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

searching for


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

Senate | April 22, 2013 | Chamber | Session

Full MP3 Audio File

Plead with you tonight that you would truly pour refreshment upon us on these men and women that are in authority that have leadership that are leading may that gracious blessing be poured out may humble them before you . I pray in the name with gracious [??] Jesus. Amen. [Speaker Changes] Senator Berger is recognized for the motion [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr. President, the Journal of Thursday April 18th 2013 has been examined and has been found to be correct. I move to be dispensed with the reading of the journal and that stands approved as written [Speaker Changes] Without objection, the journal for April 18th 2013 stands approved as written. Senators come to order. We do have the nurse of the day with us today. Our Nurse of the day is Mali Adamacabwali North Carolina. Mali, if you please stand to be recognized, Thank you for our services to the senate today. Well on the motion of Senator Berger of Rockingham county senators Rayban and Goolsby of New Hannover and Brunswick county and Senator David Curtis of the Gaston and Lincoln county, the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to the young professional republicans and the college republicans and especially courtesy and welcome to Preston Curtis, son of Senator David Curtis, for working with former senator Robert Benjo , now congressmen Benjo running his Morrisville office. If you are here with us today, please stand and be recognized young republicans, college republicans, Thank you. On the motion of senator Harrington of Gaston county the chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Max Friedner and Kirsten GustIceman, city council members from Gaza, Germany which is Gaston in North Carolina’s sister city and Pat Smith their host from Gaston , if you are with us today, Please stand and be recognized . Thank you for joining with us today. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President [Speaker Changes]Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [Speaker Changes] Two motions were added to the calendar Please [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca is offered to make his motion [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr. President , member’s senate bill 287 Notice publications by some local government I need that if you could remove that and put that at the end of the calendar please. [Speaker Changes] So ordered [Speaker Changes] Mr. President, Senate Bill 520 government’s cartful IC hearing asked to be removed from today’s calendar and placed on Thursday 25th. [Speaker Changes] Not objection. So Ordered [Speaker Changes] Senators, we will be starting with local bill , Senate Bill 311, clerk will read [Speaker Changes] Senate bill 311 Apex carry [??] usage and CPD [Speaker Changes] Any discussion or debate, Hearing none , the question for the senate is the passage of the committee substitute number 2 to senate bill 311 on its second reading. All in favor will say Aye and all oppose no. The ayes have it. Committee substitute number 2 to senate bill 311 has passed second reading without objection and would be read the third time [Speaker Changes] North Carolina General Assembly act [Speaker Changes] Further discussion or debate. Hearing none, the question for the senate is the passage of committee substitute two to senate bill 311 on its third reading. All in favor would say Aye and oppose no. The Ayes have it. Committee substitute two to senate bill 311passes its third reading and would be sent to the house. Senate bill 325 the clerk will read.

?? to the fate of the fat lady and the district discussion that has ever seen the time that the time-out of business and is and then, did the¢ Xavier’s invasion that is to it, the investment that the defendant, the Russians that several actions, too-subtle , the standing of actions and has been handsome and-scan and less than 70,000, the same man, commissions and if something that I'm impressed, school board actions such as high as a student , Jeff, Spanish and French seven-foot-Time Investors and- as common services-a-lifetime event in the two-and- answer that stuff, and that's a no-times-a-half teaspoon of vision just the business section eight disk that sense, that's just the Data Systems have made the pages as I know the senate as the media about the about it at the white county must have of every five at the time is the agent said it has to happen again; events and is styled as a cactus-hell out of committee to deal time that it was simply that, given me this happen, and the impact of which we have the time-50,000 school?? best answer is that the justice system is the trustees decided some sentence plans and this is how I might distance and that's the second this is concerned about trial in Denver that is the increasing, of these¢ would be a factor as the 20-year stint as does the Sinai I'll access to justification for fascinating, more China, families and students that was the Sunday edition of the succession is more than half of this: if you must -service has signed bills and statements, is 31 and schools and it must find a common comment on the parents understand American citizens of the nation, CFCs in fact advantage of the packets sent some account riled the schools does affect this is good for an industry and enhance the senate is the man this was your left with a seemingly small percentage of the population seven is very small percentage we're completely tearing up the school districts that have the right time is of the statement said that members of his question that you do when you have a constituent industry case, times and Assad is for an athlete that even when the Sonics insists: it is true that the parents with another sister I have sponsored eight of nine democrats and republicans and then unanimously set the date was, I happen to access the times that, together that the school superintendents passed the five days time isn't as his beloved for the highest in history that anyone out its assessment as a constituent services at nine; San Jose events that happen again, time today he's on display at Shannon, as in the time he added that Koppers the position services access to the system and I'll than as a visionary district that's the essence of four as a-half loss to the chances of that mail ?? ?? ??.....................

This bill changes none of this. All this bill does is allow the use of a legal suppressor while hunting, increasing the risk of hearing damage related to the use of firearms. Suppressors also allow hunters to wear less ear protection, which increases their awareness of their surroundings and improves safety. This legislation will benefit farmers who need to hunt nuisance wildlife such as feral hogs and coyotes. These animals are typically found in groups or packs and when using a normal rifle, the animals will scatter after one shot. Suppressors will allow farmers to fire multiple shots and take multiple animals without them scattering. Currently, hunting with legal suppressor is allowed in 24 states. The bill is supported by the Lilac Resource Commission, and it did pass the Senate Add committee and the Senate Judiciary One committee. In closing, I would like to use the words of Dr. Phillip H. Dater who writes "It is easy to spot older, long time shooters. These are the guys who can't understand a word you're saying while regaling you with tales of the great hunts in exotic locations, the competitions won, or the battles bravely fought. Some use hearing aids, which are second choice to natural hearing. Others will be able to understand you if they can see your lips move and their is little ambiance in the room." I would appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Walters, what purpose your aye's? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Walters has the floor to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. President. I think this bill, this is not a second amendment rights bill. We've heard today from the bill sponsor all the guidelines that we have to go through to buy suppressor or silencer. I don't think, that's not the issue. There's an issue that's far reaching than hunters, and it's landowners, private property rights. As we go forward, you know there's a thing, it's safety. Safety should be for every North Carolinian. Not just the hunters in North Carolina. Because living in rural North Carolina, when you live there day after day, and you walk out in the morning, and you hear someone duck hunting, or in deer season you hear deer rifles discharge, you know someone's on your property. And you know when you've given permission or not. You can hear them. And so as a landowner, you go and check on your property. But also, you send farm workers out everyday. And a lot of places in North Carolina, little farms, we travel across two or three neighboring properties to get to a property in the back maybe. And we may not know that someone has the right to hunt, but if you hear that gun discharge, you stay out of that area. If you're working in the forest products industry, in deer season, you understand if you hear a gun discharge in the green ??, 660 acre block, which is a mile squared, you don't enter that block, because you understand someone is hunting there. What the next thing is is deer poaching, or night hunting. If you're at home in the evening, and you hear a gun go off, you know probably someone is on your farm hunting illegally. You can call the sheriffs department. And we passed a bill in 2010, general senate, landowner protection. Where you have to have written permission to hunt. Oh, 2011, thank you. Where you have to have written permission to hunt. Those are the issues that I have with this bill, it's safety and trespassing. And I think at some point in time, we as property owners and family farms for generations, we need protection as well. Hunting is a wonderful sport, I participate in it all the time, have two or three hunting lodges; I understand the joy and the privilege of hunting. But it is a privilege. And we have to protect our workers, and our family farms.

