious target. As mentioned, let's talk about how isolated this bill really is. Forty-one district attorneys out of fifty-one responded to a poll on this legislation, and every single one of them re- opposed it. Every single one. [5:44:01] Think about it. In a profession where people disagree on almost everything, they were united on this. All DA elections in Georgia should be treated the same, not just the metro ones, not just the Black women, all of them. That alone should end this debate. But there's more. The bill is supposedly about partisanship in law enforcement. Fine. Then why doesn't it apply statewide? Why is partisanship suddenly an emergency in only five metro counties? [5:44:32] Why not in other one hundred and fifty counties in Georgia? Why not in every judicial court? Because this bill is not about principle. It is about power. It is about making it easier for someone who looks like the senator from the thirty-seventh to beat someone who looks like Sherry Boston, Fani Willis, Tasha Moseley, Patsy Austin Gaston, and Sonya Allen. That is the truth at the center of this bill. And no matter how many procedural excuses get wrapped around it, that is the truth about this bill. [5:45:04] This is not about fixing a broken system. This is about punishing people for winning elections, for holding office, and for not looking like the people who used to monopolize power in this state. And beyond all that, this bill is unconstitutional. The Georgia Constitution says district attorneys are elected at the general election. Nonpartisan elections do not happen at the general election. They hap- happen on the day of primaries. That is a serious constitutional problem. And there's another one. [5:45:34] The Constitution prohibits special legislation based on population. This bill may try to disguise what it is doing, but everyone in this chamber can see exactly what it is: special legislation aimed at a tiny set of counties for naked political purposes. So no, this is not reform. It is selective, it is punitive, and it is likely unconstitutional, and it is an insult to the voters of Cobb, Clayton, DeKalb, Fulton, and Gwinnett County. I urge this body to reject Senate Bill 573. [5:46:04] Thank you, and I yield the well. [5:46:09] Chair recognizes the senator from the 56th to speak to the motion. [5:46:24] Thank you, Mr. President. I want to commend the senator from the 37th for bringing forth this very important piece of legislation. As you all know, my focus is always primarily on public safety. Our five largest and most populous counties are where the majority of challenges we face come from due to the density of our population. They're also some of the most municipalized, which means the cities within those counties, which have mostly all nonpartisan elections, are then working with partisan elected officials. [5:46:56] In this case, it only makes good common sense to, to put this forward in order to make sure people are not focusing on the partisanship. They're focusing on doing what we really want to do, which is keeping our citizens safe. And if your main focus is not political and your main focus is that family in your district, that small business that it's concerned about being broken into or taken advantage, to making sure the criminal justice system work from, from the time they called 911 to the police officer arriving, from them being prosecuted, for them being judged and eventually sentenced to a prison sentence, then you will vote for this bill. [5:47:35] But don't come up and tell us it's about politics when we're trying to take the politics out of it. Thank you. I yield the well. [5:47:44] Senator's yield the well. [5:47:48] Senator from the 26th, what purpose do you rise? [5:47:55] Parliamentary inquiry. State your inquiry. [5:48:00] Mr. Governor, are DAs constitutional officers? Yes, sir. Then it would take a two-thirds vote in order to change the Constitution, wouldn't it? I think this is about whether the election is partisan or nonpartisan. I don't know that it would take a constitutional amendment, but I'm no constitutional scholar for sure. But, but the DAs are constitutional officers, aren't they? [5:48:31] That's my understanding. Yes, sir. Thank you. [5:48:36] Senator from the 14th, I'm hearing a lot from you today. What purpose do you rise? Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President. State your inquiry. Mr. President, after the senator from the 56th fulsome explanatory speech, can the chair think of a reason why DAs in any other county should be focused on partisanship and partisan politics instead of the small businesses and citizens in those counties? Each senator's, uh, got the ability to introduce the bill. All right. Let's get this one voted on. [5:49:08] Any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none and the previous question is ordered. Is there objection to agreeing the report of committee which favor will pass to the bill? Chair hears none. [5:49:26] He waves, I think. Oh, he does want to close. [5:49:34] I was on a roll, Senator. [5:49:43] We got a lot of bills on the list we hope to get to, so let's, let's keep it moving. Thank you. [5:49:51] Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, um, I want to address some of the questions raised by the minority party and get back to the, the thrust of this, which is the proposition to take politics out of, uh, governance of our core metro area counties. Um, one thing that was raised, and I, I want to address it because it's not just the members here, it's also the members of the public who are watching this. Um, you know, the idea that we're, we, we have the, the contention by the senator from the 42nd that I've said somehow that the DAs in the core metro area are selecting, enforcing our laws, I never said that. [5:50:24] Never said that. What we've seen, though, is nationally a trend in metro areas is that there's an increasing prevalence of the s- selective enforcing of laws by politicized DA offices. Um, she mentioned DA Boston from, from Gwinn- from, uh, DeKalb County. I've worked with DA Boston, have tremendous respect for her. Um, as many of you will know, um, th- in this talk about this being some attack on DAs of color, uh, DA Boston was the solicitor of DeKalb County before she was the DA. [5:50:57] Uh, do you know how she was first made the DA of DeKalb County? [5:51:03] She was appointed by Governor Brian Kemp as the district attorney because she does a great job at what she does. I have full confidence that in a nonpartisan election, DA Boston will be reelected again and again and again as long as she s- chooses to serve in DeKalb County because she is serving not only at the, um, w- with the support of her, a Democrat base, but also the support of Republicans with whom she serves and appreciate her service. The contention this is somehow some targeted thing in some counter-partisan way, what, it's, it's, just, just, it's just a, it's a, it's a foolish, um, suggestion. [5:51:39] It was raised in committee. It was raised by our members here. Uh, but we can't deny the national trends show that with increased partisanship of prosecution, the laws legislatures pass and the safety citizens can have in their own communities is diminished significantly. We've since seen that s- in state by state by state by state, uh, where this has happened and w- w- where we see increased partisanship in our elections. The senator from the 44th also raised the prospect that 42, that, that homicides are down in the city of Atlanta by 42%. [5:52:12] I thank her for the statistic. That's absolutely true. And what is true about the governance of the city of Atlanta? The city of Atlanta is governed by a nonpartisan city council that oversees their police department. Nonpartisan leadership in urban areas is the positive good we're trying to create. The circumstances and the statistics the senator from the 44th shared is exactly why we're doing this bill. Now, there's been some claims about intentions and this is t- trying to make this debate more partisan. [5:52:42] Everyone has a right to their own opinion. Everyone has a right to their own green and their own red button. Mr. President, uh, we have seen what Atlanta can be. Atlanta's a global city. We have the world's largest airport. We're hoping, we're, we're hosting the World Cup here in a couple months. We've had the World Series in Cobb County, also in Atlanta. We're a global city with 5.5 million people. The success we've seen in nonpartisan urban governance is a model. Um, I don't have the ability to make that happen in every single, um, corner of this state, but we do have the potential in the community that I represent, community Senator Albers represents, community that many of you represent to take some of the partisanness out of keeping the seat straight, uh, the, the streets safe, paving our roads, providing services, and that's exactly what Senate Bill 573 does. [5:53:36] It does not insert partisanship it, in- into our, uh, leadership. It seeks to remove it. Mr. President, I've been thanked by members of our business community, um, people who vote on both sides of the political spectrum. They say they think this is a good move. I've been thanked by folks in the prosecution community. In fact, I was asked by one of the prosecutors about who I consulted for this. I've consulted retired district attorneys who've run in Democrat constituencies, Republican constituencies. [5:54:07] I've talked to senior staffers in, um, in, in current district attorneys' offices who thanked me, encouraged me for this proposal. Mr. President, uh, every member has a right to their own opinion, but the citizens of Georgia need to understand this is no cynical partisan move. This is a move for enforcing our laws, providing government services in the, in the core five metro counties. It's for that purpose I ask your support for Senate Bill 573. [5:54:37] Senator has yielded the well and closed debate. Is there objection to agreeing the report of the committee which is favorable to pass the bill? Senator from the 26th, what purpose do you rise? [5:54:53] Mr. President, I ask again, are these constitutional officers? Are these folks we are talking about constitutional officers? [5:55:03] District attorneys are constitutional officers, I think. Yes, sir. [5:55:08] Mr. President, uh, w- would, w- would about, would I be correct in order to change the Constitution it takes two-thirds vote? [5:55:21] For a constitutional amendment it does take a two-thirds majority, yes sir, to change it. [5:55:30] Further parliamentary inquiry. [5:55:32] State your inquiry. [5:55:35] This is a bill to deal with constitutional officers, a regular bill. But isn't it true that district attorneys are constitutional office, which means it would take a constitutional majority to change the Constitution? [5:55:59] I don't know the answer to that for sure. I'm sure it'd be litigated if it does pass and it's unconstitutional, somebody can challenge it, Senator. All right. [5:56:13] Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee which is favorable to pass the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none and the main question is ordered. Question is on the pass of the bill. All those in favor of the bill vote yay. Opposed, nay. The secretary will unlock the machine. [5:57:05] Senator from the 37th, what purpose do you rise? Parliamentary inquiry. State your inquiry. Uh, to the senator from the 26th, question, isn't it true in the Kemp v. Gonzalez case, um, even though DAs are constitutional officers, these kinds of decisions can be provided for by general law? That's been, that, that's provided to us, um, I mean, prosecuting attorney's counsel confirmed that. Even though they're constitutional officers, we're, we, this, this, this bill's appropriately framed. I'm confident you know what you speak. On the pass of the- Senate, come to order. [5:57:39] Senate will come to order. On the pass of the bill, the yays are 24 and the nays are 29. This bill, having failed the req- to receive the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore lost. [5:57:55] Senator from the 37th, what purpose do you rise? Mr. President, I'd like to serve notice of my intention to call for reconsideration at the appropriate time. [5:58:04] Just pause just a minute. [6:00:11] The senator from the 37th has asked for reconsideration. [6:00:24] Pursuant to Senate rules, the chair sets the time for reconsideration to be between 6:00 and 6:15 PM today. [6:00:38] Amen. Senator from the 26th, state your inquiry. Uh, Mr. President, uh, the time for reconsideration, uh, isn't it right now? No, sir. The, the time for reconsideration has to, has to be done today because we're on crossover day, but it's set by the chair, and it has to be at least 10 minutes from now, but it can be any time after 10 minutes from now. And it's set by the chair, and I've s- I'm the chair at the moment, so I set it between 6:00 and 6:15 today, which means we're gonna be here at least till then, I guess. [6:01:13] So- Well, that means you overruling me. The big chair may overrule me later, but, uh, right now it's 6:00 to 6:15. All right. Thank y'all. [6:01:32] The wheels come off every time, every time. State your, state your point of order. Mr. President, pursuant to Senate rules 6-7.1, is it not required, since the gentleman served notice, that we vote to allow that reconsideration to take place? Uh, while the president does have the ability to set the time, that motion for reconsideration still should be voted on by the body. [6:02:03] You, you're gonna have a chance to, you're gonna have an opportunity to vote on it, sir. [6:02:17] Okay. As the, as the gent- gentleman, as the pro tem just stated, he set the time, uh, for approximately between 6:00 to 6:15. However, it will be up to the chair whether or not that will even happen itself. So that is, that is a temporary time right now. [6:03:07] Senator from the 55th, are you, uh, are you asking, are you s- your light's on. Are you asking to speak, or you, you wave? Oh. [6:03:19] Now I recognize the senator from the 48th. Welcome back, Mr. President. I ask, uh, unanimous consent to lift Senate Bill 587 off the table. Secretary, read the caption. [6:03:33] Senate Bill 587 by Senator Still of the 48th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 12 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions regarding offenses against public health and morals so as to provide for the establishment of an animal cruelty database, to provide for purpose and funding, to require the Prosecuting Attorney's Council of the State of Georgia to create, administer, and maintain such database, to provide for minimum requirements, to provide for reporting and forms, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety recommends that this bill do pass. [6:04:05] Respectfully submitted, Senator Albers of the 56th District, Chairman. Mr. President, I request your- Is there objection? Recognizing the senator from the 48th. [6:04:21] Sure. Let's just, I didn't know there was a movement. Thank you, Mr. President. Senate Bill 587 I bring to you today because there are some not great people in this world, somebody who would be so cruel to a pet that they would be charged [6:04:46] and convicted of animal cruelty. You know, in October, just a few months ago, a couple in Statesboro were arrested for cruelty against over 50 animals in what officials called a nightmare situation. [6:05:01] In January, a canine sheriff's deputy was arrested and booked in the Bullock County Jail on eight counts of animal cruelty. Last month, two suspects were arrested in Fannin County for malnourishment and abuse of a dog. [6:05:19] In the state of Georgia, we do not have a way to track these heinous crimes. And so in coordination with Prosecuting Attorney's Council, [6:05:32] we will be creating and administering and maintaining a statewide database that will be updated at least monthly with those who are convicted or plead guilty of cruelty to animals so that organizations like our humane societies can check that database [6:05:58] and then prevent those people from adopting animals in the future. [6:06:04] My good friend, the senator from the 40th, and I worked with Prosecuting Attorney's Council on an amendment that's on your desk right now, and all this does is bring together the criminal code of where this is addressed in 16-12-4. [6:06:26] While I did not go to the University of Georgia, I do love dogs. I hope that you'll vote with me on this bill, and I'm happy to yield for any questions. [6:06:44] So I ask your, you name is favor on amendment one. I ask you to please support Senate Bill 587. Let's get back on track and let's get back to the people's work. Thank you. I yield the floor. Thank you, Senator. Apologize for that. [6:07:03] Uh, Secretary read amendment one. [6:07:08] Senator Still of the 48th and others offers the following amendment. Amendment one, amend Senate Bill 587 by inserting after funding on line four to require clerks of court to transmit certain conviction and sentencing information to the Prosecuting Attorney's Council of the State of Georgia and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [6:09:00] Trying to help my old seatmate out, you know what I mean? I spent 10 years beside him. I'm, I'm lis- I'm hearing him out, you know? [6:09:11] Who, who's, uh, who has amendment number one? You do, Senator. Oh, S- Sen- oh, s- uh, senator from the 48th, do you offer the amendment? Okay. Is there objection to the amendment? Hearing none, amendment number one is added. Is there objection to agreeing to the reported committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill as amended. All those in favor of the bill... [6:09:42] Isn't this my wife's bill? Isn't, isn't, isn't this the one she wanted right here? Boy, I tell you what, I, I, I, I don't know how y'all gonna vote, but I tell you what, y'all make my life a lot easier if y'all vote right on this thing, so. All those in favor, vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [6:11:03] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 54, the nays are zero. This bill, having received the r- requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed as amended. Good job, Senator. [6:11:41] Recognize the senator from the 6th. Mr. President, I move that SB 589 be risen from the table. