WELCOME TO "KENTUCKY TONIGHT."

I'M RENEE SHAW.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US.

TONIGHT A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE 2022 KENTUCKY LEGISLATIVE SESSI THE SESSION BEGAN ALMOST A WEEK LAWMAKERS HAVE ALREADY SENT THE GOVERNOR BILLS TO REDRAW LEGISLATIVE AND CONGRESSIONAL B THEY HAVE PUSHED BACK THE FILIN DEADLINE TO RUN FOR POLITICAL O AND LAST FRIDAY, HOUSE REPUBLICANS FILED A BUDGET BILL BEFORE THE GOVERNOR UNVEILED HI BUDGET PLAN.

DEMOCRATS BLASTED THAT AS A VIOLATION OF A LONGST TODAY THE GOVERNOR PROPOSED $2 BILLION IN NEW FUNDING FOR PRE-K THROUGH 12 EDUCATION, INCLUDING FULL FUNDING FOR UNIVERSAL PRE- TO DISCUSS ALL OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS AND WHAT'S NEXT, W ARE JOINED IN LEXINGTON BY FOUR TOP LEGISLATIVE LEADERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY: SENATOR ROBERT STIVERS, A REPUBLICAN FROM MANCHESTER AND KENTUCKY SENATE SENATOR MORGAN MCGARVEY, A DEMOCRAT FROM LOUISVILLE AND SENATE MINORITY FLOOR LEADER.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVID OSBORNE, A REPUBLICAN FROM PROSPECT AND KENTUCKY HOUSE SPEAKER.

AND REPRESENTATIVE JONI JENKINS, A DEMOCRAT FROM SHIVELY AND HOUSE MINORITY FLOOR LEADER.

WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU.

TONIGHT, SO SEND US A QUESTION OR COMMENT O SEND AN EMAIL TO KYTONIGHT@KET.

OR USE THE WEB FORM AT KET.ORG/ MAKE SURE TO CHECK THE BOX THAT SAYS YOU'RE NOT A ROBOT.

OR YOU MAY GIVE US A CALL ON th WELCOME TO ALL OF OUR GUESTS.

EVER L. I KNOW THAT PRESIDENT STIVERS IS PARTICULARLY FOND OF THAT ROBOT LANGUAGE.

AND WE THANK ALL OF YOU FOR MAKING US YOUR CHOICE TONIGHT INSTEAD OF SOME KIND OF GAME THAT'S HAPPENING.

YOU CAN ALWAYS CATCH THAT LATER, RIGHT?

LET'S STAT WITH SOME EVENTS THAT HAPPENED TODAY.

ACTUALLY LET'S START WITH WHAT HAPPENED ON FRIDAY.

SPEAKER OSBORNE, HOUSE REPUBLICANS MADE THE UNPRECEDENTED BILGE BILL OF FILING THE LEGISLATIVE BILL ON THE FOURTH LEGISLATIVE DAY, AND THIS IS KIND OF UNUSUAL SINCE YOU HAVE NOT.

USUALLY YOU WAIT FOR THE GOVERNOR TO SUBMIT HIS PROPOSAL.

SO WHY DO THAT?

WHAT KIND OF JUMP START ARE YOU HOPING TO GET HERE?

>> I GUESS IT IS A LITTLE BIT UNPRECEDENTED, BUT AT THE SAME TIME I'M NOT SURE WHY IT'S UNPRECEDENTED BECAUSE WE SPEND AN PRIME INTERIM WITH OUR BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS, TAKING TESTIMONY FROM COUNTY FISHES, SCHOOL OFFICIALS ABOUT WHAT THEIR BUDGET NEEDS ARE.

APPROPRIATIONS AND REVENUE MEETS THROUGHOUT THE INTERIM, WORKING ON BUDGET ITEMS.

AND SO IT DOESN'T SEEM UNUSUAL TO ME THAT WE WOULD GET IT OUT AS SOON AS WE POSSIBLY COULD.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT ON SOME LEVEL THE ADMINISTRATION OUGHT TO BE TICKLED BY IT BECAUSE NORMALLY HE GETS TO ROLL HIS BUDGET OUT AND WE WOULD IMMEDIATELY START POKING HOLES IN IT, AND NOW HE CAN IMMEDIATELY START POKING HOLES IN OURS, AND APPLAUDING HIS OWN IN THE PROCESS.