Child child days that less than an aisle and if you that if this man in the ms have as its apparatus and the white stuff for the study found that the senate has been a test that his sense of the past his off-the district now has risen 25 before you, Mr. This is a valentine's days distance society that has used that is the basis of medicine, just as he has a nice way fare-thee-fish limit, some times pop Mages whenever he does best-of-the-¬10% of those investments identify the county as bad as that from a separate time machine, a 5050 one to creation about 10% this week as investors of the time-outs this the spaceship intensity happens that has enveloped and is that child is a benefit assessment of the Mac 10-cent stamps the sense that a sense this premise that of his accents child is as justification for sincere that one of them for students-sinister and one of the bedside as well as the top left, time is the best when he couldn't see this would not comment on this is the best defensive and whites to have offices of how to combat that this is the best-of-state of the mandates to the lifestyle to have access to that sense, went out excess remembers that actually matters as this, and his top aides and styled activism and other benefits it-like device that confusion has been that will create on his Allies might have said time is a chance to make sense that is packed with impossible to know that child MSN content for the novice to resend of the event at the district enough that they that hasn't happened in-town to begin healing and focus was times in 7 seconds, small one day, as this legislation is a republican majority defensively in certain sometimes a level of his energy exact participate this is not that we see that as well as the boards which she felt this point it's time to pass this legislation in this hasn't said the issue as to the timer who has headed the Finnish-and-see that the head of the season of the the fed has happened, this session child that if-of-the- if that's the stuff that Wilson added that has finished when the device-question that has times, that the answers of the-pants that the data that's the question itself has a-lifetime with a five-to-point has the events of the end of each of medicine have a system of Investors System child deaths of as the half-day economic conditions at this time as the most of the Sammamish and lots of issues, that his half-brothers and as a common-sense that time that happens to be in the county is financed by then-national-child if that the fan-that-that's what it means orchestra seven, and that's a-half-a-share that view??...............

I think that this is such an important vote. Wake County is the 16th largest school district in the country. We have the approaching 154,000 students. It adds 3- to 5,000 students per year, and its been consistently doing that for the last decade, decade and a half. That many extra students per year. And the amazing thing about it until recently, it was constantly rated as one of the one or two best large districts in the United States. And the other thing about it, I will tell you about the students from Wake County. You can check any of the admission offices of any of the schools around the country. The elite institutions, institutions that are not so elite, and you find Wake County students at the tops of those lists, whether you're talking about the Ivys or any of the others, or you're talking about small college somewhere in the United States anywhere. Wake County students consistently by studies done, tend to do better in whatever setting you put them in than other students. Whether you put them in the Ivys, or whether you put them in the state institutions or anywhere across the country. I'm part of an institution that looked at 30 plus thousand applications for less than a 1000 seats. Surprisingly, the county that provides more public school students and applicants, then that school district is Wake County. More applicants, more admissions. One year, nine out of the top scholarships of that institution were offered to Wake County students. My daughter graduated from a Wake County public high school. In its consistent now, over 2 million scholarships are offered to graduating seniors from the Wake County high schools, a system that has worked very well. And there's several reasons for it. When our kids were in the school, they went to one of these magnet centers that Senator Stein talked about, Enloe high school, which was one of the best in the state, and it was a school that students attended by choice. Before our kids started driving one weekend, I'd be up north of Wake Forest, east of Zebulon, the next weekend, south of Fuqua, 45 miles from one to the other taking the kids to activities, and they got to know kids from all over the county, and they still have those relationships and friendships. Not only my kids, but kids from all over the county and their parents decided that that's what they wanted. So now, Wake County has 31 magnet schools, one of the best magnet programs in the country. When I talked to Tony Tater when he was the superintendent here in Wake County he said, "The amazing thing that folk don't realize is that the magnet schools answer the choice question in Wake County. You don't need all of the debate that's going on." And he learned that after studying it for less than a year. And the voters in this county felt the same way about it. You can live anywhere in Wake County and go to any school pretty much that your heart is set on. Ideal for the real estate agents, you don't have to worry about placing people in specific parts of the county when new companies move in. And why do I say that? Because the realtors, the Chamber, and a bunch of other folk got involved in this debate. The Chamber of Commerce wrote Senator Hunt wrote us in the delegation asking us not to change the way that we elect members to the Wake County School Board, The Chamber of Commerce. And when you look at it, it becomes again obviously why. Because they know the success of the school district, and the they know what the issues are when you got specific areas that people flock to because they think that that's where their kids are gonna to go to school. In 2006, we passed almost a billion dollar bond issue to build new schools in this county. Right now, we're considering another bond issue of another $1 billion dollars roughly. We need $2 billion to build the schools, but I mentioned those bond issues because in 2007, people started clamoring because there weren't schools in their neighborhoods. Couldn't build them fast enough. The district was increasing students so fast. We had a school board that basically decided it was going to be arrogant. It was going to tell folk when their kids would get out of school early so that they would disrupt their schedules, have to go pick them up, or arrange daycare for them. It was going to change their assignments and to not let their siblings go to the same school they had gone to. And they paid for it.