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 589 by Senator Brass of the 6th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 3 of Article 6 of Chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to educational programs under the Quality Basic Education Act so as to revise the date by which a child must attain a certain age to be eligible for enrollment in kindergarten or first grade, to provide for parents and guardians to elect for their children who have attained the age of four or five to be enrolled in a voluntary pre-kindergarten program provided and operated as part of Georgia's pre-K program, to provide for an effective date and applicability to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [6:12:24] Mr. President, that completes the order. Is there objection? Hearing none. [6:12:33] Secretary, finish the caption. [6:12:45] The Senate Committee on Education and Youth recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Hickman of the 4th District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Education and Youth offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 589, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Code Section 20-2-150 relating to eligibility for enrollment, program assignments for students, and student Social Security numbers so as to provide for parents and guardians to elect for their children who have attained the age of four or five to be enrolled in a voluntary pre-kindergarten program provided and operated as part of Georgia's pre-K program, to provide for an effective date and applicability, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [6:13:19] Mr. President, that completes the order. Recognize the senator from the 6th. [6:13:28] Thank you, Mr. President. This bill is very simple. If a child turns four before September 1st- [6:13:35] They can attend preschool pre-K. They turn five before September 1st, they have to go to kindergarten unless their county allows them to go to pre-K. [6:13:50] That's always been the case. [6:13:51] That's always been the case, but counties, not all counties do it, not all school systems allow it. This simply takes the power out of the school systems and puts it where it belongs with the parents. That's it. [6:14:11] Any, any other senator who would speak for or against the measure? [6:14:20] Recognize the senator from the 33rd. For what purpose do you rise? [6:14:23] Thank you, Mr. President. I was gonna ask the senator what was his age when he entered the Senate, I mean, kindergarten? [6:14:32] Hmm. All right. [6:14:37] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Questions on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee sub- substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? [6:15:08] Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor will vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [6:16:58] All right. On the passage of the bill, the yays are 54, the nays are 0. This bill, having received a constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [6:17:18] Recognize the senator from the 46th. [6:17:26] Recognize the senator from the 46th. [6:17:40] Excuse me, Mr. President. There was a senator from the 37th that was just wearing me out. He hadn't quit talking yet even after he left the, the well. If I could, I would ask that Senate Bill 605 be removed from the table. [6:17:53] Senator asks that 605 be removed from the table. Secretary, read the caption. [6:17:58] Senate Bill 605 by Senator Cowsert of the 46th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 18 of Title 15 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions regarding prosecuting attorneys so as to provide for additional grounds for discipline of a district attorney or solicitor general or for his or her removal or involuntary retirement from office, to provide for an effective date and applicability, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [6:18:24] Is there objection? Hearing none, Se- secretary will finish the caption. [6:18:36] Mr. President, the Senate Special, the Senate Special Investigations Committee recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Cowsert of the 46th District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Special Committee on Investigations offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 605, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 18 of Title 15 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions regarding prosecuting attorneys so as to provide for additional grounds for discipline of a district attorney or solicitor general f- or for his or her removal or involuntary retirement for offices and for other purposes. [6:19:07] Recognize the senator from the 46th. [6:19:29] Thank you, Mr. President. Senators, this bill comes from the work of the Special Investigative Committee over the last two years where there was quite a bit of, uh, evidence presented to us and testimony about conduct of prosecutors and really the lack of public faith in the independence and the impartiality of the prosecuting attorneys in the state. Back in 2023, we passed a bill that set up Prosecuting Attorneys Qualifications Commission to review the conduct of prosecutors, both DAs and solicitor generals. [6:20:04] Uh, and that ended up didn't have rules and regulations enacted, and we had to reenact it in 2024. Finally got the rules up and going, and that commission has been active. We learned that over the last couple of years, they have handled somewhere, I, the number 186 sticks in my mind, but somewhere close to 200 complaints against prosecuting attorneys. Out of those complaints, they have not, um, presented a hearing on any of them after the investigation. [6:20:36] Part of the reason is because the, the areas of conduct that we had defined that were inappropriate, that were subject to sanctions by this commission, uh, were very limited and not particularly clear. They applied to willful misconduct in office, a willful or persistent failure to carry out the duties of your office, a conviction of a crime of moral turpitude or conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice We learned through the case where Fani Willis was removed from the election interference case based on a appearance of impropriety that many of the prosecutors wanted more clearly defined, uh, standards of conduct. [6:21:20] They wanted more of a bright line rule. Tell us exactly what is not permitted before we're taken off of cases or disciplined in some way. So that's what this bill does after a lot of collaboration with the district attorney's organization and also, uh, the solicitor general's organization and testimony from quite a few, uh, district attorneys, uh, including the district attorney from, um, DeKalb County and Clayton County, uh, as to what they agreed would be appropriate actions that should allow discipline against them. [6:21:56] So starting on line twenty-five, those are the changes or the a- added clarifications of conduct that would not be permissible and would subject, uh, the prosecutors to some type of sanctions anywhere from a reprimand to removal from a case to a suspension even. One is a failure to make reasonable efforts to strictly comply with the Crime Victims Bill of Rights. We have victim rights, and that largely involves notification, uh, of the victim that they're, uh, the criminal is being prosecuted and the various steps in their prosecution from the arraignment to plea bargains to a plea deal so that they can be heard. [6:22:37] Uh, and if a prosecutor doesn't at least make reasonable efforts to comply with this bill, then victims are left behind and are not taken care of. So, um, that's one of the, the rules. There have been some cases where district attorneys have been challenged, including in my home county of, of Clark County, for failing to even notify victims when there was a plea bargain made or there was a trial or there was a sentencing hearing, they didn't even get a chance, and our DA was sanctioned by the judge for that, uh, but this commission didn't have specific power to do that. [6:23:13] The original version of this said that they had to strictly comply with the Crime Victims Bill of Act, but after input from the district attorneys and testimony from them, we changed that to failure to make reasonable efforts, 'cause sometimes you're unable to reach the, the victim if they've moved and didn't tell you their address or whatever. Same thing in line twenty-seven, failure to make reasonable efforts to comply with essentially open records laws. Again, we've had a couple of DAs that received open records requests and simply ignored them, refused to respond to them, said they were constitutional officers not subject to them. [6:23:48] Court of Appeals has made it clear they are subject to those, so we thought it would be good to put that in, uh, this compliance. Our prosecutors need to be transparent. Our law requires them to be. The courts say it applies to them, so they must make reasonable efforts to comply with our open records laws. The next one is knowingly authorizing or making a decision based on, uh, factors that have been outlined at a different place within the code section. This was initially saying failure to be impartial, and after some discussion, uh, we ended up going ahead and citing another part of the law that says what this replies, a- applies to. [6:24:30] It can be, um, [6:24:34] an undue bias or prejudice against the accused, an undisclosed financial interest in the outcome of the case, an undisclosed conflict of interest, factors that are completely unrelated to the duties of the prosecution, or a stated policy, written or otherwise, which demonstrates that the district attorney or solicitor general categorically refuses to prosecute any offense or offenses of which he or she is required by law to prosecute. [6:25:05] These factors identified there, uh, were put into the code section with the, uh, consent and agreement of the prosecuting attorney, so it's something they're already required to do. But we never put in there that you could be sanctioned or disciplined for failure to follow the other part of the statute, so this, this code section clarifies that. And finally, we, we say failure to make reasonable efforts to comply with, uh, a code section that relates to discovery in criminal procedure. [6:25:35] When you're prosecuting a case, the prosecuting attorney has an obligation to provide the accused person with any, uh, evidence that we call exculpatory that might prove their innocence. You can't hide evidence that helps the defendant. There's a code section that prevents that, so we say they must at least make reasonable efforts to comply with that, uh, discovery provision that's in the law. And then the next one is a catch-all, uh, that they have to follow the rules of professional conduct that all attorneys have to follow, and it specifically mentions Rule three point eight, which is a rule of the State Bar of Georgia that applies solely to prosecuting attorneys, and it has things in it like you must know that your case has or reasonably believe that it has probable cause. [6:26:21] You've got to disclose evidence to the other side. You're not supposed to litigate your case in the press or make extrajudicial comments that might, um, heap scorn upon the defendant before they have a chance to have their trial. Uh, this is just codifying what is already the law or the rules of professional conduct, making it clear that the Prosecuting Attorneys Commission, uh, has the ability to sanction folks for failing to follow these rules. 'Cause right now, the State Bar can't, can't give them any kind of sanctions other than a, a reprimand or anywhere up to disbarment, but this gives the appropriate body the power to do that. [6:26:59] I think it's, uh, a lot of, uh, conversation and input from the, the all different types of prosecutors, a lot of testimony over a couple hearings, and it makes sense. Helps us restore the public's confidence in our judicial system, particularly the criminal justice system, to know you're being treated fairly and ethically and honestly by the prosecuting attorneys. Happy to answer any questions or yield the will. [6:27:25] You do have a couple questions, Senator. I recognize Senator from the twenty-sixth. You do have a couple questions, Senator. I'm sorry. [6:27:33] Sure. Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, gentleman will yield. [6:27:40] I yield. [6:27:42] I don't wanna be presumptive, but as I look at this bill and the explanation, [6:27:54] you all carried out a investigative review of Fani Willis prosecuting the president. And to me, what I see in here, now I could be wrong, I'm not a lawyer, but what I see is the against investigative report in this bill based on your investigation of Fani Willis prosecuting the president. [6:28:31] Senator, uh, I know it doesn't happen much, but you are wrong. Uh, this is not aimed at Fani Willis in any way. As a matter of fact, it's responsive to some of the concerns that she raised. Our committee has taken no action whatsoever against her. We have no jurisdiction or authority over her. She was removed from a case by a superior court judge, appealed that, and it was upheld by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court that her behavior was improper. [6:29:05] And they used the phrase, appearance of impropriety, without specifying particular conduct that she had done, and that was her beef. And other prosecutors like, "Tell us the rules. Don't just say you don't like what I did and it appears that I did something improper. What's the bright line rule? What is the conduct that I did that was inappropriate?" So this is to help her in the future that there has to be a bright line rule, a clear guardrail of what's permissible. [6:29:36] Uh, so this is in no way, uh, any action against her and it applies to all prosecuting attorneys. [6:29:46] You have one more question, Senator. Recognize Senator from the forty-first. [6:29:50] Thank you, Mr. President. Does senator yield? [6:29:52] I yield. [6:29:53] Uh, Senator, can you tell me, uh, the difference between strictly comply as found on line twenty-five and comply, which is found throughout the rest of the bill? [6:30:03] Say that again. Strictly comply on line twenty-five says, "Failure to make reasonable efforts to strictly comply." [6:30:09] Yes. So what's the difference between strictly complying and complying? How, how are you making a distinction between those two things? [6:30:15] Well, this, this, the, the code and as written here doesn't even require you to comply. At the response of Tasha Mosley, the input from Sherry Boston and Tasha Mosley from Clayton County and DeKalb, they said, "What if we're trying to comply and we simply drop the ball because of our volume or because of a loss of an address or some clerical mistake?" And so at their request, I changed it from failure to comply or failure to completely or strictly comply to failure to make reasonable efforts to comply. [6:30:46] But surely every district attorney ought to make reasonable efforts to comply with the law. We passed the Victim Bill of Rights, we passed the open records laws, and we expect the people that are enforcing the laws to follow them or at least make reasonable efforts to. [6:31:02] Does senator further yield? [6:31:03] I'll be glad to. [6:31:04] Uh, would you read aloud line twenty-five? Because I- [6:31:10] Be glad to. Yeah [6:31:11] ... I think that you believe, isn't it not true that you think strictly has been removed, but strictly is still there? [6:31:17] I, I amended the original bill to this substitute- [6:31:21] Yeah [6:31:21] ... in response to concerns raised by district attorneys that they may not be able to or willing to strictly comply with the Crime Victims Bill Act. I'll read it to you what it now says. [6:31:34] Mm-hmm. [6:31:34] "Failure to make reasonable efforts to strictly comply," and then it says the Crime Victims Bill of Rights. So that was in direct response to make sure that no DA was inadvertently disciplined in some way when they had made reasonable efforts and done their best to comply with the laws that apply to them. [6:31:55] Do you further yield? [6:31:56] Yes. [6:31:57] Isn't it true that the DA from DeKalb County remains unsettled by the use of the word strictly? [6:32:05] I don't think so. I think that the testimony you heard in committee was before they read the substitute, and I say they, she and Tasha Mosley, who are very fine district attorneys, uh, they were on the phone and texting with me till about eleven fifteen the night before this vote, and I told them I was gonna take their concerns into account, and I did. And when you heard their testimony in committee, I said, "Wait a second. Make sure you read this committee substitute, and then let's see if you still have a problem." And I think once they read it, that I had softened it to make reasonable efforts, I believe they were okay with it. [6:32:43] If not, they surely ought to be. [6:32:50] No further questions, Senator. [6:32:52] All right. I yield the will. [6:32:56] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objections to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. Previous question is ordered. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objections to the main question be in order? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. [6:33:29] All those in favor, vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [6:34:36] On the passage of the bill, the yeas are 34 and the nays are 18. This bill, having received requisite c- constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [6:34:50] Recognize the senator from the 42nd. Mr. President, I move that Senate Bill 482 be removed from the table. Secretary, read the caption. [6:35:03] Senate Bill 482 by Senator Strickland of the 42nd and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 1 of Title 35 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions regarding law enforcement officers and agencies so as to require persons requesting booking photographs to provide the first and last names of the individuals in the photographs, to require requests for booking photographs to be made as separate requests, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date and applicability, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [6:35:33] Is there objection? Hearing none, Secretary, finish the caption. Who do you have with you here today, Senator? Is, is, is that the, is that the First Lady of the 42nd there with you? It is. Well, let's give the First Lady right there. The First Lady of the 42nd- The former First Lady of the 17th, now the 42nd. Uh, and, and- [6:35:59] You got a house number, too, now. Th- th- what was that house number? You were the house member. Uh, former First Lady of House District 111. Wow, okay. All right. That- I see. Yeah. Good to have you here, Lindsey. Always a pleasure. Go ahead, Secretary. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator John Albert, Albers, the 52nd District chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 482, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Titles 35 and 50 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to law enforcement officers and agencies and state government respectively so as to require persons requesting booking photographs or law enforcement videos to provide the first and last names of the individuals in such photographs or videos and for other purposes. [6:36:47] Mr. President, Senator Strickland of the 42nd and others offers the following amendment. Amendment 1, amend Senate Bill 482 by striking lines 21 and 22 and inserting in lieu thereof the following, "Except for requests by the persons or persons depicted or requests by the attorney or other designated agent of such person or persons depicted, requests for booking photographs or law enforcement videos shall be made in person as separate requests for each booking photograph or law enforcement video. Requests for booking photographs or law enforcement videos by the person or persons depicted or requests by the attorney or other designated agent of such person or persons depicted shall be made in writing pursuant to Article 4 of Chapter 15 of Title 50." Mr. [6:37:24] President, Senator Robertson of the 29th offers the second. [6:37:30] Mr. President, Senators Robertson of the 29th and others offers the following amendment, amendment 2. Amend the Senate Committee on Public Safety substitute to Senate Bill 482 by inserting after changes on line 6, "To provide for the public disclosure of certain records of the General Assembly, to provide for application, to provide for construction," by replacing line 38 with the following, "Said chapter is further amended by adding a new code section to read as follows: 50-18-79, if any claim of an unlawful employment practice made against the General Assembly, the House of Representatives, the Senate, or any member, office, or employee thereof, including but not limited to a claim of sexual harassment, disc- discriminatory harassment, discrimination, or retaliation is resolved in whole or in part by a settlement agreement, a memorandum of agreement or understanding, or other similar document however denominated, such agreement shall be subject to public disclosure with the claimant's identity redacted. [6:38:17] For purposes of this subsection exclusively, the Gen- General Assembly shall be an agency. This subsection shall be re- applied retroactively and for other purposes." Mr. President, that completes the order. [6:38:31] Recognize the senator from, from the 42nd. [6:38:40] Mr. President, we just had to make certain that the First Lady didn't go downstairs to the second floor and try to qualify for anything today, but the time has passed, so we're safe now. She'd be a good one. She would be. She'd be a good one. She fills that seat well. Mm-hmm. Members of the Senate, I bring you Senate Bill 482. What this bill says is someone wants to request an arrest image or a law enforcement video, they must request that image or video in person, identify the individual they want the image of, and sign an affidavit confirming they won't use that image or video, post it online, and charge somebody for having it taken down. [6:39:19] Mugshots and body cam videos are not entertainment, and folks should not be making money by posting these images or videos online or in other publications in our state. With this bill, we're making certain that images and videos remain open to the public and the legitimate press while letting those in the mugshot business know we aren't gonna let you make a living off of harassing our sheriffs or other law enforcement and by trying those charged with crimes in the court of public opinion. [6:39:50] And that is your underlying bill, Mr. President. There are two amendments, one that, Amendment 1 that I'm bringing, which clarifies something that I missed when we drafted the bill, that if, if it's your image, if it's your mugshot, or if you're in the body cam video, you can still request that directly, um, without going through this process here. There's Amendment 2 from the senator from the 29th that he will explain when he comes up, which also is a friendly amendment on this bill as well. I'll be happy to take any questions. [6:40:25] You have no questions, sir. I ask for your support of Senate Bill 482 and both amendments. [6:40:35] Recognize the senator from the 29th to speak to his amendment. [6:40:46] Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to thank the, uh, senator from the 42nd for accepting this as a friendly amendment from the 42nd and all the other districts he has represented since being in this building. It's really simple. I presented a piece of legislation earlier that talked about how law enforcement and teachers and clergy, um, need to be dealt with when they choose to be, um, um, perpetrators of sexual harassment, sexual abuse or anything else. [6:41:18] All this amendment does is bring that same standard upon anyone that serves in this building. If you go to Washington DC, if you look at what happened today when somebody tried to bring accountability to Congress and hold them to that standard, it was voted down s- by vast, vast majority of the people that serve in Congress. Let us be better than they are. Let us be willing to have ourselves looked at. [6:41:50] All this does is if you have been accused of, excuse me, if you have been found to, uh, be guilty of any of these, um, actions, if you reach a settlement because of your misconduct, if the courts determine you were wrong because of your conduct, that information should be available to the public should they ask. And with that, Mr. President, I yield the floor. [6:42:22] Would any other senator would speak on the measure? Hearing none. So we'll take up amendment number one, authored by the senator from the 42nd, the author of the bill. Is there objection to amendment number one? My objection, amendment number one is, amendment number one is, uh, applied. Senator from the 55th, for what purpose do you rise? Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. [6:42:53] Chairman. State your inquiry. On the amendment by the distinguished gentleman, 29, he said, "If you're found guilty, if you are found liable," I don't see that language in here. I see that if there is a settlement agreement, it doesn't speak to the guilt or innocence. Is that not true? Senator, that may be something you need to walk over there and talk to your colleague about there. [6:43:31] Question is, is on amendment number two. Is there objection to amendment number two? Without objection, amendment number two is adopted. [6:43:45] The question is on the adoption of the committee substitute as amended. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute as amended? Hearing none, the committee substitute as amended is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the fourth committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The fourth committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill will vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary will unlock the machine. [6:45:31] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 53, the nays are zero, and this bill, having received a requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [6:45:47] Recognize the majority leader for a motion. [6:45:53] Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to take Senate Bill 540 from the table. [6:46:02] Senator has requested. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 540 by Senators Anavitarte of the 31st and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 5 of Title 39 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to online internet safety so as to require certain disclosures related to controversial AI services, to require the operators of controversial AI services to take steps to limit certain actions related to minors by such systems, to require operators to provide certain privacy tools to users, to require operators to adopt a protocol for a cons- con- conversational AI services response to suicidal ideation or self-harm, to provide for enforcement by the Attorney General, to provide for exceptions, to provide for definitions, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws for other purposes. [6:46:39] Mr. President, that completes the order. [6:46:47] Is there objection? Hearing none. Secretary, finish the caption. [6:46:54] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Children and Families recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Kirkpatrick of the 32nd District, Chairman. Recognize, recognize the majority leader. Read, we have pieces to read. I didn't pay his attention. I didn't finish reading. Just leave it there. Good. Just leave it there. Oh, you didn't know. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Children and Families offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 540, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 5 of Title 39 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to online internet safety so as to require certain disclosures related to controversial AI services and for other purposes. [6:47:30] Mr. President, amendment number one. Mr. President, amendment number one, yeah, number one by Senator Setzler of the 37th and others- My friends ... and to amend Senate Bill 540 by inserting after line 83 the following, "Nothing in this code section shall be con- constructed to limit or preclude any other available remedy at law or equity." [6:47:48] President amendment, Mr. Senator Hatchett. Mr. President, Senator, Senator Hatchett of the 50th and others offers the following amendment. Amendment 2, amend the Senate Committee on Children and Family Substitute to Senate Bill 540 by striking lines 30 and 31, by redesignating subparagraph C, D, E, and F on lines 32 through 36 as B, C, D, and E respectively, by inserting between lines 70 and 71 the following. Before allowing access to a con- con- conversational AI services that sh- could provide synthetic content containing sexually explicit content, an operator shall use a responsible age verification method and for other purposes. [6:48:21] Mr. President, that completes the order. [6:48:26] All right. Thank you, Mr. President. Senate Bill 540, uh, presenting to y'all today. Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming our world. It's already helping doctors detect diseases earlier, improving productivity across our workforce, and giving small business powerful tools that once only large corporations could afford. It's also becoming increasingly important to our national defense and economic competitiveness. AI has become very well, has may, may very well become the most powerful technology in the 21st century. [6:48:59] The United States must lead in this space, and we must ensure that American innovation continues to outpace our foreign adversaries. President Trump has made it clear during his administration and again in his recent executive action on AI, the president has emphasized winning the AI, AI global race is critical, critical to our economic strength and our national security. At the same time, his executive order also recognizes that states have an important role to play in establishing, uh, establishing responsible guardrails, particularly when it comes to promoting children online. [6:49:33] Senate Bill 540 aligns with that agenda. It allows innovation to continue, but it ensures that we are addressing the real risks that emerging AI technologies can pose to our, can pose to our children. Across the country, we are seeing the rapid rise of conversational AI systems designated to simulate human interactions. For many adults, these tools can be useful and productive, but for children and teenagers, they present real and growing risks. Recent studies show that nearly two-thirds of teenagers are already using an AI chatbot, and more than half of them are turning to these systems for emotional support. [6:50:09] These, these systems are not neutral. They are machines specifically designed to maximize engagement. They are programmed to validate and reinforce user behavior in order to keep people interacting with them for a longer period of time. For developing minds, that dynamic can be especially dangerous. We have already seen troubling examples. AI chatbots have simulated romantic relationships with minors and in some cases have encouraged harmful behavior or failed to respond appropriately when young users express thoughts of harm, self-harm, or suicide. [6:50:44] That is completely unacceptable. Senate Bill 540 establishes common sense guardrails to ensure that these technologies develop in a way that protects Georgia's children. The bill prohibits sex- sexually explicit interactions between AI systems and minors and bans AI from simulating romantic relationships with children and requires operators to maintain procedures that direct users expressing suicidal thoughts to proper crisis resources. Second, it requires conversational AI programs to clear dis- clearly disclose when a user is interacting with AI rather than a real human being. [6:51:23] The bill also requires AI platforms to provide parental controls tools that parents and not algorithms have the final say over their children that interact with these systems. These are simple, reasonable protections. They do not stop innovation, and they do not hinder responsible companies that are building the next generation of technology. Instead, they ensure that AI becomes the mo- the more integrated, more integrated into our daily lives. Our children are not exposed to preventable harm. Georgia should absolutely remain an innovation leader in this space. [6:51:57] AI will continue to shape our economy, strengthen our national security, and create opportunities for the next generation. But leadership and technology must also mean leadership and responsibility. Senate Bill 540 supports r- innovation while protecting Georgia's families and ensuring that our children are not exploited in a world that is changing faster than any of us could have imagined. I respectfully c- ask for your consideration favorably of this bill. You will have on your desk, uh, one amendment from the senator from the 37th that is friendly, and also an amendment from the senator from the 50th, which is also friendly, and I'll let them present their own amen- amendments. [6:52:35] With that, Mr. President, I'll take one or two questions. You do not have any questions. Thank you, Mr. President. Please vote green. Recognize the senator from the 40th. [6:53:00] Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in support of Senate Bill 540. Uh, it's, it's an important first step in taking action to keep our kids safe online. Um, this has been an important topic for me. Um, I co-chaired a study committee on this during the interim with the senator from the 48th, and I wrote the resolution for the study committee because i- it was... My kids were in about eighth grade when pretty much all kids started having, um, smartphones, and I could see immediately that this phone was changing them. [6:53:46] Uh, [6:53:47] And but there was no kind of collective support for any limitations at that time. And so my voice of concern was kind of the lost voice in the wilderness at that point. These were shiny new objects. The teachers were excited about them. They wanted to use the phones, teach the kids how to do research. Um, I, we even had a teacher who required my child to open an Instagram account in order to complete an assignment. [6:54:18] So it really was a different day. I had concerns, but no one was hearing those concerns. So I have been waiting literally ten years for this moment. I have been waiting for millennials to have children so that you would be worried with, about your children along with me and how I was worried about my children. I saw kids getting harmed. Um, early exposure just for kids of my friends, early exposure to pornography that was experienced as traumatic to the children, content that developed eating disorders. [6:54:53] I saw it happening all around me, but it's taken like ten years to collect enough data to really know as much as we can that these phones were causing anxiety and depression in our young pers-- or in our young people. And then about two years ago, an author wrote a book, Jonathan Haidt wrote the book, The Anxious Generation. I'm sure some of you have read it. When I read it, it was like, "Yes, finally, somebody really gets it, and someone has expressed that." And that book has lit a fire in our country, and there has been so much activism since then. [6:55:35] In fact, members of The Anxious Generation team were very helpful in providing testimony to our study committee. Just this week, the team of The Anxious Generation released something called a Childhood Index. It's a first of its kind ranking of all fifty states on how well tech laws and policies in each state support healthy, flourishing childhoods on and off line. [6:56:07] And there are two states that got the top ranking, uh, Texas-- no, uh, New York and Utah. Um, but there were six states that got the Rising Star status, which was the second ranking, and I am proud to say that Georgia was among them. And I'm gonna read to you why Georgia was ranked one of the Rising Stars, because I think you will be proud. Um, one, one in the green category was that Georgia has a reasonable childhood independence law that helps protect families from unreasonable charges of neglect. [6:56:45] We got a green status for that. We also got a green status for mandating bell-to-bell phone-free schools for K through