>> SO WE'RE GOING TO GET TO, OF COURSE, SOME OF THE NITTY-GRITTY OF THE DETAILS BUT HERE'S WHAT HE ANNOUNCED TODAY ABOUT THE $2 BILLION WORTH OF EDUCATION FUNDING.

ROLL TAPE.

>> MY BUDGET ADDS RECORD FUNDING, NEARLY $2 BILLION IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING OVER THE NEXT BIENNIUM PRE-K THROUGH 12th GRADE.

THAT'S RIGHT.

I SAID PRE-K.

THIS BUDGET STARTS AT THE YELLOWS AGE PROVIDING UNIVERSAL PRE-CATCHMENT.

PHIL FUNDING UNIVERSAL PRE-K FOR ALL FOUR-YEAR-OLDS AND FUNDING FULL-DAY KINDERGARTEN FOR EVERY KENTUCKY CHILD FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER.

NO LONGER WILL TENS OF THOUSANDS OF OUR CHILDREN BE LEFT OUT OF PRE-SCHOOL OR HEAD START.

PROGRAMS THAT WE KNOW PROVIDE POSITIVE OUTCOMES ON CHILDREN'S EARLY LITERACY AND MATHEMATICS SKILLS AND FOSTER LONG-TERM EDUCATIONAL SUCCESS.

THE COST IS MORE THAN AFFORDABLE.

PRE-K FOR EVERY FOUR-YEAR-OLD IN KENTUCKY COSTS $172 MILLION EACH YEAR OF THE NEXT BIENNIUM.

COMBINED WITH $140 MILLION PROVIDED IN THE LAST BUDGET FOR FULL-DAY KINDERGARTEN, KENTUCKY WOULD NOT PROVIDE OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITH THE RESOURCES NEEDED TO FULLY IMPLEMENT A PRE-K THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL SYSTEM.

AND LET ME TELL YOU, EARLY LEARNING IS NOT JUST CRITICAL.

WITH OUR CURRENT BUDGET OUTLOOK IT IS MORE THAN AFFORDABLE.

FULL FUNDING PRE-K FOR ALL FOUR-YEAR-OLDS IS LESS THAN 8% OF THE BUDGET SURPLUS WE HAVE GOING INTO THIS BUDGET.

IT'S NOT JUST SOMETHING WE CAN AFFORD TO DO.

IT IS SOMETHING WE MUST DO.

>> SO WHEN THE GOVERNOR WAS ASKED TODAY ABOUT THE TIMING OF HIS PARTIAL BUDGET REVEAL WHEN IT COMES TO EDUCATION FUNDING AND THE HOUSE GOP FILING OF THE BILL LAST WEEK, HERE'S WHAT HE HAD TO SAY.

>> ORIGINALLY TIMING WAS WE WERE GOING TO BRIEF LEGISLATORS ON THURSDAY, HOUSE AND SENATE LEADERSHIP AND OTHERS.

WE WERE GOING TO BRIEF THE PRESS ON THURSDAY, AND WE WERE GOING TO BRIEF OTHER GROUPS.

THAT'S THE WAY WE DID IT LAST YEAR AFTER GETTING INPUT FROM A YEAR BEFORE WHEN LEGISLATIVE LEADERSHIP WAS UPSET THAT WE BRIEFED THE PRESS AND MADE SOME OF THE INFORMATION PUBLIC BEFORE BRIEFING THEM.

OBVIOUSLY, THAT ALL CHANGED WHEN THE HOUSE FILED A BUDGET BILL FOR THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WITHOUT CONSULTING OR ALERTING THE BUDGET BRANCH -- THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.

WE WERE COMPLETELY SURPRISED.

WE HAVE BEEN IN MEETINGS WITH THESE INDIVIDUALS, AND NO ONE HAD EVER MENTIONED IT.

SO IT REQUIRED CHANGING OUR TIMELINE.

AND I HOPE THE NEXT BUDGET WE CAN GET BACK TO THAT MORE TRADITIONAL SCHEDULE WHERE WE CAN PROVIDE THAT BRIEFING TO LEGISLATORS BEFORE THE PUBLIC, BUT THE HOUSE'S ACTIONS MADE THAT -- DIDN'T MAKE THAT POSSIBLE.