The voters scheme out in ??, voted them out and in 2009 elected a republican majority school board. No body has paid much attention to the make up of the school board before then, in fact one of the chairs of the school board said since we created this school board in 1976 there have been 6 republican chairs and 4 democratic chairs and 1 no body knew what she was because it didn't matter. And that's important because it takes the entire community to make school successful and that's especially so when you consider only 30 percent of the tax payers in our community really have kids in the schools. So you have to get support from everybody including those who don't have kids in the schools and when you start injection partition ship into that, you adversely affect that support that you going to get. And that's what beginning to happen in this, county to a greater degree. In 2009 when the new school board was elected and I might add there was a democratic majority in the senate and democratic majority in the house and a democratic governor, we chose not to try to change the way the school board was elected to make it democratic again because it shouldn't matter. The school board ?? of the voters ??. 93 percent of the parents in this county were supportive of the decision that the school board has made with respect to where there kids went to school. And once they found out that they were being bus because you couldn't build schools fast enough. We need 40 new schools right now but you couldn't build schools fast enough, they supported the pro policies and the new school board was trying to reverse those policies and 93 percent of the people in this county favored. So, in the next election after ??, ?? ??, He is my friend, ?? ?? and I agree with ?? ?? ?? in a reasonably fair manner because he kept communities of interest together. He didn't weird looking shapes and designs and more importantly he didn't do something that really offends me.?? ?? and it really ought to offend you too. And it offends me to the quick, it makes me want to yell but I think at some point race has to stop playing a rule in what we do. Look at this map and look at the bill itself because that's what more instructive. It takes 3 pages to describe the three pages that's being created here, 3 full pages and consequently a ?? and that's district number 4 when you read the bill itself because it goes through, it breaks down voter tabulation districts of precincts as we tend to call them and it peels out black parents and black citizens. We are talking about school boards, about schools. It feels them out, packs them all into a single district and if you look at district number 1 you'll see that it has a lot of voter tabulation districts rather than precincts of broken down precincts because you got to do something with the remaining people in those precincts that will split. Those dealing with 2 districts out of 7 where you have page and page and page of voter tabulation averages rather than precincts introducing more confusion and you know that perhaps coupled with the fact that we are messing with quite is for the benefit of over 150 thousand people really does get going. Every democrat on the school board was up for re-election in 2011 and districts that were drawn to favor one party over another but not outrageously. The chairman of the school board was in the most republican district in the county, overwhelmingly. Every single democrat won, every republican lost because they were injecting partisanship into this election, into the selection of school board members. People put their kids above petty politics and I hope you'll help us put county kids over petty politics. Now I think that if it's not in ethic to inject brace and partition politics into this, new map. And I've never known sent on a hunt to do something like this. So If...

A member in districts that are not partisan. And I’ve never known him intentionally do something like that, but it’s a blatant attempt when you look at these numbers that I just talked about. Why consider registration? You look at the backup to this plan. Registration has nothing to do with it. The cases don’t say that you got to consider registration. You don’t have to. In Wake county is not a county where you have to consider race. We don’t have to preclear. There is no sign of African Americans being unable to elect the candidates of their choice. There are no studies. In fact, this county led most, two of the four constitutional officers. The ‘70s and ‘80s and ‘90s were African Americans. Sheriff, registered deeds, county commissioners, judges. We’ve consistently voted without regard for race across this county. And so when you introduce these things into school board districting, it makes me somewhat emotional because I don’t want to spend the next forty years battling those kinds of battles. And so, I say to you this evening, that this is important because you really can save a great school system. And this bill goes to destroy it. As I said, the chamber opposes it. Every organized group that I know in the county opposes it. The fact that we are now looking at putting a bond on the ballot, when everybody says that we need two billion, but we’re going to go for a billion. And you guarantee, you absolutely guarantee, that that bond issue will fail if in fact people perceive that race has entered in to the way that you’re going to run the Wake county school district , it absolutely will fail. If people don’t feel good about how their school board members are treating all of the students. And, the last thing that I would say is that we need to build schools in this county. I represent the city, and I represent part of the county. Used to represent it all the way to the county line, and had for twenty or thirty years. But I will tell you, mostly within my district there’s no room to build new schools. The places where the new schools will be built are the places that are represented by folk who ought to be fighting to ensure that we don’t inject these other issues in how we choose school boards. In Western Wake County, in Eastern Wake County and Northern Wake County where the populations are increasing. And if we don’t build those schools as you tear down this system, more people are going to get frustrated because their kids have to take long rides into the schools inside the Raleigh belt line, because that’s where the schools are. And that’s how we save money over the years, by using the space that we have rather than just building new schools and abandoning others. That’s why our system has been successful, and I hope that you will vote with me to help keeping it successful, and let’s defeat this bill. Let’s save the Wake County school district, and let’s not inject these things into educating our kids that ought not be part of the decisions that we make. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question for the Senate is the passage for the committee substitute for Senate Bill 325. On its second reading we will do two electronic votes here. All in favor will vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. 33 having voted in the affirmative, and 17 in the negative. Committee substitute for Senate Bill 325 passes its second reading, without objection, will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: North Carolina ??? sentiment act. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, , the question for the Senate is the passage for the committee substitute for Senate Bill 325, on its third reading. All in favor will vote aye, opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. 33 having voted in the affirmative, and 17 in the negative. Committee substitute for Senate Bill 325 passes its third reading, and will be sent to the House. Moving on to our public goals today. Second reading, Senate Bill 105, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES]: Senate Bill 105, clarify.

Political signed ordinance authority. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President, members. This bill simply clarifies that the ?? is made enforces the ordinance that pertains to political signs that deal with the state roads and highways. As you know, all ?? has a state road or highway. All that I know of anyway, that goes through there ?? valley, and this simply clears it up that that may enforce that legislation as they would any other legislation even though they are within the ?? valley and I think this will make it uniform as people that are running in multi-districts or statewide. It'll be a little more clear to them about the ordinance pertaining to the sign. I appreciate your vote. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none the question for the senate is the passage of the committee substitute to senate bill 105, on a second reading. All in favor will vote Aye. All opposed will vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. 48 having voted in the affirmative and two in the negative, the committee substitute to senate bill 105 passes in the second reading. That objection will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Hearing none the question for the senate is the passage of committee substitute senate bill 105 on it's third reading. All in favor will say Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Opposed no. The Aye's have it. Committee substitute bill 105 passes in it's third reading and will be sent to the house. Senate bill 201, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate bill 201, allow hunting with suppressors. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rabin is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen, senate bill 201 will allow anyone who has obtained a federal permit to purchase and posses a suppressor to use it when hunting. This legislation is supported by the wildlife resource commission, and I appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Walters, with what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Walters has permission to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] As most folks know in this chamber, I'm from rural North Carolina and have a great respect for hunting and been a part of hunting all my life, but being a member of the forest farmers community and having to go into the forest every day in a working environment I have concerns about folks hunting with silencers. It's dangerous. Also, being a landowner in eastern North Carloina, and living on a farm, we always step outside the house and if you hear a gunshot go off you know someone's trespassing on your land. I'm all for hunting, all for the second amendment to bear arms. I just have huge concerns about using silencers while you're hunting, so I ask for you not to support the bill. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Senator Tillman, with what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President, to ask the bill sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rambin, do you yield for questions? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I heard this disgusting judiciary, but I didn't pay as much attention to it as I should have. Would you tell me senator why we need this bill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, for a lot of hunters they have experienced hearing loss and I have a letter from one of my audiologists who said that he has performed hundreds of hearing examinations on people, and that this bill tends to ?? towards people who have experienced hearing loss from use of firearms over the years. Typically hunting rifles, generally fired around, with 160 decimals. A suppressed rifle varies based on the specific suppressor and the type of ammunition, but they typically lowers the decimals to between 120 to 140 range. Anything above 140 range is when the damage, which is caused by the rifles, can be permanent damage and it is irreversible. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just to comment. Senator Walters, I've got a farm over on ?? county ,and no the timbers all been sold, but I tend to agree with you. I've had hunters down there, when we did have a lot of timber, that were hunting and if they had suppressors I probably wouldn't know they were there and that concerns me. One of the things that concerns me about this bill, it is certainly a well intended bill, Senator Rambin, and I