eight. Y'all voted on that last year, and I'm hoping that this year you'll have the opport-o-opportunity to extend it to high school. Then in terms of the yellow category, we got points for a bill that we all voted on, Senate Bill three fifty-one, a couple years ago, which requires parental consent for minors under sixteen to create social media accounts. [6:57:15] This has been challenged in the courts, and it's in the courts right now, but we did pass that, that law. And then also in the yellow category is the work of our study committee that we did during the interim in that it created a comprehensive blueprint for where we go from now in passing legislation to protect our kids. There's a lot more we can do, but Senate Bill five forty i-with its amendments is a very good first step. Things have gotten even worse online for kids since my kids were young because of AI and these companion chatbots that are being rolled out without any care and concern about, about risks. [6:58:00] We heard torturous testimony in our study committee from families whose kids started interacting with chatbots. One kid started interacting with a chatbot because he was using it to do his homework. And this chatbot, it, it, it, it, like, acted like it was in love with this kid. And, and the kid reciprocated and fell in love with this chatbot, and the chatbot ultimately talked the child into killing himself. [6:58:31] And that mother testified to our committee. Y'all, these chatbots are so incredibly dangerous for our kids. Seventy-five percent of our kids have used them, but when you mention them to parents, a lot of parents don't even know what they are. So that's why action that we're taking on Senate Bill five forty is so important. It is just a first step, though. There's more work for us to do. Particularly, we need to do more to help our parents keep their kids safe online. [6:59:03] Parental controls are out there, but they're, they're incredibly difficult and time-consuming to use. And we need to deal with s-- uh, the addictive nature of social media, which forty of you signed my bill that, uh, regulates manipulative, addictive design in social media and gaming. Um, so we need to come back next year and deal with this more fully. But Senate Bill five forty is, um, a really good first step, and I urge your support. Thank you. [6:59:39] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? [6:59:45] We have a late arriving amendment. Okay. [6:59:50] Stand by. [6:59:55] Secretary, just read the amendment whenever you have it ready. [7:01:58] Senator Jackson of the 41st offers amendment 2A to amend amendment two to Senate Bill 540 by striking on line 16 and 17 as G, H, I, J, and K respectively, and replacing it with and redesignating accordingly. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:02:18] Recognize the senator from the 41st. Speak to the amendment. [7:02:30] You waive? Okay. It's a technical correction. All right, so we're gonna take them up in reverse order here. [7:03:03] We'll start with amendment number 2A, authored by the senator from the 41st. Is there objection to 2A? Hearing none, 2A is amended. Now on to amendment number two. Is there objection to amendment number two? No objection. And now amendment one authored by the senator from the 37th. Is there objection to amendment one? Without objection, amendment one is, uh, is added. [7:03:33] Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute as amended. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute as amended? Hearing none, the committee substitute as amended is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill will vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary will unlock the machine. [7:05:26] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 54, the nays are zero. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed by substitute. [7:05:48] Recognize the senator from the 25th. Mr. President, I move that, uh, we pull Senate Bill 454 from the table, please. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 454 by Senator Williams of the 25th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter Two of Title 25 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to regulation of fire and other hazard, hazards to persons and property generally, so as to authorize the use of temporary door locking devices in public buildings during certain emergency situations, to provide for guidelines for use of such devices, to provide for rules and regulations, to provide for definitions, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [7:06:27] Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:06:32] Is there objection? Hearing none, secretary finish the caption. Mr. President, the, the Senate Committee on Public Safety recommends that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Albers of the 56th District, Chairman. Mr. President, that completes the order. Recognize the senator from the 25th. Speak to the bill. [7:07:02] Thank you, Mr. President. You know, we all have one precious thing in our life, and that's our children. And when we take our children or send our children to school in the morning, we hope and pray they come home safe that day. And this is what Senate Bill 454 is about. It's a measure focused on strengthening school safety while maintaining the highest standards of fire safety. [7:07:36] This legislation allows for the limited use of temporary door locking devices in public buildings, particularly schools, only during emergency active threat situations or drills such as lockdowns or shelter in place events. The Department of Insurance is supportive. It does not legislate one particular product over another one. Staff and first responders will be trained on the device before it is used. [7:08:10] You cannot trap anyone in a room with any version of these devices. They are only used to keep bad actors out. It is not different from locking a door with the door handle from the inside. All you do is twist the handle and exit. A barricade device, it just slips out and you exit. If there's no questions, uh, I'll be glad to yield the whale and I'll ask for your favorable consideration. [7:08:42] For the children, Mr. President, thank you. No questions, Senator. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none and the previous question is ordered. Is there objection to agreeing the report of the committee, which is favorable to pass the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none and the main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill. All those in favor of the bill will vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary will unlock the machine. [7:09:42] On the pass of the bill, the yeas are 51 and the nays are zero. [7:10:15] This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. [7:10:23] Chair recognizes the senator from the 30th for a motion. [7:10:31] Mr. President, I ask for unanimous consent to remove Senate Bill 594 from the table. [7:10:36] Secretary will read the caption. [7:10:41] Senate Bill 594 by Senators Bearden of the 30th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Part IV of Article VI of Chapter 9 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to internet and email fraud so as to establish the criminal offense of digital identity fraud, to provide for criminal penalties, to require social media platforms to evaluate claims of digital identifi- identity fraud, to provide for civil penalties, to provide for enforcement, to provide for a cause of action and damages, to provide for definitions, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date and applicability, to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:11:15] Senator from the 30th District has moved that Senate Bill 594 be removed from the table. Is there objection? Hearing none, Senate Bill 594 is removed from the table. Secretary will finish the caption. [7:11:29] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Judiciary recommends that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Strickland of the 42nd District, Chairman. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:11:38] I recognize the senator from the 30th to speak to Senate Bill 594. [7:11:56] Thank you, Mr. President. I rise today to present Senate Bill 594. But for, before I present the bill, I really need to lay the foundation out to why this bill is here. One of my constituents back home was going through a very complicated pregnancy where they did not think the baby would even make it to birth. So she did like many other families did in crisis. She turned to social media to make sure her friends and loved ones could keep updated with the progress without having to answer the same questions time and time again. [7:12:29] Um, pretty much by a miracle, her baby, Baby Landry, was born, and for the next four months, Baby Landry fought complications, but exactly four months to the day she was born, she passed away. Just days later, the mother discovered a fraudulent social media post using her personal photos, videos of the family and Landry. The post claimed Baby Landry was still alive and desperately needed money to be saved. For weeks, she contacted the platform and requested the fraudulent content to be removed. [7:13:04] The platform responded that the post did not violate the terms of service, and during the portion that she had to fill out, it even requested that she provides a death certificate of her child to prove that the baby was, has passed. She went through that process. The fraudulent posts remain active. She th- she then filed a police report with her local sheriff's office. Law enforcement opened an active investigation but lacked the authority or the mechanism to force the platform to remove the content. [7:13:38] This is where I publicly wanna say thank you to someone that don't hear thank you very often, and that's our media, specifically S- Savannah Levins of 11Alive. When she got involved, she was able to get the posts taken down. As copycat posts showed up, she was able to get those taken down. While I greatly appreciate the work of Ms. Levins, I have a major issue when a victim can't get a fraudulent post removed, law enforcement can't get a fraudulent post taken down, but it takes the media to have a fraudulent post removed. [7:14:16] So what does Senate Bill 594 do? It creates a new felony offense of digital identity fraud. A person commits the offense of digital identity fraud when using someone's personal images, videos, or identifying information online to deceive others for financial gain or other unlawful purposes. It also establishes a clear process for victims to remove the fraudulent content. [7:14:47] The victim can submit a process or a request to the social media platform. The platform must review and make a determination with the se- within 72 hours, excluding weekends, if the content is fraudulent. But then if the platform, upon receiving an active police incident report from Georgia law enforcement confirming fraudulent activity, the social media platform must restrict public access to the content or activity within 48 hours, again, excluding the weekends. [7:15:22] Violations carry a $50,000 civil fine per incident. The prosecuting attorney or attorney general is authorized to enforce these civil penalties. And finally, a social media platform's violation of these requirements create a private right of action allowing the victim to pursue civil remedies directly. [7:15:45] Folks, it's time to give victims a real voice, a real recourse, and platforms must be held to a basic standard of responsibility when criminals exploit our citizens and especially our children on their sites. Senate Bill 94 protects our citizens, hopefully re- hopefully deters this cruel form of fraud and ensures platforms act swiftly. I ask respectfully for your favorable c- consideration on Senate Bill 594, and let's do the right thing for our families. [7:16:16] And Mr. President, I yield the well if there's no questions. [7:16:21] No questions, Senator. [7:16:23] Thank you very much. [7:16:24] Is there any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previ- previous question being ordered? [7:16:48] Is there objection in agreeing the report of the committee which is favorable to pass to the bill? The chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none and the main question is ordered. Questions on the pass to the bill? All those in favor will vote yay. Opposed, nay. The secretary will unlock the machine. [7:18:05] On the pass to the bill, the yays are 50, the nays are one. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed. [7:18:15] Chair recognizes the senator from the 45th for a motion. [7:18:21] I request that Senate Bill 498 be lifted from the table. [7:18:27] Secretary, read the caption. [7:18:31] Senate Bill 498 by Senators Dixon of the 45th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 31B of Chapter 2 of Title 20 of the OCGA relating to charter school, uh, charter school capital finance so as to establish the Georgia Charter Schools Facilities Authority for the purpose of enabling charter schools to obtain revolving loan funds and other public financing assistance for purposes of constructing, renovating, and rehabilitating educational facilities for much schools. To amend Article 2 of Chapter 17 of Title 50 of the OCGA, the Georgia State Financing and Investment Commission Act, so as to provide for the in- issuance of general obligation bonds by the Georgia State Financing and Investment Commission to provide for educational facilities for charter schools, to provide re- for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [7:19:11] Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:19:14] Senator from the 45th has moved Senate Bill 498 be removed from the table. Is there objection? Hearing none, Senate Bill 498 is removed from the table. The secretary will read the re- remaining caption. [7:19:28] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Finance recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Hufstetler of the 52nd District, Chairman. [7:19:35] Mr. President. [7:19:36] Mr. President- [7:19:36] Committee on Finance. [7:19:36] The Senate Committee on Finance offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 498, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 31B of Chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to charter school capital finance so as to establish the charter, in charter, Charter School Facilities Authority for the purpose of enabling charter schools to obtain revolving loan funds and other public financing op- assistance for purposes of constructing, renovating, and rehabilitating educational facilities for such school, and for other purposes. [7:20:02] Mr. President, fiscal note is attached. [7:20:03] Mr. President, a fiscal note is, is, is attached. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:20:07] I recognize the senator from the 45th to speak to Senate Bill 498. [7:20:22] Thank you, Mr. President. Senate colleagues, I bring Senate Bill 498 before you today. Uh, it addresses a significant challenge faced by Georgia's charter schools, uh, when financing their facilities. Uh, it creates the Georgia Charter School Facilities Authority, and it establishes its ability to issue revolving loans and administer other funds to support charter schools with capital projects. It caps the loan amounts at 20% of the total project, and it limits the term of the loan to the length of the charter school's charter. [7:20:57] This bill provides charter schools with increased access to affordable capital and ensures more dollars are spent on kids rather than buildings. Uh, Mr. President, I'd be happy to answer any questions or I'll yield the well. [7:21:09] No questions, Senator. [7:21:11] Thank you. [7:21:12] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none and the previous question is ordered. Questions on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing the report of the committee which is favorable to the pass to the bill? The chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? The chair hears none and the main question is ordered. Questions on the pass to the bill by substitute? All those in favor of the bill vote yay. [7:21:43] Opposed, nay. The secretary will unlock the machine. [7:21:51] Senator from the 13th, what purpose do you rise? [7:21:57] Uh-huh. Senator from the 13th, your light's on. [7:22:41] He waves. [7:22:46] On the pass of the bill, the yeas are 49, the nays are three. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [7:22:57] Chair recognizes the senator from the 29th for a motion. [7:23:04] Mr. President, I ask for unanimous consent to take Senate Bill 501 off the table. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 501 by Senators Robertson of the 29th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Titles 8 and 25 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to buildings and housing and fire protection and safety respectively so as to improve government efficiency by updating provisions to the Office of the Sec- Safety Fire Commissioner to provide for an effective date, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:23:35] Senator from the 29th has moved that Senate Bill 501 be removed from the table. Is there objection? Without objection, Senate Bill 501 is removed from the table. Secretary will read the caption to Senate Bill 501. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Albers of the 56th District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 501, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Titles 8 and 25 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to buildings and housing and fire protection and safety respectively so as to improve government efficiency by updating provisions of the Office of the Safety of Fire Commissioner to provide for procedures for rules, promulgation, hearings, and appeals, to provide for the appointment of a deputy commissioner of safety fire, to provide for such positions, duties, and powers, to, to provide for the payment of expenses of certain employees, and for other purposes. [7:24:24] Mr. President, that completes the order. I recognize the senator from the 29th to speak to Senate Bill 501. [7:24:42] Thank you, Mr. President. Colleagues, this is a, uh, legislation brought to us by our, uh, insurance commissioner, who is, um, as we know, also, um, over our fire safety for the State of Georgia. What this legislation does is it, um, establishes a consistent process for hearing across the agency to conform with modern legal processes. Those wishing to appeal a decision of the office must first request a hearing from the commissioner, and if the decision is upheld, they can petition for review in the Superior Court of Fulton County. [7:25:13] It establishes an appeal mechanism for those aggrieved or adversely affected by a final ruling of a local governing authority on a building permit. Appeals will go before a board made up of local authorities, licensed contractors, and members of OCISF to determine if the local authority's final ruling will be upheld, modified, or reversed. It provides oversight for over-deputized personnel to ensure deputized local fire marshals and state inspectors are in compliance with administrative and operational procedures. It authorizes the commissioner to issue an immediate evacuation order from a building or structure that presents an imminent life safety hazard. [7:25:51] It enhances fire fatality investigation and reporting by requiring coroners and medical examiners to report all fire fatalities to the agency and prevents them from moving fire-related decedents until authorized by personnel with the state fire marshal. It amends punishments for violating Title 25, excuse me, and modernizes fees and fines for not having working smoke detectors in dwellings and increases re-inspection fees for manufactured housing certificates. [7:26:21] This helps cut down on excessive re-inspections and using OCI staff as quality control. I would ask that, um, for, uh, a positive vote on this as it makes our state safer by providing the tools needed for our local fire safety division of the Office of Insurance Commissioner and Safety Fire. And with that, I will yield unless there are any questions. No questions, Senator. Does any other swe- senator wish to speak for or against the measure? [7:26:52] The chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question be in order? The chair hears none and the previous question is ordered. The question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing the report of the committee which is favorable to pass the bill? The chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question be in order? The chair hears none and the main question is ordered. Question on the pass of the bill by substitute. All those in favor vote yay. Opposed, nay. The secretary will unlock the machine. [7:28:21] On the pass of the bill, the yeas are 51 and the nays are zero. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. Chair recognizes the senator from the 54th for a motion. Yes, Mr. President, I ask for unanimous s- consent to remove Senate Bill 485 from the table. Secretary will read the caption of Senate Bill 485. Senate Bill 485 by Senators Payne of the 54th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 10A of Title 43 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to examination regarding professional counselors, social workers, and marriage and family therapists so as to authorize applicants for a license in social work enrolled in a master's degree program to take the Master of Social Work Licensing Examination in their final semester of the program, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [7:29:06] Mr. President, that completes the order. Are you running again? It's up there. It's hot. Hey, Brian. Senator from the 54th has moved that Senate Bill 485 be removed from the table. Is there objection? Hearing none, Senate Bill 485 is removed from the table. The secretary will re- read the remaining caption. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Regulated Industries and Utilities recommend that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Cowsert of the 46th District, Chairman. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:29:38] I recognize the senator from the 54th to speak to Senate Bill 485. [7:29:48] Thank you, Mr. President. Because we got a lot of good Senate bills and we need to get moved, I'm gonna be quick. This better serves, uh, Georgia's need for mental health professionals. What this bill simply does is allow students from their final semester of school, a master of social work program, to sit for their licensure exam before they graduate in their final semester of school. Mr. President, any questions? I will yield the will. No questions, Senator. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. [7:30:19] Is there objection agreeing the report of the committee which favor the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Questions on the passage of the bill. All those in favor of the bill vote yay. Opposed, nay. The secretary will now unlock the machine. [7:31:34] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 48 and the nays are zero. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed. [7:31:44] Chair recognizes the senator from the 25th. Thank you, Mr. President. I ask for unanimous consent to pull Senate Bill 586 from the table. [7:31:57] Senator from the 25th has moved that Senate Bill 586 be removed from the table. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 586 by Senator Williams of the 25th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Code Section 16-11-107 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to interfering with, harming of, or aggravated harming of a public safety animal or search and rescue animal so as to provide for commendations of public safety animals and search and rescue animals that are injured or killed in the line of duty, to provide for related matters, to provide a short title to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [7:32:28] Mr. President, that completes the order. Is there objection to the motion? Hearing none, Senate Bill 586 is removed from the table. Secretary will read the remaining caption. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety recommends that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Albers of the 56th District, Chairman. Mr. President, that completes the order. I recognize the senator from the 25th to speak to the bill. [7:32:59] Thank you, Mr. President. This is something that, um, I think is very much needed. This bill is in honor of our public safety animal or search and rescue animals so as to provide for commendations of public safety animals and search and rescue animals that are injured or killed in the line of duty. And the Commissioner of Public Safety shall be authorized to issue commendations for heroism to any public safety animal or search and rescue animal that is injured or killed in the line of duty. [7:33:37] And that's all this bill is, recognizing our four-legged heroes. All right. Questions? I ask for your favorable consideration. I'll yield the will. Thank you. No questions. No questions. Thank you, Senator. Would any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. [7:34:08] Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Questions on the passage of the bill. All those in favor of the bill will vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [7:35:32] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 51, the nays are zero. This bill, having received requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed. [7:35:44] Recognize the senator from the 51st. Thank- From Lumpkin County, Georgia. The Gold City of Georgia. The Gold Capital of Georgia. Mr. President, I ask for unanimous consent to remove Senate Bill 465 from the table. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 465 by Senator Gooch of the 51st and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article II of Chapter 7 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to imposition rate, computation, exemptions, and credits relative to income taxes so as to disqualify business enterprises that hire illegal aliens for large-scale projects from claiming certain tax credits associated with such projects to provide for related matters to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [7:36:22] Mr. President, that completes the order. Is there objection? Hearing none, secretary, finish the caption. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Finance recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Hufstetler of the 52nd District, Chairman. Mr. President, the K- Senate Committee on Finance offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 465, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article II of Chapter 7 of Title 48 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to imposition rate, computation, exemptions, and credits relative to income taxes so as to disqualify business enterprises that hire illegal aliens for large-scale projects from claiming certain tax credits associated with such products and for other sh- purposes. [7:36:55] Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:36:57] Recognize senator from fifty-first. I was in your hometown last night. They like their senator up there. I'm telling you. They like their senator up there. And they, and they like you, Mr. President. They like you. Senators, my bill is a pretty simple bill, SB four sixty-five. We all know how important economic development is in our state. Our Department of Economic Development uses incentives to lure big projects into our state. We have retail projects and wholesale projects, manufacturing projects. [7:37:29] So this bill deals with the area where large-scale job creators are re-recruited into our state. Typically a p- an applicant that would apply for these tax credits would have to employ at least eighteen hundred full-time jobs. They would also have to provide health insurance to those employees, and they would have to spend at least six hundred million dollars on their investment to create the, uh, the product and create the jobs for the state before they could qualify for these tax credits. [7:38:01] Typically, the tax credit is up to five thousand two hundred and fifty dollars per job created, and that would carry forward for five years. The only change we made to this bill, actually there were two additions in, in committee. The f- finance committee passed this bill unanimously, but this bill would require that all applicants required to hire legal citizens and legal residents of our state and our country. So this bill just adds that the, the applicants or the employees must be legally authorized to work here in the United States of America. [7:38:37] We also put a five-year sunset in this bill, and we eliminated the rollover provisions that were already in current law to where the, the em- employer could not use the unused portion of the tax credit as a forward, pay-forward provision and roll those credits forward. Mr. President, I'm happy to take a couple questions or I'll yield the will. I do have one question, Senator. Recognize senator from the thirtieth. Does gentleman yield? I'll do that for my seatmate. Is it not true that the city of Villa Rica was the original gold rush in the state of Georgia? [7:39:09] Sir, I think your information may be correct, but the speaker, the, the senator may know of which he speaks, but not from the perspective of the senator from the fifty-first. All right. Thank you for that good question. [7:39:24] You have no other questions, Senator? Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, please vote favorably for Senate Bill four sixty-five. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. Previous question is ordered. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. [7:39:54] Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [7:40:10] Order. We have the wives of the senator from the forty-fifth, the senator from the forty-ninth, and the senator from the forty-second all back there in the back. Let's give those ladies a big round of applause- [7:40:27] ... while you vote. Why they put up with the men they're married to I'll never know, but they're, they're good ladies. They're good women. Tha- glad to have you ladies. [7:41:30] On the passage of the bill, the yays are forty-nine, the nays are zero. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [7:41:48] Recognize the senator from the forty-second. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senate Bill five forty-seven be removed from the table. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill five four seven by Senator Strickland of the forty-second and others. A bill to be entitled an act to amend Code Section sixteen dash six dash thirteen of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to penalties for violating Code Section sixteen dash six dash nine through sixteen dash six dash twelve so as to modify the penalties for the offenses of pimping and pandering, to provide that all such offenses shall be a pu- punishable as felony offenses, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date and for applicability, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [7:42:21] Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:42:27] Is there objection? Secretary, finish the caption. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Judiciary recommends that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Strickland of the forty-second District. Chairman. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:42:43] Recognize the senator from the forty-second. Speak to the bill. [7:42:53] Thank you, Mr. President. Members of the Senate, I bring to you Senate Bill five forty-seven. This bill makes the offenses of pimping and pandering go, go from a high and aggravated misdemeanor to a felony on the first offense [7:43:07] With human trafficking in our state, we've come a long ways from recognizing the crime itself to giving tools to our attorney general and prosecutors to take down the industry, to making certain that folks can't turn a blind eye to the industry happening right in front of them making money off of it, to also standing up and supporting the victims. Today, we go back and focus on the demand itself. Pimping and pandering is directly supporting the criminal enterprise of sex trafficking in our state. This is not a petty victimless offense, and it's time we start treating it like the crime that it really is. [7:43:41] And if I can, Mr. President, I wanna stop for a second and recognize some folks in the gallery. Ms. Tricia Boschert, who has a nonprofit, She's My Sister and Freedom and Restoration Network, dedicated to empowering communities to prevent human trafficking, along with students from the Forest School down in Fayetteville. This bill was their idea. They came to me and said, "Y'all have come so far on human trafficking, but you've left some things out," and this bill was their idea, and today I bring this bill on their behalf to y'all. [7:44:12] And I'll be happy to take any questions. You have no questions, Senator. I ask for your support of Senate Bill 547. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? [7:44:26] Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objections to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Questions on the passage of the bill? All those in favor vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [7:45:54] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 48, the nays are zero. This bill having received requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. [7:46:16] Recognize the senator from the 54th. Yes, Mr. President, I ask for unanimous consent to remove Senate Bill 556 from the table. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 556 by Senators Payne, Paynes of the 54th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Code Section 20-2-157 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to uniform reporting system for certain purposes, dual credit courses, and academic eligibility requirements to receive HOPE Scholarship so as to provide for the inclusion of advanced placement and International Baccalaureate fine arts courses in the calculation of grade point averages for determining student eligibility for the HOPE Scholarships and other scholarships, to provide for applicability, to provide for a definition, to provide related matters, to provide effective date, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [7:46:54] Mr. President, I request the order. [7:47:04] Is there objection? Hearing none, secretary, finish the caption. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Higher Education recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Burns of the 23rd District. Chairman. Read the sub. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Higher Education offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 556, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Code Section 20-2-157 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to uniform reporting system for certain purposes, dual credit courses, and academic eligibility requirements to receive HOPE Scholarship so as to provide for the inclusion of advanced placement, Cambridge, and International Baccalaureate fine arts courses in the calculation of grade point averages for determining student eligibility for the HOPE Scholarships and other scholarships, and for other purposes. [7:47:42] Mr. President, I complete the order. Recognize the senator from the 54th. Thank you, Mr. President. Friends, this bill is a Department of Education bill brought to me to, and it's, it, it adds to the addition of fine arts courses to HOPE rigor course list. This bill will add advanced placement, International Baccalaureate, and upper level Cambridge fine art courses to the Georgia HOPE Scholarship rigor course list in OCGA 20-2-157. [7:48:19] R- currently we have English, mathematics, science, social studies, and foreign language. This just adds fine arts to that list so that it'll apply to not only AP and Ba- and International Baccalaureate, but also to Cambridge fine arts. That's all this bill does. Mr. President, any quest- questions I'll be glad to answer them. If not, I yield the will. You have no questions, Senator. I ask for your favorable consent. [7:48:44] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none, and the previous question is ordered. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. [7:49:14] All those in favor of the bill, vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary will unlock the machine. [7:49:22] Did the House ever get back from lunch? [7:49:31] Are they taking a little milkshake break this afternoon, huh? [7:49:39] I'm looking at them over there. [7:50:16] On the passage of the bill, the yeas are 50 and the nays are zero. This bill, having received requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [7:50:34] Recognize the chairman from Statesboro, Georgia, senator from the fourth. [7:50:42] Mr. President, I request unani- unanimous consent to raise Senate Bill 515 from the table. [7:50:49] All right. Secretary, read the caption. [7:50:52] Senate Bill 515 by Senators Hickman of the fourth and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 9 of Article 6 of Chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to grants for educational programs under the Quality Basic Education Act so as to revise and streamline provisions relative to the Teacher Recruitment and Retention Tax Credit Program, to provide for definitions, to amend Code Section 48-7-29, point 23 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to tax credits for teachers in the Teacher Recruitment and Retention Program so as to provide for tax cred- uh, for amounts to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. [7:51:22] President, that completes the order. [7:51:26] Is there objection? H- hearing none, finish the caption. [7:51:30] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Finance recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Hufstetler of the 52nd District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Finance offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 515, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Part 9 of Article 6 of Chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to grants for educational programs under the Quality Basic Education Act so as to increase the maximum number of participating teachers in the Teacher Recruitment and Retention Tax Credit Program from 1,000 to 1,200 each year. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:51:58] Recognize senator from the fourth. [7:52:01] Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, sir. Um, again, this is another literacy bill, and it just passed out of the, um, Finance Committee, which you know is a strong vetting committee, 10 to one. Last year we passed out of this, um, out of Senate, Senate Resolution 237 where, where we asked Dr. Jody Barra to look, the Professional Standards Commission to determine why people do not wanna be teachers and why people are getting out of education. They did that, and as we've shared with many of y'all, an excellent report on that, and this bill included a recommendation to extend the, the teacher tax credit along with chronic absenteeism, which we've already passed, along with the big literacy bills and so forth. [7:52:42] As we well know, educators are the only workforce whose performance determines the quality and size of all future workforce, all future workforces. If we don't have degreed teachers in the classroom, our students will not be able to read. Georgia cannot deliver on its c- commitment to schools without a strong, stable educator, educator workforce. This bill actually extends House Bill 32, extends and also modifies House Bill 32, which expires December, uh, 31st of this year. [7:53:14] Um, our, our bill modifies that to a $2,500 tax credit per teacher for 1,200 teachers to a total of $3 million. The big, couple big things about this bill is this bill only applies to the bottom 25% of the schools in Georgia, but it also specifies specific classes, and those classes are math, special education, career technical and agriculture education, or reading or English or writing, la- or English language arts. [7:53:47] And the person must also hold a current dyslexia or reading endorsement approved by Professional Standards. This bill takes e- takes e- takes effect 1/1/27. It's a five-year bill. In no event shall the total amount of tax credits under this code section exceed $3 million any, any fiscal year. Our students will not be able to read if we do not have degreed, qualified teachers in the classroom. Help us fill that gap. Please bl- vote green on this bill. [7:54:18] And Mr. President, I yield and will. This is a great bill. Thank you for your support. [7:54:24] Senator's yielded. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Hearing none, is there objection to the prev- previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. Previous question is ordered. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objec- objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the reporter committee which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The reporter committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? [7:54:54] Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Question is on passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill, vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [7:56:16] On the passage of the bill, the yeas are 49, the nays are one. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [7:56:40] Recognize the senator from the 48th. [7:56:42] Good afternoon, Mr. President. Asking your s- consent to lift SB 570 from the table. [7:56:50] Secretary, read the caption. [7:56:52] Senate Bill 570 by Senator Steel of the 48th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 21 of Title 43 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to rights, duties, and liabilities of innkeepers so as to provide for a required human trafficking training program for inns and short-term rental properties, to provide for definitions, to provide for training policies and procedures, to provide for the retention of certain records, to provide for limitations, to provide for penalties, to provide an effective date, to provide a short title, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [7:57:22] Is there objection? Hearing none, just finish the caption. [7:57:26] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public S- Safety recommends that this bill do pass by committee substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Albers of the 56th District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 570, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 21 of Title 43 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to rights, duties, and liabilities of innkeepers so as to provide for a required human trafficking program and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. Recognize senator from the 48th. [7:58:04] Thank you, Mr. President. [7:58:08] If everyone in this chamber boarded a bus [7:58:13] 70 times, that's how many children are trafficked in this state every year. I want that to sink in just for a minute. Senate Bill 570 does not cure that. What it does do is it puts mandatory frontline worker training for hotels, motels, short-term rentals to mandate that the people that work on the front lines, particularly housekeeping, have the proper training from our very own CJCC, or if they work for a national brand that already has their own educational platform on this, within 60 days of hire, they must complete this training to know how to identify and report any sign of human trafficking. [7:59:06] This bill has been written in conjunction with all of our friends in the hotel industry, the CJCC, [7:59:16] and my only regret is that we can't make the penalties harsher than they are. Those are listed on page four at the back of the bill. But it's a good start. It reminds us that our Georgia hotline for domestic minor trafficking is 1-866-END-HTGA. That's listed in the bill. We're gonna have that posted everywhere to make sure that everybody knows that we're gonna do everything we can and that Georgia is serious about our efforts to end human trafficking. [7:59:55] Happy to take any questions. [7:59:59] Thank you. I yield the floor. [8:00:04] Sorry about that, Senator, but you had no questions. [8:00:11] Any other senator who wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objections to the previous question be an ordered? Chair hears none. Previous question is ordered. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of committee, which is favorable to the pa- passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Question is on the pass of the bill by substitute. All those in favor vote yay. [8:00:41] All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [8:01:50] On the pass, on the pass of the bill, the yays are 49 and the nays are zero. This bill having received requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed by substitute. [8:02:04] Senator from the 33rd, for what purpose do you rise? I ask for unanimous consent to excuse the senator from the 22nd for business inside the Capitol. Without objection, senator from the 22nd is excused. [8:02:21] Recognize the senator from the 42nd. You got a busy day today, Senator. Hopefully the last one, Mr. President. Ask unanimous consent that Senate Bill 569 be removed from the table. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 569 by Senator Strickland of the 42nd and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to motor vehicles and traffic so as to provide for the issuance of emergency vehicle light permits for towing services companies in certain instances, to revise the definition to provide related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:02:53] Is there objection? Hearing none, Secretary, finish the caption. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Public Safety recommends that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted, Senator Albers of the 56th District, Chairman. Mr. President, that completes the order. Recognize the chairman, the old country lawyer from McDonough, Georgia. Country lawyer. Mr. President, I wore my boots for you today. You haven't complimented them yet. I wore them just for you. Thought you might recognize them. Those, those are some of the ugliest boots I've ever seen in my entire life. [8:03:24] Just some country lawyer boots, Mr. President. Members of the Senate, I bring to you Senate Bill 569. This bill simply fills a hole in the law that we have where wrecker trucks are not able to get around traffic to get to accident scenes to clean up wrecks, and the bill allows for wrecker trucks that are part of the federal TRIP program. And this is a program where trucks are incentivized to clean up certain hotspots in our state, such as where I'm from, in Henry County, the interstate, and, uh, as fast as they possibly can. [8:03:54] Also wreckers that are under contracts with local governments. These are all law enforcement-initiated tows. Law enforcement calls wreckers out to clean up the interstate. This simply allows the colonel of state patrol, um, if the wrecker service completes the training that he or she implements, to get red light permits for their vehicles. And we all get very annoyed when you get stuck in traffic, and that's obviously a big issue. But bigger than that, a lot of the folks who die on our roads die in secondary accidents, and this bill will help make sure we clean up our wrecks faster. [8:04:26] Happy to answer any questions. You have no questions, Senator. I ask for your support. Thank you. And that was such a mean comment I made. You, you have very nice looking boots right there. Oh, well, thank you. Yeah, they're, they're, they're pretty nice. I couldn't pull them off. You can pull them off. Yeah. [8:04:40] And you know, your, your dad is a countryman in the family. You know that, don't you? He's, he's, he's real countryman. He's a good man too. Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. Previous question is ordered. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. [8:05:10] The main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill. All those in favor of the bill, vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [8:05:27] Recognize the senator from the 14th. What purpose do you rise? [8:05:29] Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President. [8:05:31] State your inquiry. [8:05:32] Mr. President, this bill's about towing. I'm trying to think of any other policy issues this might have been a good vehicle for. I don't know. Can you think of any, Mr. President? [8:05:40] She, she, she knows, senator. It could have been, it could have been a good thing for a lot of things, I guess. [8:05:51] Senator from the 42nd, for what purpose do you rise? [8:05:53] Parliamentary inquiry. [8:05:54] State your inquiry. [8:05:55] Isn't it true that senator from the 14th had brought an amendment, he could have put red lights on that and had it, had it go to the floor very quickly with this bill? [8:06:07] All right. They got a inside thing going there. Recognize the senator from the 20th. For what purpose do you rise? [8:06:18] Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry. [8:06:21] State your inquiry. [8:06:22] So this is a towing bill, is that correct? [8:06:25] That's what it feels like. [8:06:27] But the author of the bill was wearing boots, so I just don't know if it was towing or booting or what we're talking about. [8:06:33] Oh, wow. Day's getting long. Day's getting long. [8:06:44] How many folks, how many folks in this room are running statewide now? Can I get a show of hands? Let me get a show of hands. How many folks in this room are running statewide? [8:06:56] Rise, stand, and be counted. How many statewide folks we got? Rise, stand, and be counted. Here we go. [8:07:04] You're, you're running statewide. You're, you're running statewide. [8:07:10] Man. All right. [8:07:14] Get out of the state Senate. [8:07:18] All right. On the passage of the bill, the yays are 45, the nays are five. This bill having received the requisite constitutional majority is therefore passed. [8:07:33] All right. Recognize the senator from the 46th. [8:07:38] Thank you, Mr. President. I move that Senate Bill 604 be removed from the table. [8:07:43] Secretary, read the caption. [8:07:45] Senate Bill 604 by Senator Cowsert of the 46th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to crimes and offenses so as to provide the Attorney General concurrent jurisdiction with district attorneys to conduct criminal prosecutions of violent crimes, illegal immigration offenses, and fentanyl offenses, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date and applicability, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:08:08] Any objection? Without objection, secretary, finish the caption. [8:08:13] Mr. President, the Senate c- the Special Senate Committee on Investigations recommend that, recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Cowsert of the 46th District, chairman. Mr. President, the Special Committee on Investigations offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 604, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 1 of Chapter 18, Title 15 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions regarding prosecuting attorneys so as to give the Attorney General, in circum- circumstances, the option of being appointed in the place of a disqualified district attorney and for other purposes. [8:08:41] Mr. President, Senator Jackson offers the- [8:08:43] Mr. President, Senator Jackson of the 41st offers the following amendment. Amendment 1. Amend the substitute to Senate Bill 604 by inserting after that on line 23 the following, "Except in the event of the voluntary recusal of a district attorney." Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:08:57] Recognize the senator from the classic city. Beautiful Athens, Georgia. [8:09:17] Thank you, Mr. President. Senators, this is another bill that we came up with, the Special Investigative Committee. Our investigation showed that a number of the district attorneys feel like they have inadequate staff and resources to prosecute all the crime in their circuits. Many of them, uh, basically were crying out for help or assistance, additional funding so they could hire, uh, more prosecutors to try to reduce their backload. In fact, the, uh, the district attorney in Fulton County said they got about 2,000 cases that are backed up they're trying to work their way through. [8:09:50] This is an attempt to give them a resource to do that. It allows a district attorney to request the assistance of the Attorney General's office to prosecute certain types of crimes. The first are violent felonies that are listed as the seven deadly sins. Uh, those begin at line 40, uh, and go through line 48. The next is drug trafficking type offenses, and then prosecutions of illegal aliens, and finally, prosecutions under the Racketeering Influence and Corrupt Organizations law, the RICO law. [8:10:24] As we've learned, those type of prosecutions are very, uh, complicated, very time-consuming, uh, and they take a long time to try. So we wanted to give the, uh, different district attorneys around the state the option of asking for assistance from the Department of Law, which has about 150 attorneys on staff and might be able to help reduce this backlog on those serious crimes. Finally, we noticed a problem that came up, up, really, uh, also sprung out of the Fani Willis disqualification. [8:10:54] Current procedures are if a, a DA recuses themself or get removed from a case, it goes to the prosecuting attorney's council to go try to find another DA somewhere around the state that will assume the prosecution and if not, uh, the executive director of, of PAC can take over a prosecution and you noticed on two different cases, uh, in really the last year, they shopped all over the state, could not find another district attorney either willing or had the resources to step up and prosecute a case. [8:11:27] So this gives the district attorney the sort of right of first refusal in a recusal or disqualification case to step up if they have the resources, uh, and take over that prosecution and if not, it goes back to the existing process. Uh, very simple, a way to try to streamline processes and to give extra manpower and assistance to district attorney's office when they're prosecuting serious crimes. Glad to take any questions or, um, of course, I'm, I'll yield the will. I do anticipate the amendment is to, uh, effectively gut that second portion that allows the attorney general to have an opportunity