YOU'VE HEARD A WHOLE LOT, AND I GET IT, IN REDISTRICTING ABOUT DEMOCRATS USED TO DO THIS, AND DEMOCRATS USED TO DO THAT.

NO ONE HAS EVER DONE THIS.

FILE A BUDGET BEFORE THE GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATION AND MAYBE EVEN ACTING LIKE THEY IGNORED IT WITH NO ONE'S DONE THAT TO A GOVERNOR, DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN.

NO HOUSE HAS DONE THAT WHETHER CONTROLLED BY DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS.

SO UNPRECEDENTED ONE PROVOKED, BUT MAINLY UNWISE.

RIGHT?

TO PUSH FORWARD AN EXECUTIVE BRANCH BUDGET WITHOUT ITS INPUT.

YOU'RE JUST NOT GOING TO GET A GOOD PRODUCT.

AND I THINK ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT BRANCHES.

SO LET'S DO THIS THING RIGHT.

AND AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO FOCUS ON DRAMA.

IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME PERSONALLY BUT IT LEADS TO AN INFERIOR PRODUCT WHICH PROVIDES INFERIOR SERVICES TO OUR PEOPLE.

>> SO LEADER JENKINS, DO YOU AGREE WITH THE GOVERNOR?

>> YOU KNOW, WE ARE AT A POINT NOW WHERE WE HAVE SEEN LOTS OF POLITICAL GAMES MANSHIP BUT I'M READY TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THIS IS.

IT'S THE PEOPLE'S BUDGET.

AND I THINK AS WE GO FORWARD, I HOPE THERE'S ROOM FOR COMPROMISE, THAT THERE'S ROOM FOR TRANSPARENCY, AND THAT THE VOICES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AS WELL AS THE MINORITY AND THE MAJORITY ARE HEARD, AND THAT IS THE PEOPLE, THAT THE PEOPLE OF KENTUCKY AND THE STAKEHOLDERS, LIKE EDUCATORS, LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND ALL THOSE PEOPLE WHO RELY ON THE STATE BUDGET ARE HEARD, AND IT'S DONE IN A VERY OPEN AND TRANSPARENT WAY.

>> BUT THEY'VE BEEN HERD.

SPEAKER OSBORNE SAID YOU HAVE ALL THESE BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKING TESTIMONY AND PLANNING.

HASN'T THAT ALREADY HAPPENED?

>> I DON'T THINK THE ELLEN J PUBLIC HAS HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THE BUDGET AND HEAR FROM US ON YOU ARE WHAT OUR PRIORITIES ARE.

>> SPEAKER OBSTRUCT JUSTICE OSBORNE YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT THE GOVERNOR SAID TODAY.

>> I THINK IT'S RIDICULOUS TO ASSERT THAT IT WOULD SOMEHOW RESULT IN AN INFERIOR PRODUCT.

I THINK AS LEADER JENKINS SAID, THE MORE EXPOSURE ALL OF THAT THESE BUDGET BILLS HAVE, THE BETTER.

THE BETTER WORK PRODUCTIVE.

CERTAINLY WE WILL CONSIDER, JUST AS WE DO EVERY BUDGET SESSION, WE WILL FULLY CONSIDER EVERY ITEM THAT THE GOVERNOR HAS OFFERED UP.

I AM CERTAIN, JUST AS NO GOVERNOR'S BUDGET HAS EVER, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, PASSED THE HOUSE EXACTLY AS IT WAS PRESENTED, I AM CERTAIN THAT AS WE GO FORWARD, THE SENATE WILL BLEED ALL OVER WHATEVER WE PASS, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND PASS SOMETHING TOGETHER.

I DO WANT TO CORRECT SOMETHING 2 GOVERNOR SAID, THOUGH.

MY VERY FIRST SESSION IN 2:00, I SPECIFICALLY REMEMBER -- 2006 WHEN GOVERNOR FLETCHER PRESENTED HIS BUDGET, AND JONI, YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER THIS, THEN SPEAKER JODY RICHARDS AND CHAIRMAN HARRY MOBERLY HAD A CEREMONIAL THROWING OF HIS BUDGET IN THE GARBAGE AND REFUSED TO SIGN IT AND JEFF HOOVER ACTUALLY HAD TO SPONSOR THE BILL BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATS REFUSED TO.