I appreciate you working on it. If you’ve got two groups of hunters down there, and they don’t hear the others, I believe you, you’re opening yourself up to another dangerous situation, so thank you, Senator Randleman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brock, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brock has the floor to speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman, then, for one reason, the … As far as one reason for hunting with suppressors is that when you’re getting rid of nuisance animals such as coyotes or feral hogs, if you’re, when they travel in packs, you may get off one or two shots and that’s about it because they’ll scatter. Using a suppressor, you’re able to take more down. But hunting with a suppressor is not one that you pick, something that you pick up off the street. You have to go through a process to actually get a suppressor. You have to make an application to the ATF for a tax paid transfer and a registration of that firearm, provide a fingerprint card and a personal photo. You must obtain the signature from the chief law officer, from your sheriff, pay a $200 transfer fee, and register with ATF. And that, and if you’re caught with an illegal silencer, it’s a $10,000 fine and 10 years in prison. This is not something that you would normally just happen to have. I urge you to support the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Brown, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ask the sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Randleman, do you yield for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Randleman, I heard your explanation, and I have concerns as well, but I don’t think that many people will be able to get the silencers. Can you try to clear up how many people will be available to even get the silencers? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, as the Senator explained, it is a process that one has to go through. They do have to have an extensive background check. They have to have a photo ID. If you talk about being concerned about silencers being in the forest, being out in the forest and not being able to hear these things, well you can still hear a rifle with a suppressor, and the concern that you should have are the folks that’s out in the woods with crossbows because I can assure that the people that are out there hunting with crossbows, you will not hear the crossbow. And the people who hunt with crossbows, they are very accurate. So you will hear a suppressed rifle more so than you will hear a crossbow. So I still appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [Overlapping with previous speaker.] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Walters, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Walters has the floor to speak a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We’ve heard some very good rebuttals here this evening, and ?? …with the hearing loss, certainly hunters can use ear plugs. I think that’s a very good way to protect your hearing. But to talk about using a crossbow versus a high-powered rifle. Your limited distance on a crossbow is pretty limited versus a high-powered rifle. In the woods, it travels a long way. So that’s my concern. I mean, every day when we walk in the woods during hunting season, we blow the horns in pickups and get out of the truck and start singing, whistling, or do whatever we have to do to try to let hunters know that we’re there. But if we don’t hear those gunshots and understand that they’re in the woods hunting as a still hunt, it’s a danger, and that’s my only concern. It’s not about issuing silencers. I understand that there’s a long process to obtain a silencer. That’s not the point. It’s about the safety in the woods. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Newton, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? the bill. SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca - [SPEAKER CHANGES] Motion please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca has the floor for the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. I move that Senate Bill 201 be removed from tonight’s calendar and placed on Thursday’s calendar, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection so ordered. Senate Bill 377. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 377. Suspend Truck Inspection/Severe Weather. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Jackson is recognized. Explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President, members of the Senate. I just want to say up front and be fair and honest with you, everybody likes my bill. There’s no opposition. There’s no objection to this bill. But I will tell you briefly what it does. It allows the Commissioner of Agriculture, when there’s an immediate danger coming due to hurricanes or whatever, severe weather, he can send over a resolution to the governor, and this will allow the governor to suspend the DOT and Highway Patrol from making routine stops on vehicles to weigh them or whatever so they can get their crops out of the field and into the bins or wherever they’re going. They can’t go overweight -

Cant’ be, cross any bridges or anything else but it does allow the Governor, the Commissioner, excuse me, to issue this order so that the Governor can put in an executive order into place. And I appreciate your support and I’ll answer any questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] There any discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 377 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye. Oppose the vote, no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. Clerk will record the vote. Bryant, Bryant aye. Rabin, aye. 49 having voted in the affirmative and 1 in the negative. Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 377 passes its second reading without objection to be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any other further discussion, further debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 377 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oppose, no. The ayes have it. Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 377 passes its third reading. It will be sent to the House. Senate Bill 461 the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 461. CDL Changes.   [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Wade is recognized to explain the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. President. Senators this passed the Committee unanimously. It’s about commercial driving license. It allows the test to be given by certified license person on any day of the week. What really is happening is, if you have another job and you’re trying to get your commercial driving license, DMV is only open from 8 to 5. But only certain offices will let you take that driving test. Therefore, they need a time to go and take the test that’s outside of the normal working hours. And this was done before, somehow it was taken out of the law and now I’d like to put it back in. The other part has to do with extending the time for temporary license from 20 days to 60 days. What happens is, if you go out on a haul on a truck you might be gone several days and if you come back home and if your license didn’t come in, you don’t have it, you go out on the next haul. It doesn’t come in it might be over 20 days and also if you have an add-on The person that called me about this had an add-on for hazmat. He was out on a haul, came back, his license wasn’t there. It made his commercial driving license go to temporary for 20 days. The next time he called me, he had pulled his truck over to the side of the road because he didn’t have his license, his commercial license because it was tied to the add-on. So he asked me to see about doing something about 60 days. I’d appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Senator Ford, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask the bill sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Wade, do you yield for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam, what are the qualifications for the third-party company issuing the commercial license? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It’s the same people that do the testing through the week. Like at a private industry like at overnight or any of the trucking firms. It’s the very same people that are certified to do this during the week during the regular business hours. [SPEAKER CHANGES] By what? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Ford. Senator Wade, do you yield for a follow-up? She yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m not sure I was in the Committee meeting but I’m still not sure what are, who is eligible to be ableto provide these services? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The certified trainer you’re talking about? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes ma’am. [SPEAKER CHANGES] They go for certification and I don’t know everything they have to do to in order to be certified to train, for the driving trucks. But they have a certification they have to go testing and everything. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any other discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 461 on its second reading. All in favor will vote aye. Oppose the vote, no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. 48 having voted in the affirmative and 2 in the negative. Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 461 passes its second reading without objection. It will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] North Carolina General Assembly enacts. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of the Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 461 on its third reading. All in favor will say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oppose, no. The ayes have it. Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 461 passes its third reading and will be sent to the House. Senate Bill 539 the clerk will read.

