WEEK SEVEN LEGISLATIVE REPORTS

In appropriations this week, we cleared our docket of bills. Next week begins the task of putting all the pieces together, and it will be a busy time. SB205, the bill to reduce the original registration tax on drones and separate the revenue from the aeronautics commission, made it out of committee in the House before it nosedived and crashed and burned after coming into contact with many members who are more concerned about funding airport maintenance than keeping tax revenue uses germane to the industry being taxed. First on the calendar for cross over day Tuesday was two reconsideration votes. The prior day, SB193, which would change regulatory laws regarding back up generation, had been reconsidered. After that vote the sponsor gave his intent to reconsider the second time, then I stood up and asked for a parliamentary inquiry, asking how it is eligible for reconsideration when it’s been reconsidered once already. The President then responded that it is his interpretation of the rules that since the bill was amended before the vote it was now a different question and therefore eligible for reconsideration. That evening we talked with LRC staff and we felt that this was not the correct interpretation of the rules, and that it was worth challenging to avoid setting bad precedent and allowing a continuous loop of reconsiderations to begin to take place. When the second vote for reconsideration on SB193 came up, the President Pro Temp called for a point of order and stated his case on why he believed SB193 was ineligible to be reconsidered a second time. The body supported that challenge and SB193 was then lost. The next reconsideration vote was on SB239, a bill aiming to expand a government economic development program for large projects. This bill would’ve allowed the GOED (Governor’s Office of Economic Development) board to review applicants on a caseby- case basis and grant partial or full sales tax refunds for up to 30 years. When it came time for the reconsideration vote a member called for a “Call of the House.” This rule requires the Sergeants at arms to close the doors of the chamber and search for the missing member( s) to bring them back to vote. Why would a member of the body who voted yes on the bill the day prior care so much if a member who voted no was missing? Thanks to the Supreme Court’s advisory opinion stating they believe the LT Governor can cast a vote to break a tie on final passage of a bill, a 17-17 vote leaves a good chance the bill will pass if the Governor’s office supports it, effectively making a member’s absence more powerful than their no vote. After the “call of the house” motion was made, and the search conducted, the report was that they could not find him, contact him, nor was his car in the parking lot. The Senator was actually gone before we caucused prior to session. We voted to proceed with business, and the bill was defeated. This upset some members of the body, which then led to several procedural motions being made that extended the night even longer for no reason. We ended the week on a good note, with HB1001, the bill to allow for prescribed burning along the river, passing with no opposition. This is a long overdue victory for ranchers in our district who are doing their best to steward the land they care for and preserve our grasslands.