to step in on recusals or disqualifications. [8:12:09] I would not agree to that. I think this addresses a problem and if you go with that amendment, you leave the same problem there. You have no questions, Senator. Thank you. I yield the will. [8:12:24] Senator from the 41st, would you like to speak to your amendment? [8:12:44] Thank you, Mr. President. I rise and request your support of this amendment, um, that I have for SB604. So what it does is it's very simple. I acknowledge that the attorney general's office can be very helpful to our DA's offices across the state when they are not able to take on a case. However, when a DA recuses themself, not due to some type of misconduct but because of conflict or for some other reason, when they self-recuse, I do not believe that the AG- AG's office needs to get the first bite of the apple. [8:13:28] We have PAC. We spend state dollars for the prosecuting attorney's council to do this very thing, to help find and to do the work of finding someone who can step in in the event that a DA cannot take a case. So what this amendment does, it's very simple. It says, "Listen, if a DA recuses themself, then PAC will continue to function as it does today." PAC will be the one who helps try to find someone and it preserves the author's original language because it still allows a pathway if PAC doesn't find someone, the AG's office will still have an opportunity to take over, which right now doesn't exist. [8:14:09] So I, I wanna be clear, I support so much of this underlying bill and I am grateful for, to the, to the senator from the 46 for wanting to bring more resources to counties like mine. I'm grateful for that. However, I'm very clear that if someone simply recuses themself, there's been no misconduct, we do not need to send that straight to the AG's office. I believe that that actually would slow down and delay justice if they have to go to the AG's office for the first bite of the apple as opposed to using the prosecuting account, uh, prosecuting auth- author- the P- PAC, instead of using PAC. [8:14:43] Um, it w- PAC is very skilled. That's one of the things we pay PAC to do, is to find an aide of the DA to step in in the event of a recusal. So I'm making a very slice, a very s- precise cut in this bill. If a DA is disqualified for misconduct, the AG gets the first bite of the apple but if it is simply a recusal, then we continue to function as we have with PAC being the per- the group that facilitates the change. [8:15:15] I'll yield for questions. You do have a couple questions, Senator. Recognize the senator from the 19th. Thank you, Mr. President. Senator yield? Yes, I will for the, uh, mis- appropriations chairman. Thank you. I am sensitive to, to what you're saying. I'm, I'm concerned about something else. I wonder if you've thought about this. In situations where a district attorney may feel like they have, they need to recuse themself, uh, do you think that this might cause some type of forum shopping where they would wait till the end, make, to see if they're gonna be disqualified by the court, uh, who then say, "Hey, wait, I don't want the court to decide. [8:15:50] I'm gonna go ahead and recuse myself voluntarily so PAC can decide who my successor is instead of the attorney general"? No, I'm not concerned about that at all. DAs have been very clear that it's not uncommon for them to just need to do a swap, right? Clayton County needs someone and, and Dekalb County needs someone, so they simply swap cases. We don't need the AG's office involved in that. Um, I'm not concerned about shopping around and, and let's also be clear, PAC is a state agency. Uh, so if PAC is somehow in collu- cahoots with these DAs to shop around for the proper form, then we've got a bigger problem. [8:16:25] So no, I am not concerned about that. [8:16:29] Recognize the senator from the 46. Will the senator yield? I will. Yes, sir. So in the Ahmaud Arbery case down in Brunswick, that's what the senator from the 19th's talking about kinda happened there. The, the original prosecutor that had refused to prosecute recu- cused themselves, then it goes to another prosecutor that was found to have a conflict and then it went to another one who happened to have gone to college with me, Tom Durden, whose office didn't have the resources and that thing got delayed for six to 12 months and it ultimately ended up with the AG's office making the appointment Um, I don't wanna inadvertently delay prosecutions. [8:17:09] I'm inclined to go along with your amendment if it could have unanimous support here so we could address the problem. But I think this, is there a way to tweak this to make certain that it doesn't involve forum shopping or, or delays in prosecution? [8:17:26] Yeah, so I think, thank you for that question. I, I think the example that you've given is, is, is actually, I think it speaks to a, a different issue in that you had people who are very closely knit who are all attached to one another. But I think ultimately the example that you give, it shows that it, the process does work. It took a couple of times to get to the right place, but I don't believe that anyone was intentionally trying to find a DA who would be in cahoots or who would need to conflict out, right? So it took a couple of bites of the apple to get to the right place, and that ultimately was the AG's office. [8:18:02] Uh, but it's a process that works most of the time. Let's just have PAC make this hap- happen quickly to not delay justice. The, the example that you've given is very unique, very specific, and very rare. Um, what happens much more frequently are th- these kind of quick recusals of people just needing to, um, step out of a case. And so I don't wanna delay things by clogging up the AG's office with every single, uh, recusal when really I, I believe, sir, that the heart of this you're trying to get at is when a DA has misconduct and is disqualified, uh, you want someone to step in from the AG's office. [8:18:38] That makes sense. I support that. Um, so that's what I'm trying to get at, is trying to, to make sure we keep this as tight as possible. I believe that the current system that we have works, and that it works well. A- and every once in a while it will break down, but at the end of the day, it still worked. [8:18:53] Okay. Well, I, uh, will you agree to continue to work with me through the process if we can refine that language to avoid those type of problems that the senator from the 19th and I have, uh, observed as we go through the legislative process? [8:19:07] Uh, absolutely. Thank you, um, Mr. Chairman. [8:19:09] Yeah. [8:19:10] I am deeply committed to helping make this work. I want more resources available to our DAs across the state, and I think that that is what your bill is trying to get to. I just don't wanna kink up the works, so I'm happy to work with you on this. [8:19:22] Okay. Well, with that, uh, assurance, then I wi- I will not object to your amendment. [8:19:26] Thank you. I appreciate that. I will yield the well. [8:19:31] Wow. [8:19:34] Man, who says there's not bipartisan work? He goes, "Oh, yeah, yeah. Oh, wow." [8:19:53] I mean, that was just, senator from the 14th, I mean, that just felt really genuine, didn't it? I mean, that was like a nice moment. I mean, it was like a Hallmark moment right there, so it's really nice. All right, so let's take up amendment number one. And, uh, obviously we, as you all heard, there shouldn't be any objection on amendment one. Amendment one has been adopted. The question is, on the adoption of the committee substitute as amended, is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute as amended? [8:20:30] Hearing none, the committee substitute as amended is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. Therefore, the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill, vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary will unlock the machine. [8:20:55] Order. [8:20:55] Senator from the 2nd, for what purpose do you rise" [8:20:58] Parliamentary inquiry. [8:20:59] State your inquiry. [8:21:00] Mr. President, is it not true by the amazing hospitality of the senator from the 46th, uh, and my colleague at the well, I'm convinced that the well does work, and I'm voting yes on this legislation because of that. [8:21:12] I know. I think it, I think it moved, I think it moved us all, Senator. [8:21:20] I think it moved us all. Recognize the senator from the 43rd. [8:21:26] Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President. [8:21:27] For what purpose do you rise? [8:21:29] I rise to acknowledge that the chairman, or senator from the 46th, it took courage to execute justice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [8:21:42] The senator from the 46th is a good man. He's a good man. [8:21:54] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 47, the nays are 2. [8:22:01] Wow, these two right here. The, right here. Y'all, the dinner's coming up. Y'all can, y'all can prevent them from having any if you want some, but... On the passage of the bill, the yays are 47, the nays are 2. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. [8:22:28] Recognize the senator from the 51st. [8:22:31] Thank you, Mr. President. I ask for unanimous consent to remove Senate Bill 591 from the table. [8:22:38] Secretary, read the caption. [8:22:40] Senate Bill 591 by Senator Gooch and the 51st and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Article 2 of Chapter 11 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to offenses against public order so as to prohibit the disruption of a religious service, to provide for enhanced penalties, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:23:05] Is there objection? Hearing none, Secretary, finish the caption. [8:23:12] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Judiciary recommends that this bill do pass. Respectfully submitted is Senator Strickland of the 42nd District. Chairman, Mr. President, that completes the order. Recognize the senator from the 51st. Speak to the bill. [8:23:32] Thank you, Mr. President. Senators, Senate Bill 591's a pretty straightforward, simple bill. Today in Georgia law, it is forbidden, in fact, it's a misdemeanor, if you interrupt a memorial service or a funeral. This bill simply adds religious services to that same code section. It will remain to be a misdemeanor punishable for up to 12 months in jail and $1,000. We also added on the last line of the bill, if you interrupt or disrupt, interfere with a memorial service for a military service, it would be a aggravated misdemeanor, which would be up to 12 months in jail and up to $5,000 fine. [8:24:12] Mr. President, I'm happy to take questions or I'll yield the well. You do have a couple questions, Senator. Recognize the senator from the 2nd. [8:24:24] Senator, do you yield? I sure will for the man from Savannah. Now, Senator, I happen to be a Baptist preacher, ordained and licensed in the Baptist Church, and I have been to many meetings where the preacher has been put out of a Baptist church, but I've also been at meetings with those who did not sustain the votes, have shown up to voice their opposition to the preacher, pastor at that particular church. Senator, would this now criminalize those people that exercise that discourse in, uh, worship services when church business may come back and show back up into the worship service? [8:25:02] We don't think this has anything to do with the First Amendment rights, and I don't believe that you will be criminalized unless you're found to be guilty by a court. So you would have the right to defend a charge if there were one to be brought forward, just like you would on the, uh, current law today, and we haven't seen that to be a real issue here in Georgia, but there's been other situations around the country where it's becoming a problem. So it doesn't discriminate on any type of religion. It would be any religious services whatsoever. And likewise, uh, Senator, do you further yield? I sure will. [8:25:32] Senator, I've also, uh, served in the funeral service for many families, and those may involve families, uh, where we may do a service for an individual who was a member of the military, and there may be a disagreement from family members, and that disagreement may show up at the cemetery, usually where those services oc- occur, uh, especially when folks travel from Savannah, for example, to Beaufort National Cemetery, uh, or other cemeteries in the state of Georgia. So now, Senator, if a family member were to show up, um, and disrupt that service, would they now also face criminal penalty while experiencing grief? [8:26:07] That would too also be, uh, left up to the jurisdiction in that community, and it would be left up to the court system to determine whether that was a disrupted service or not. And I believe all military funerals should be held of utmost respect, and the dead should be put to bed and buried and not be disrupted by either family members or anyone from the outside as well. And Senator, as my final question, if you yield? Yes, sir, I will. And so should a district attorney in a particular judicial circuit not choose to move forward, uh, with charges, would it be, uh, your presumption or your understanding that that district attorney would be derelict of their duty, duties if they chose not to foresee those charges and chose to just unilaterally dismiss them? [8:26:49] I believe there's procedures in place in Georgia law that would address that. If a DA's not doing his or her job, then the PAC would be able to take action on that district attorney. Recognize the senator from the 14th. Does the senator yield for a series of questions? I will yield for a couple. Okay? Yes, sir. Senator, did Don Lemon text you to tell you he was gonna disrupt a church service in the state of Georgia? I'm not sure what you just said. Did Don Lemon send you a text message telling you he was planning to come to Georgia to disrupt a church service? You know, I've never met the man before- Okay ... [8:27:20] and I've never heard from him. So is the senator aware of any imminent harm or risk in the state of Georgia that would require this legislation? You know, it could happen any day, Senator- Okay ... and we would want to protect our religious, uh, freedoms in this state, and we would want to protect everyone who wants to worship their Lord and Savior. Senator, further yield? Yes, sir. Senator, is it true that yesterday you or your campaign team generated an AI photo of me carrying a box of cereal? Is that true? That is correct. Okay. You look, you look good in that photo. Second question, are you aware that one of your colleagues introduced legislation this session that in its original form would have made it a felony to do what you did with that AI image? [8:27:56] You know, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not sure if, if I was on that committee when that bill came through or not, but- Final question, Senator. Go ahead and let's hear it. Do you believe in the consistency in the application of criminal law or are you using criminal law bills to do political messaging? Sir, I'm trying to protect people's right to worship their, their religion and also to protect people who are dead and are being buried and having a memorial service, and I'm also trying to give dignity to those who have died who have defended our freedoms in our country. I'll congratulate the senator for staying on message. Yes, sir. Thank you. [8:28:26] Thank you for those good questions. All right, Senator. Mr. President, I'm happy to yield the well at this time. All right. Senator's yielded. [8:28:38] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Chair hears none. Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. The previous question is ordered. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Questions on the passage of the bill? All those in favor of vote yea. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [8:29:22] On the passage of the bill, the yeas are 39 and the nays are 13. This bill, having received requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed. Well, if I could have everybody's attention real quick, we have a very, very special guest with us today. A man who started his career right here in this body, the youngest senator elected to this esteemed body at the ripe old age of 25, about 14 [8:30:39] years ago now, I believe. And, uh, he now serves as our agriculture commissioner, and I like to think of him, well, number one, he's my friend, and he's been my friend for a long time, but number two, I think he's the best ag commissioner in the, in the country, of this great country here. [8:30:58] So y'all give a warm welcome to Commissioner Tyler Harper. [8:31:06] Well, good afternoon to my good friends. It is always good to be back, uh, in the State Senate, uh, the upper chamber of the General Assembly. Uh, but it's always good to be back. Mr. President, uh, Lieutenant Governor, thank you for your friendship and your esteemed service. Uh, and, uh, definitely know that, uh, we're gonna look forward to working with you moving forward. Uh, yes, sir. Definitely. But we're gonna miss a lot of folks. Uh, the senator from the 15th, uh, senator from the 42nd, uh, I know there are some others in here that are moving on and looking for higher office, but Dean, thank you for your service. [8:31:43] I appreciate your friendship. Uh- [8:31:45] Hey, hey, hey [8:31:45] ... and, um- Yep. [8:31:56] Hey, hey, hey. Hey. Hey, hey. [8:32:15] Yes, sir. I'll, I owe you, I owe you a ride. I do. Uh, I remember when I first come to this august body and I stood in that well on a stool. Uh- ... Dean, uh, you ma- you let me know right fa- right quick like, uh- [8:32:29] We still got it [8:32:30] ... that stool, this stool right here, that's right. You let me know right quick like that I didn't need that stool. Uh, and I appreciate you. I appreciate your friendship, and you're gonna be missed, uh- [8:32:40] Absolutely [8:32:40] ... but I appreciate what all y'all are doing. Thank you for the work that we do together in serving our state, especially our state's number one industry, agriculture. Uh, our, our work together helping our farmers, our farm families, and consumers across this state is important. Um, and I appreciate the work that y'all do every single day to help us do just that. Uh, I know y'all got a lot of work to do, so I'm not gonna be very long. I'm gonna be very brief, uh, and get out of your way and let y'all go back to work. But thank you for what you're doing for our great state. I look forward to our continued work together to ensure this state continues to be the best place to live, work, worship, and raise a family. [8:33:12] And our number one industry and our farm families can continue to be successful in doing that every single day as well. So thank y'all. God bless you. And as always, y'all keep plowing, and I'm gonna keep plowing with you. Good to be with y'all. Thank y'all very much. Have a great day. [8:33:37] Recognize senator, senator from the 16th. [8:33:42] Mr. President, I move that, uh, SB 324 be removed from the calendar. [8:33:47] Secretary read the caption. [8:33:50] Senate Bill 324 by Senator Harbin of the 16th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 25 of Title 33 of the OCGA relating to life insurance so as to provide for certain protections for life insurance policyholders and beneficiaries, to provide for an owner of a life insurance policy or annuity, annuity to be represented by a local agent when such policy or annuity is sold, to provide for such owner to be represented by a local agent when such agent does not have a contract with such insurer, to provide such owner with an annual notice report on such policy or annuity, to require an insurer to conduct a quarterly search of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners' policy locator, to provide for annual reporting, to provide for rules and regulations, to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date, to repeal conflicting laws, and for other purposes. [8:34:29] Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:34:34] Is there objection? Hearing none, finish the caption. [8:34:40] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Insurance and Labor recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Harbin of the 16th District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Insurance and Labor offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 324, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 25 of Title 33 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to life insurance so as to provide for certain protections for life insurance policyholders, to provide for a short title, to provide definitions, to provide for insurers to conduct policy locator searches, and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:35:07] Recognize the senator from the 16th. [8:35:21] Thank you, Mr. President. I appreciate that. This is SB 324 is a policyholder bill of rights. We don't think about life insurance is that life is long. People buy life insurance and they may not die for 20 or 30 years. And what this bill does is give some rights to a policyholder that really needs to be done. For first, let's talk about unclaimed pro- property. We currently have $3 billion in our unclaimed property fund, and right now, under the current law, it says that a life insurance company will check the Social Security death benefit list to see if somebody's is dead. [8:35:58] If they cannot find the b- beneficiary, they, the money goes to unclaimed property. Now, what this does, bill does in the first part, in the unclaimed property section, is it requires not only to check the Social Security death benefit list, but it also requires the checking of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners policy locator. That is a national. What this bill is requiring Georgia companies to do is to check the national register. That, that website that was created by the National Association has collected over $13 billion in policies that couldn't, they couldn't, that people couldn't find. [8:36:37] And, and so that we've included, that that's part of the process that when somebody dies, not only do you check the Social Security death benefit, you know they're dead, but also you make an attempt to look at the, uh, policy, uh, locator that the National Association has put in place. The second part of this bill of rights is this, if your company is sold to another company, that your agent continues to get the reports on it so that you bought it from him, he knows the policy. Currently, what happens is when a company sells to another company, they have no obligation to send you the report or your agent the report, and that's who you bought it from. [8:37:14] And so this would require that to continue. We also have asked in this bill that a form be created by the insurance department that when you need to know something, you can have it signed by your attorney, CPA, or a life insurance agent, and he can send that into a company, and the company has to honor that form created by the Department of Insurance. If we don't do it that way, then every company will want their own form. This takes one form from the Department of Insurance and makes it uniform so that that handles that way. [8:37:47] And then the other part is that our many policies are paid up. You find a lot of policy paid up, um, 20-year pay, whatever. Well, they quit sending an annual statement. This requires an annual statement to be sent on a policy that's active so that the policy holder knows what's going on, and they don't have to do it under current law. We fix that portion. And then the policy lo- uh, um, locator is the biggest thing I see here is that people are unaware that there are policies. I talk to clients all the time that do not have, have any idea of their mother or father, if they have any life insurance in place, and older policies do not have the identification. [8:38:28] Older policies do not have Social Security numbers, do not have dates of birth or addresses of the beneficiaries. And that money, if they can't find the beneficiary, goes into unclaimed property. So I believe this is a good thing for the citizens of Georgia, a good thing for people who have life insurance, that their beneficiaries get paid, and that's what this is all about. [8:38:49] Mr. Pre- Yes, sir. Any questions? No questions, Senator. No questions. Thank you, sir. Senator, this is about the fifth or sixth time this thing's been brought to this floor, isn't it, through the years? It's taken me a while. I'm gonna get it soon. I got some leverage this time. Okay. We were talking back here. It might, you might be going on eight or nine years with this one here, so. Okay. All right. I'm sorry. All right. All right. All right. All right. We gonna have to hammer down on the House on this one, I think, so. [8:39:19] Any other, any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? [8:39:25] Hearing none. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of this bill? Chair hears none. Report of the commi- committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question be in order? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. Question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill will vote yay. Opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [8:40:55] Yay. It's still undefeated. [8:41:02] All the passage of the bill, the yays are 50, nays are zero. This bill having received regularly constitutional majority is therefore passed by substitute. [8:41:16] Recognize senator from the 23rd. Thank you, Mr. President. I request that Senate Bill 418 be lifted from the table. Secretary, read the caption. Senate Bill 418 by Senator Burns of the 23rd and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 1 of Title 51 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions regarding torts so as to provide a cause of action against the knowing and unauthorized use of an individual's photograph or image together with representations of nudity or sexually explicit conduct to provide for states of such causes of action, to provide for definitions, to provide for related matters, to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [8:41:47] Mr. Pres- [8:41:53] Is there objection? Hearing none, f- finish the caption. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Judiciary recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Strickland of the 42nd District, Chairman. Mr. President, the Senate Committee on Judiciary offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 418, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 1 of Title 51 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to general provisions regarding torts so as to authorize the Attorney General or an appropriate prosecuting attorney to bring civil enforcement actions against the knowing and unauthorized use of an individual's photograph or image together with representations of nudity or sexually explicit conduct, to provide for states of such ac- causes of action, to provide for a limitation of liability, to provide for definitions, to provide a r- for a related matter, to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. [8:42:35] Mr. President, Burns, Senator Burns of the 23rd and others offers the following amendment. Amendment one, amend the Senate Committee on Judiciary Substitute, Senate Bill 418, by replacing causes of action with civil enforcement actions on line five, by replacing cause of action with civil enforcement action on line 42. Mr. President, Senator Burns of the 23rd and others offer the following amendment, amendment number two to Senate Bill 418, by replacing one hun- one thousand dollars with ten thousand dollars on line 36. Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:43:06] Recognize the senator from the 23rd. [8:43:23] Thank you, Mr. President. Colleagues, this is an image protection bill. It protects Georgians, especially minors, from abuse of unauthorized exploitation of their image. It protects them from ridicule or shame, embarrassment, bullying, blackmail, or any other kinds of exploitation because that individual's image has been used in an unauthorized manner to represent either nude or sexually explicit conduct. It authorizes the attorney general or appropriate prosecuting authority to pursue a civil course of action, a civil action against an abuser, and it would ensure that our children are protected even to the point of 10 years after they reach their 18th birthday, and in reality, even someone who is deceased whose image may be violated. [8:44:16] So there are two amendments to this. They simply ensure that the language is consistent so that the language shall read, uh, civil engagement action on lines five and lines thirty s- uh, lines forty-two, I believe. And then it changes. The Second Amendment is a friendly amendment, patterned after the Senate Bill 540. We've increased the penalty from one thousand dollars to ten thousand, up to ten thousand dollars. With that, Mr. President, I yield for questions or I yield to Well. [8:44:51] You have no questions. Well, recognize the senator from the 41st. Yeah, one question, Senator. One question? Recognize the senator from the 41st. Thank you, Mr. President. Does the senator yield? Absolutely. Senator, uh, can you tell me or can you define what use is, and does it include personal use, or is this only illegal if you distribute? No, this is personal use or any form, any form of use, either personal or, uh, commercial. Do you further yield? Yes, certainly. So if a person has an image of someone who is nude and has that just in their per- on their person, they could be liable for up to ten thousand dollars? [8:45:34] If they do it knowingly without that individual's knowledge or consent, they would be held responsible. Does the senator further yield? One more question. Yes, and just, I'm looking at line, um, seventeen where it defines image. Yes. And it says that it's a readily identifiable depiction of an individual, including but not limited to a photograph. So if a person were to draw a subject in the nude, would this be a violation of this code section? [8:46:09] The image would have to be recognizable and, again, without that individual's consent, knowledge and consent, we're protecting the image and the rights of the individual, whether it be a child, a minor, or an adult, and as I pointed out, even beyond that if they were to be abused, uh, after their death. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield to Well. Senator is yielded. [8:46:43] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? Senator from the 26th, would you like to speak, would you like to speak to this? [8:46:54] Uh, chair hears none. Is there objections the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. Previous question is order. The question is on the adoption of amendment one. Adoption of amendment one authored by senator from the 23rd. Is there objection? Hearing none, amendment one is added. [8:47:22] Question is on amendment number two authored by the senator from the 23rd. Is there objection to amendment number two? Hearing none, amendment number two is adopted. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute as amended. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute as amended? Hearing none, the committee substitute as amended is adopted. Is there objection to agree into the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objections to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. [8:47:53] The main question is order. Question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor of the bill, vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary will unlock the machine. [8:49:05] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 40 and the nays are eight. This bill, having received the requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. We have a special announcement from the president pro tem here, the man from Perry. Ladies and gentlemen, we have, uh, worked awfully hard today since 9:00 AM this morning, meetings probably prior to 9:00 AM, and I know you've developed quite an appetite. So we have Maggiano's in the ante room for the senators, and I would ask that the senators be allowed to go first whenever the president, uh, breaks us, gives us a break. [8:49:45] And, uh, but we do have dinner for you. Uh, be sure and look at the sponsor board and thank the sponsors. [8:49:54] He's saying we got ten minutes. [8:49:55] All right. Thank you. [8:49:56] Did House ever get back from their lunch break? [8:50:00] Special session. 593's on the table. [8:50:04] Huh? They're working? [8:50:08] Is Ed here? [8:50:09] I, I figured they need a midday snack now, right? [8:50:13] Ed [8:50:19] Harbison. [8:50:20] Senator from 37th, [8:51:02] could you come, could you come up here real quick? [8:51:30] We're gonna take one more bill so they can get everything set up in there. Recognize Senator from 37th. [8:51:38] Mr. President, uh, like to ask, uh, unanimous consent to remove Senate Bill 593 from the table so we can act on it as a body. [8:51:47] Secretary, read the caption. [8:51:49] Senate Bill 593 by Senator Hatchett of the 50th and others, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 71 of Title 36 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to development impact fees so as to provide for disclosure of impact fees upon transfer of ownership to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date to repeal conflicting laws for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:52:08] Is there objection? Hearing none, Se- Secretary finish the caption. [8:52:14] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on State and Local Government Operations General recommends that this bill do pass by substitute. Respectfully submitted, Senator Dixon of the 45th District, Chairman. [8:52:23] Mr. President, the Senate Committee on State and Local Government Operations General offers the following substitute to Senate Bill 593, a bill to be entitled an act to amend Chapter 71 of Title 36 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated relating to development impact fees so as to provide for disclosure of impact fees upon transfern- transfer of ownership to provide for related matters, to provide for an effective date to repeal conflicting laws and for other purposes. Mr. President, that completes the order. [8:52:45] Recognize Senator from 37th. [8:52:59] Mr. President, uh, ladies and gentlemen, Senate, uh, Senate Bill No. 593, uh, came from the State and Local Government Operations Committee. It's a, it's a procedural bill, but it's an important one. Uh, what it does is it allows folks who are considering the purchase of land for development to make a written application to the local governments to figure out what the impact fees would be. Currently, there's no provision that unless you own the property, um, to understand what all the potential impact fees can be. And as we know, impact fees are a development tool that a lot of governments use to sort of forward load infrastructure costs to make sure infrastructure costs aren't just paid by existing residents. [8:53:39] So what this allows, again, Mr. President, um, allows if a specific request is made by a, a potential purchaser to have the local governments lay out in detail the, the specific impact fees if they provide a pr- specific project scope. Glad to take questions. [8:53:59] You have no questions, Senator. [8:54:00] Thank you, Mr. President. [8:54:03] Does any other senator wish to speak for or against the measure? [8:54:08] Is there objection to the previous question being ordered? Chair hears none. Previous question is ordered. Question is on the adoption of the committee substitute. Is there objection to the adoption of the committee substitute? Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted. Is there objection to agreeing to the report of the committee, which is favorable to the passage of the bill? Chair hears none. The report of the committee is agreed to. Is there objection to the main question being ordered? Chair hears none. The main question is ordered. The question is on the passage of the bill by substitute. All those in favor will vote yay. All opposed, nay. Secretary, unlock the machine. [8:55:54] On the passage of the bill, the yays are 50 and the nays are zero. This bill, having received requisite constitutional majority, is therefore passed by substitute. All right, the Pro Tem has, uh, arranged for you all a nice dinner. So, uh, they should be set up by now, and we will stand at ease for about 30 minutes. About 30 minutes. So-