?? ?? to the fact that during that time information sent center, was recognized by the U.S. has these lifetimes many of the data the username have to renew the point that members of estrogen revised one time there's more to offer his Indians and slimmest intro session that it not possible since passed a substance and all five rebounds and reading of benefit by time and the 61 of the daytime, and see the pace of season on the society without objection to that, yeah, that's a fact center, has announced the signing of ActiveX operating as announcement that we have a technical correction eighth that would actually that one at this time needed for information that within the next recall supporters would provide no ?? independence of the reason, non-down to the fire hydrant, made the event that had the best in the event is the time has recognized by the pages of resumes, said as many as states that that is the first, and it was assassinated-the-the upshot of us in the bill has even test and if the passage of the season it is time-day Adventist Media that defines the Mexican and those of us of that is that the reason the then-head north carolina's outer trial and the real money that answering questions in a session that sent back to adjust times it may have the highest in the heart of this year, visit the U.S. and the Spanish constitution and is currently in the coronation ball. She's not all of his actions and rivaling the budget problem here is that the fashion designers of the URL, and Riley information or to design has occasionally there is no station E brown in public thinks the Chinese opera and symphony, means is that enough to stay in the event has been in jail system that connects with people were a I did a fine sieve into a pager that sometimes-digest and that when that happens to me that's just the last event for that, that time and testing as a reasonable that contents, and where Chan movies and intuition but not at that and the application is now that the senate, provision has stopped at the beginning of this behind me that section one time 60, and those from an NT is the provision of the deal is stop the times and has constitutional amendments, the fact is that if I may , he did not just such a sense of times and now happened on his knee with that means that time, students and the proper screening of the consummation date on tradition of more than that of his data to have the state competition, ensuring that point, because of the things that would call and some candidates will have the facts times nation, and not that that something and not a black hole happens that is one way that I'm his aunt in this investigation of the 70 to 1 thing is that we always exactly is in the prestigious his life, constitutional and thought I mention requirements than-upon seeing is not as a division among the more than a constitutional ban the way that we, the agent at a Disney of the end of the Disney has not happened, 78, things that that is the intention that it happened is below time evening somebody is@about the U.S. is, uses ?? ?? ?? ??.......................

When all evidence shows that their incidence of drug abuse are no worse than the general population using other government services. So where do we draw the line then? Do we test all school parents of children going to the public schools? Their incidence of drug abuse are probably higher, if it were researched. Do we test parents of all scholarship applicants of all government scholarships for higher education and community college? Where do we draw the line? The fact that this bill has the applicant pay for the test in order to apply is also a huge negative consequence that we know is going to bear on how this, the constitutionality of this provision because you are targeting ninety something percent of applicants who have no connection to drug abuse whatsoever and also creating a huge barrier for them to get services for themselves and their children and supportive services to get to work which is what this program is designed to do. The impact of this bill, if not the intent, is to hurt the most vulnerable because they can't fight back. Even if the drug abuser doesn't apply, you aren't helping him or her get treatment; you're just punishing their children from getting these needed services. And then if they test positive, they have to pay for the treatment even though they're eligible for Medicaid and are already poor because they are eligible for this program. So clearly the way this bill is designed, there is no interest in helping. The result of the impact is to stigmatize and demonize poor people which is not good for North Carolina and not good for our state and not good for helping the most vulnerable of our citizens have a chance to get back to work through this program. Also, the studies in the other states who have attempted to implement this kind of regime which is almost exactly like the regime in Florida that's been ruled unconstitutional has shown that it's no savings to the program if your goal is to cut public benefits and the people who are applying for public benefits and the costs far outweigh any savings in the program if that was your goal. So for that reason I would ask you to vote against this bill and I will be voting against this bill. In addition, let me say that all the social service departments in my district, five counties, oppose this bill. Thank you. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Senator Hise, for what purpose do you rise? [CHANGE SPEAKER] To speak to the bill. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Senator Hise has the floor to speak to the bill. [CHANGE SPEAKER] Thank you Mister President and members of the Senate. Our drug problem that we have in this state is not something that we can just stick our head in the sand and hope goes away. I can go back to what would be my high school yearbook. The community I grew up in had a, not left before graduation going to science and math, and I counted it up a couple of years ago. More than twenty percent of my graduating class has already served time or lost their life to a drug abuse. And I spend a lot of time talking to law enforcement in my district and I don't think this story is very different all across this state. And I think we have to be aware as to how we are creating and we are funding this problem in our communities. When an individual can go to the correct doctor for two dollars and pick up a prescription for three, actually they don't even have to pay that, and can turn that into nine hundred dollars of street value for 30 milligram Oxycontins, we are funding our problem. And when you look at this bill specifically when we are handing cash payments to individuals who could not pass a drug test, we are funding our problem in this district and in this state that we are creating a situation, we're talking economic benefits all the time about the ?? you put a lump sum cash payment in a drug addict's hands and look how quickly that can turn over in your community. When they take it to buy the large bags and break it into the small ones, sell it on the corners and you've enabled that by creating this funding. Do I believe that this completely solves the problem? No. But I do believe it's an action we can take and we must take to help protect our communities from the damage that we are doing to them by allowing these type of cash front payments

wants to go forward to individuals who could not pass a drug test. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Ford, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask the bill sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Davis do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do, yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, let me make sure that I'm clear here. I'm all supportive of accountability and for drug testing. In jobs that I've either worked or businesses that I've owned I've had to drug test individuals so from that concept I don't have a problem with it. My question is is it true that we're making these individuals responsible for paying for their own drug test? [SPEAKER CHANGES] That is correct. And the reason why we're doing that, Senator Ford, is because my presumption is if you the applicant know you're going to flunk a drug test you're probably not going to apply for the benefit because you won't get the benefit and in addition to that you'll have to pay for the drug test that you failed. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do you yield Senator? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In every situation where I've been the employer and the employee, as an employer I've been responsible for paying for that drug test to bring somebody on to my company. Help me understand your rationale for somebody who is not working but looking for support from this state to go to work, has the financial wherewithal to pay for a drug test up front. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well my presumption is that as an employer you would prefer not to pay for that drug test and some people don't have to pay for their drug test. They have to show proof positive that they passed a drug test before they're going to be considered for the employment. I have a lot of employers in my district that say they have to screen three people to find one that passes the drug test and the drug test that they pay for is $47.50 for every one of them. So they would love to not have that requirement on them and I think we ought to consider that as well. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Ford has the floor to speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have fundamental issues with this bill because we're supposed to be helping folks in this state. We've got an unemployment rate that is higher than the national average. I'm not opposed to accountability. I'm not opposed to holding people responsible for their individual actions. But if we're going to help put people back to work I think we ought to do just that. Not penalize them if they have a problem. Look, if they have a problem, if they get hired, it's up to that employer to be responsible to make sure that they have the right person working for them and again at every job I've either worked at that required it or when I've been the employer I have paid for that drug test. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any further discussion or debate? Senator Goolsby, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'd like to speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Goolsby has the floor to speak to the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I hear Senator Ford's concerns and I would direct him to the bill itself, Section B, that actually says that for an applicant or current recipient who tests negative for controlled substances the Department shall increase the amount of initial workforce program assistance by the amount paid by the applicant or recipient for the drug testing. So in fact if you test negative you do get into the workforce program. You get your cash benefits, making sure that you're not a drug addict and you get your job training and you get the money back that you paid for it. I also heard one of the prior Senator's comments and I saw some figures on line that 98% of the people in the Florida test actually tested negative and I heard opponents of these types of bills say well what are you doing here? You're just wasting money. Well as Senator Davis wisely pointed out you'd have to be pretty high to spend your own money to take a test that you know you would fail. So again I think that shows that this is very effective that 98% of the people that are coming forward to do this are not on drugs and those that do test positive the way this legislation is set up they actually are able to enroll in a drug treatment program if they successfully pass that and they get tested again and test negative they are then able to go right back into the program. Otherwise they have to wait a year. I think this is wise legislation. I am in support of it and I would, like Senator Davis, urge you to support it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator McKissick has the floor to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The thing I have deep trouble with about this bill is that it's overly broad because the way this bill is interpreted and I asked these questions in Committee as it related specifically to who would be required to submit to a drug test it's not simply the applicant. It's also the applicant's spouse. It's also

Anybody in the applicant's household. So if grandma or grandpa are living there or you got kids there that are eighteen, twenty years old who may for one reason or another be experimenting with drugs, none of us approve of it. But all of those persons are subject to drug testing under this bill. It's not just the applicant. All of those other individuals. And if they have to be submitting to drug testing, to be candid with you, it not only imposes a financial burden upon them but it's going to impose a financial burden upon these counties because ultimately it becomes an unfunded mandate for these counties. And for those reasons I think this bill just goes far, far too broadly to cover a group of individuals other than the applicant who is applying for benefits. You are talking about the applicant? There's some people who might be open. But when you start reaching that far out in this net, it captures the spouse, the grandma, the grandpa, anybody else in the household. And we are looking at multigenerational households frequently that may be subject to this type of condition. I think you've got a bill here that really needs to be rethought before it moves forth. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson has the floor to speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister President and members of this assembly, I too understand the importance of substance abuse testing. I know a lot of people and some of our agencies we do random testing and that's the way it is. And I too want our children to have the best families and live in drug free environments too Senator Davis, and I think you are sincere about that. But if we want to have standards for people who receive state assistance then we need to have it for all of us who receive state assistance. And so therefore Mister President, In Kansas the governor recently felt the same way and he said we've got to do something about this drug problem and I do too. I wish we had enough drug treatment centers because where I live, we've got a lot of people lined up but not enough centers to fund that treatment. So we need to do something about that. But the other thing is that what the Governor said is he needed to handle that with the general public but it was already implemented at the executive level, at the official level, etc. And so therefore I want to send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, do all the members have copies? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes [SPEAKER CHANGES] You can send forward your amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Because I think that we as policymakers ought to adhere to the law. If we're going to make the policies in this state [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mister President [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Apodaca, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let me read the amendment in before we discuss it please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson moves to amend the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson is recognized the explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mister Chair and I was continuing to explain what the Governor did. But I will move directly to the amendment. The amendment amends the bill to say that the drug screening will be required of work force assistants as well as for certain public officials. And it would require that we as members of the General Assembly, Constitution officers including the Governor, heads of all principal state departments are screened annually. And you can read the rest of it. And that the drug test would be administered prior to taking an oath of office and you can see the rest of that. Now I think that's imperative because we are saying that we receive state funds, we represent the law, we institute policy, so it should not be above any of us to submit to drug screening. I recommend your support of this amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there any further discussion or debate? Senator David, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To ask the amendment sponsor a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson, do you yield for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do [SPEAKER CHANGES] Who's going to pay for these drug tests? [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have to pay for it if you are requiring the other people to pay for it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, what if I test negative? [SPEAKER CHANGES] If you test

Excuse me. [Speaker Changes] Senator Robinson, do you yield [inaudible] [Speaker Changes] What if I test negative [Speaker Changes] If you test negative, maybe you can put in amendment to get your money back out of your subsistence allowance, Senator Davis. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President, I’d like to speak to the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Senator Davis has the floor to speak to the amendment. [Speaker Changes] I’d like to just say here, and now that any time that anyone wants to have me drug-tested and if I test negative, you pay it. I’d be glad to do so. Reason why I chose to never use those kinds of drugs is I didn’t figure I had any brain cells to spare. And I think that this, we’ve got to start with this somewhere and if Senator Robinson wants to put in a bill to require all those individuals to submit to a drug test, that’s fine. I’d be glad to support it, just so long as if I test negative, I don’t have to pay for it. Thank you. [Speaker Changes] Any further discussion today (in audible) requesting before the senate. Senator Apodaca (inaduble) requests for the Is. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President, send for a substitute an amendment. [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca, you can send fort your amendment. Inaudible [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca moves to amend the bill. [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca is recognized, explain the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mr. President, I’ve heard some very good debate and it did trigger something in my mind. I think we need to look at this and have a report sent to us by the July 1st of next year and see how this bill’s working. So what I do, is I add a new section to the bill, page 2, line [inaudible]. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President, Point of Order [Speaker Changes] Mr. President, I have the floor I’m not yielding right now. [Speaker Changes] Point of Order [Speaker Changes] Senator (inaudible) [Speaker Changes] Do we have a problem with the amendment being discussed? [Speaker Changes] Members have copies. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President, no they don’t. If I read it, if they can’t comprehend what I read, I’d be happy to hand them one, if they need it. [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca, you have the floor. [Speaker Changes] This same Senator (inaudible) I move that we recess for 10 minutes and provide him a copy. That’s a motion. [Speaker Changes] Inaudible Senate stands in recess for 10 minutes. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca [Speaker Changes] Just an announcement while we’re killing trees, it’s on your dashboard right now, but we’ll make copies also. [Speaker Changes] Senate will come to order [Speaker Changes] Everbody should now have copies of the amendment on their desk as well as on their dashboard. Senator Apodaca is recognized to explain the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mr. President. Members, Mr. President, If I might in Accouncement, out of order. [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca has the floor for an announcement out of order. [Speaker Changes] Thank you Mr.President, Members I want you to know this is the last time we’ll be providing written copies of amendments on the floor. As of the end of March, when they’re available on your dashboard, that’s where it will be. So if you need a written copy have your staff get you one or something but from here on it will be on the dashboard. So, Thank you. [Speaker Changes] Mr. President, would the Gentlemen yield to a question? [Speaker Changes] Yes [Speaker Changes] On those written amendments that some of us need, when they’re hand-written and offered up like that, will we be able to take a recess until we can get a written copy of it ourselves, as opposed to getting one and passing it out like we’ve done down here for centuries? [Speaker Changes] Well we, Senator Nesbitt, changed that last month, we said we’d be going totally electronic. And the Clerk’s office has prepared to put it on the dashboard immediately. It’ll be even quicker than being written and passed out. So, I think right now, once it’s on the dashboard, that’s considered handed out. [Speaker Changes] Senator Apodaca is recognized to explain the amendment. [Speaker Changes] Thank you, Mr. President. On page 2, line 31 and after the line, adding a new section to read, “The department of health and human services shall report to the general assembly no later than July 1st, 2014 on the importance of, implementation of this act. Somebody writes worse than I do. So, that’s what it is. I ask for your support. [Speaker Changes] Is there any further discussion or debate? Senator Nesbitt.

does just that the time seven-day demo of medicine, the center of ?? that the holidays of the senate, the entity that is as follows of the sense of humanity and many factors behind you, you didn't have before you buy a ?? after the 10-to-hand as of the Minnesota State that we have combined for the fires of the state and we send the data and the ?? situation where of about one of the up-and-down in the end of the prime of a cat and that is sensitive skin, one ?? and heartache and his ex-wives and mothers of Euphrates where the system and what we're asking people to be a time of the event and that is fast and said that the issue of the sermon ?? chive have to be tough , ?? ?? ?? that CF-CF safe here of life that the glass as half ?? safe and-half of those events that an attack, budget, session that ?? did and as the passes and acid and seven of a and the I-a-saddened, and that China is the common sense the day's events and passes that does happen, it's an obsession that this happens as if the answer as she and the staff of the speed of the way that they have the mandate of a ?? is the right-hander spending of seven-that the one in a combo of as a percent have roughly the national and we have the event-three years everybody that I'm $50.00 a day in November that there's an as-hazard than to say that I'm a programmer hand, Dr., dentist of success and am going to get their and a van that seemed like you believe ?? action after the estimate of the family, is a wall behind this problem with the headline began its lack of action set its own tax time since an overhead of Asian us that if anybody that somebody studies at all relevant and I'm a defense of anything that when the scientists estimate of the doubt that time-a-off 80, and I forgetting the end you have a situation ?? ??............

to me, 8 to 5.19858 or fax them to as ?? at-bat that the money he landed on any of have very high you today that as the city has been spent a lifetime out, that is to dispatch centers as the only times out of them and hopes that as of this fiscal house in 1992, the issue of the Montana - saint-as-seven- and-half, and that's as anti-tax plan-that-that's-fashioned and if the fans that he added that the stuff that SMS now the U.S.-style than the seven-testifying as the president is saying that he would have finished several suggestions that it this time that end of this visit is passed to a substitute number twos and all 594 as amended on a second reading of the about-the times that many of them have any five and 15 in a subsequent case until 5.45 and a society that Jackson and other top post-and-session that ?? end of the question presence passes a substitute number 27594 as an added bonus the reading of a visit by trial is not a guest at a subsequent cities and no 14 as an impasse is the read riled them: this and said the house system and back to comment, and the benefactor, said the whole time seven the way the update seven, have the time, and that of the satisfaction that this has said that, just that-the fact I'm seen as mentioned, the consent order forms a chance that the this presents and Americans has these ideas and Saturday in the last time the as-as question in the Midwest and a ?? as fast as a white male and-hostages, or send them a time in a statement as saying the last event, addresses of the & that is, you have any offense, and sees higher-seeded and actually have three options time containing us at newsmaker that these events-time the other option was used in these neighborhoods of the activity and the times made the decision that the idea of the center of his beloved as the price of your com, said instead, take your area of the time, the inside of a decided edge and the AL said that, for possession and that means the tiny opposition to ms, possession of City Council me China has risen to his present size since senator, the budget has severed head the small-business and ?? that students sit-down sentences for tomato eyes and cities and counties are these ways to save money and time constraints and higher-than-taxpayers , at times, and that's my statements in the paper is not the place to proceedings that, and 15¢ an hour and a visitors to the states ??................

[SPEAKER CHANGES] Most residents in these small towns, rural areas, don’t read the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal. Even the news in the Observer, the Greensboro Record, or the Charlotte Observer. But they do read their local paper from cover to cover. These paper carry, little league baseball, achievements such as an Eagle Scout award, several pages of church news, local sports, accomplishments like the Aquinas Citizens of the Year, school and senior events,. They learn about their neighbors from these papers. They also cover local school board meetings, town council and county commissioner meetings. All free of charge. And remember those pages of delinquent taxpayers that we all look through? That publishing yields much more return to the cities and the counties than cost. At one point, when I had five counties, I took twelve newspapers, and I want to show you a couple I take right now. This is the Chatham Record. And here we have a chicken plant that’s closed down putting a lot of people out of work. And they got two or three articles about that. There’s an article there, about the opening of the county courthouse that had suffered a fire. Here’s a local judge who had run in the marathon and [??’ say he was okay. We have a hundred and eight year old Chatham resident. We have local farmers gathering endangered honeybees. Not that’s what they call the front section. Then we have the news of town. Eight pages of sports. Here’s the news of [??]. Here’s a local baseball player who gets honors. At Mount Olive College. We have the Board of Commissioners meeting. And on and on it goes. So why am I concerned about this Bill? Yes it’s a local Bill. But I want to tell you it’s the fourth one that’s come through since I have been here. Now the County Commissioners Association on the League of [??] want to cease publication at certain newspapers. This is the camel’s nose under the tent. Because as I have said, there are three four communities in the past, and have asked, and no longer have to publish legal notices. Instead they want to publish their legal notices on their websites where few people will see them. And some of these websites are sometimes down, they’re not current leaving people without any information. How many people including us browse our local government websites? If you got a choice between Mad Men and your local government website, when you’re tired at the end of the day. Which one are you going to look at? So very importantly, the laws of revenue could put some of these newspapers out of business. And I think that this is something that is very serious. Our government, our Constitution was founded on newspapers, if you will. The photo less papers. Our Revolution depended on local newspapers. The five small newspapers I called tell me their revenue from legal ads range from fifteen hundred to three thousand dollars a week. Without that income, they could not continue the coverage they provide to their communities for free. All of the local government meetings are covered. School boards, county commissioners, if they have a town council, and that is a very serious loss. Finally, these are small businesses. And I mean small businesses. We had a couple of people who talked to the committee as a mom and pop. The husband and wife run that small town newspaper. We talk all the time around here about jobs. You’re going to put these small newspapers out of business, slowly but surely. We always talk about jobs. We talk about small business. Here’s an opportunity to show that we really mean it. At their committee hearing, there were twenty publishers from small town newspapers, all over the State. Who would come to voice their objection and opposition to this Bill? I intend to vote against it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barringer, what purpose do you arise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To propose an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Do the members have copies of the amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No they do not.

Is it on the dashboard? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No it is not. I’m sending it forth sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator, is the amendment being placed on the dashboard as we speak? We don’t have it yet to put on the dashboard, so we need to give members hard copies or it needs to be on the dashboard. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I have hard copies. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Are they being passed out right now? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let’s make sure the members get the copies or it gets on the dashboard. Is it on? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It’s there. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hold on one second Senator. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let’s clarify this one here. Just a second Senator Nesbitt. Senator Barringer, if you could approach the dais please. Senators, we’re making mark ups here. We’re gonna place this on the dashboard. Senator Nesbitt, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m sorry, Mr. President, I couldn’t understand you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We’re having an issue just with the amendment right now, Senator, so we’re getting it clarified and we’re getting that on the dashboard right now. Senators, the corrected copy of the amendment with the correct number is now on the dashboard. Senator Barringer is recognized...the clerk will read. I’m sorry, we haven’t read it in yet. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barringer moves to amendment the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barringer is recognized to explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much. This very amendment demonstrates that this truly is a local bill. In my county of Wake, I was requested by the town of Rolesville, to not be included in this particular bill. This amendment does remove the town of Rolesville from the bill. In addition, the town of Wake Forest would like to be removed, but they don’t need to be because I learned something in this whole process several weeks ago. If a county is partially in one county and not totally in Wake county, they are not included, so neither is the town of Wake Forest included in this bill. I appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there and further discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barefoot, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barefoot has the floor to speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members of the Senate, I represent the town of Rolesville entirely and I urge you to support the amendment. I’ve spoken with their mayor and they’re fine with this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there and further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage amendment one. All in favor vote aye, all opposed vote no. Five seconds will be allowed for the voting. The clerk will record the vote. 45 having voted in the affirmative and 4 in the negative, amendment one is adopted. The bill as amended is back before the body. Is there and further discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Robinson has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. I want to clarify colleagues from Guilford county, where I also represent. This was not a unanimous request. It came up from one individual and was kind of re-amended to put in as legislation. There are several small newspapers who adamantly object because they work with citizens, or at least the publications go to citizens, who cannot get in that paper and reading it. A lot of them are elderly and they’re worse than some of us in here who don’t use electronic media. We’re already having trouble with some of ya’ll in here. But some of the people who receive the local papers, the small papers, don’t use electronic media. They can’t on those small papers, so I object and I hope that you won’t vote for this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there and further discussion or debate? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Rucho, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, I’d like to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Ruch has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I want to applaud Senator Wade for bringing this forward. Let’s be very frank, everyone, how many people read their newspaper today and read the ads about government action of whatever other than the fact that Senator Kinnaird’s talking about a farmer or whoever else. Nobody reads that part. Let’s be frank about it. What this does is allows the towns that have some flexibility to be able to decide how to best get their message out to their public. That’s what we’re trying to do. We’ve been accused of being evil to the towns and municipalities. We’re giving them freedom, some flexibility to act according...

Make their own judgements, they don't need Raleigh in this case to come down and tell them that they are mandated to put that advertisement in there. Give them the flexibility and make the choice. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Walters, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Walters has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You know, I think tonight we've shown that, with this amendment, that this is just fragmenting our state. We've got some towns that won't, some towns that don't, and so, at the end of the day, the general public doesn't know what's going on any more. And I have a huge concern -- and I talk a lot about Rowland, North Carolina -- we just don't have the internet accessibility to be able to get those internet connections that you need to visit those government websites. And yes, there are some offices that still run on paper, Senator Apodaca, it's a wonderful thing in our life; it's a renewable resource. So I would just ask that we continue to give ?? and not fragment this state, with some towns doing it one way, and some doing it another, it's just going to be very confusing at the end of the day. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barringer, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barringer has the floor to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This is truly a local bill for my constituents. I was approached in the delegation meeting for my constituent municipalities to bring forward this bill. And in looking at the amount of money, it's about government efficiency, and government choice, and government closest to the people making the decisions. Just in Wake County alone, with Wake County, Fuquay, Holly Springs, Cary and Morrisville, almost $180,000 a year is used for these notices. That's five public school teachers. I think we have better uses in a municipality -- in, for example, Morrisville, who was the first to request this, ninety-three percent of their residents have internet access. Ninety-five percent have high-speed internet access. Holly Springs, who desperately wants this option, actually has free wi-fi in the town of Holly Springs, and so even if you don't have a computer, if you have a smartphone, you can access this. Morrisville already has a wonderful web page with a link for its notices right on the front, and Cary, who's had this opportunity, this option, for a long time, has done so wonderfully with the same kind of home page button. If we're freed from the per word pricing, our municipalities, so that they can go online, they can be more specific in what they're giving notices for, and even put maps up and different things like that. And so this truly is a local bill that gives municipalities options. It's not a mandate of what they have to do, it's what they have a choice of. Thank you very much. I appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Blue, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Will Senator Barringer yield for a question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barringer, do you yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Senator. I'm trying to piece this together on the computer, but the section that we are amending, or the bill itself, takes the towns of Garner and Knightdale out of some act of whatever session laws 2786 was -- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oh, I see what you're talking about. Are you talking about the Rolesville amendment, the 6.5 amendment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No, no, I'm talking about the bill itself, because I'm trying to see whether something needs to be included with that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And I had that same question as well. Senator, what that means is, see, already Apex, Cary, Garner and Knightdale have this ability. And since they are within the confines, completely, of the county of Wake, they are not needed any longer in that session law in that respect. The town of Cary needs to stay there, because one of the things I learned is the town of Cary is actually in two counties, not just one. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I see. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Davis, for what purpose do you rise? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. President, I like to change a vote on the amendment, I voted no and would like to be recorded as an aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Davis would change his vote. 46 to 3 is the final number. Any further discussion or debate? Hearing none, the question before the Senate is the passage of committee substitute Senate bill 287, as amended on its second reading. All in favor

Vote aye. Oppose the vote no. 5 seconds will be allowed for the voting. Clerk will record the vote. 46 having voted in the affirmative and 23 in the negative. May substitute senate vote 287, as amended, passes the second reading. [speaker changes] Objection the third reading. [speaker changes] Senator Nesbitt objects the third reading. It will be placed on the calendar. Senators that wraps up our calendar for this evening. We'd like to take this time, to, We're going to take this time to introduce the pages that are left with us for this evening. So, pages, if you'll start making your way up to the dais, to the front of the chamber here so we can recognize you. The clerk will read. [speaker changes] Natalie Brown Mt. Olvie, Nick Carol Wilmington, Ryan Davenport the third Clayton, Alysia Du Dulco, Trever Edwards Gullsburough, Dan Hetchpet Fayeteville, Briggs Manis Tryan, Molly Catherine McDonald Mt. Olive, Elib Sanders Morganton, Agia White Calgores. [speaker changes] Pages we thank you for your service to the senate. We hope you enjoy your week. It looks like its going to be an eventful one. And we hope you'll also return to see us in the future too. Thanks for your service. We have any notices or announcements? Senator Allran, for what purpose do you rise? [speaker changes] Judiciary 2 will meet tomorrow at 10:00 in Room 1124. Thank you. [Speaker changes} Do we have any other notices or announcements? Is there any further business to come before the senate? If not, the chair recognizes Senator Berger for a motion. [speaker changes] Thank you Mr. President. I move that the senate do now adjourn subject to the re referral of bills and resolutions and the receipt of messages from the House and the Governor to reconvene on Tuesday, April 23rd 2013 at 2:00 p.m. [speaker changes] The motion that the senate do now adjourn subject to the stipulations stated by Senator Berger to reconvene Tuesday April 23rd at 2:00 p.m. Seconded by Senator Curtis. All in favor say aye,opposed no. The aye's have it. The senate stands adjourned.