>> DO YOU REMEMBER THAT, LEADER JENKINS?

>> I DO NOT REMEMBER THAT.

>> I DO.

I THINK ROCKY ADD PUMPKINS AND GREG STUMBO WERE THERE AT THE TIME TO.

>> I DON'T THINK GREG WAS.

HE WAS ATTORNEY GENERAL.

>> THAT'S RIGHT, HE WAS.

>> THE POINT THAT THE GOVERNOR ALSO MADE ABOUT IT'S UNWISE FOR THIS TO HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT CONSULTING THE BUDGET DIRECTOR AND GETTING ALL OF THOSE NUMBERS, AND HE MENTIONED TWO STA CHUTES, 48100 THAT SAYS THE GOVERNOR HAS TO PRESENT A BUDGET BRANCH RECOMMENDATION AND THEN 48300, THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY SHALL ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH MODIFICATIONS, AND HE IS INTIMATING THAT WHAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE SUN LAWFUL.

>> AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S LAUGHABLE.

OBVIOUSLY, THE GOVERNOR AND I DISAGREED ON SOME THINGS, BUT THE ASSERTION THAT THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO FILE A BILL IS PROBABLY THE MOST ABSURD ASSERTION THAT I'VE EVER HEARD.

I ACTUALLY HOPE THAT HE WOULD SUE BECAUSE I'M INTERESTED IN KNOWING WHAT HIS POSSIBLE ARGUMENT MIGHT BE THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO FILE OUR OWN BULL.

>> HE FELL SHORT OF SAYING THAT TODAY ACTUALLY.

LEADER McGARVEY, YOUR TAKE ON ALL OF THIS.

>> YEAH, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, IT IS THE LEGISLATURE'S JOB TO DRAFT THE BUDGET, BUT IT'S HOW WE DO IT, AND SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT.

THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THIS SESSION IN A 60-DAY SESSION -- WE'RE HERE UNTIL APRIL 15th.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE RUSHED.

WHY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RUSHED?

WE ARE IN THE CURRENTLY FISCAL YEAR FOR WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY PASSED THE BUDGET.

IT DOESN'T END UNTIL JUNE 30s.

WHAT WHATEVER WE PASS ISN'T GOING TO GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL JULY 1st.

WE HAVE TIME.

AND TALKING WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE GIVING TESTIMONY IN AN HOUR AND SOME MEMBERS MIGHT BE THERE AND WEREN'T PRESENT OR SOME MEMBER MIGHT HAVE BEEN ON VACATION, WHAT WE GET FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, NOT FROM GOVERNOR BESHEAR BUT FROM THE OFFICE OF GOVERNOR, FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT IS THEIR IDEA OF WHAT WE SHOULD BE SPENDING ON BECAUSE THEY DEAL WITH IT EVERY DAY.

RIGHT?

AND THESE ARE THE THINGS WE ALL ACTUALLY AGREE ON.

WE HAVE TO FUND MEDICAID.

WE HAVE TO FUND SCHOOLS.

WE HAVE TO FUND CORRECTIONS.

WE HAVE OBLIGATIONS IN STATE GOVERNMENT TO KNOW WHAT OUR CURRENT EXPENDITURES ARE, TO KNOW WHAT OUR PROJECTED EXPENDITURES ARE.

JUST TODAY GOING FORWARD AND TO KNOW WHAT OUR PROJECTED REVENUES ARE.

WE NEED TO AGREE AND HAVE THE BEST NUMBERS ON ALL OF THOSE NUMBERS.

I THINK THAT'S WHY THE GOVERNOR SAID IT WOULD BE WISE OF US TO HEAR THOSE NUMBERS FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND SEE WHAT THEY'RE PUTTING FORWARD BEFORE WE HAD THE DISAGREEMENTS ON HOW MUCH WE NEED TO SPEND OR SHOULD BE SPENDING OUT OF THOSE POCKETS, BUT TO SEE REALLY WHAT THE WORKING NUMBERS OF STATE GOVERNMENT ARE.

THAT'S HOW A BUDGET WORKS, AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE BEST PEOPLE INVESTED BUDGET WE CAN GOING FORWARD.

SPEAKER OSBORNE IS RIGHT.

THE HOUSE IS GOING TO TAKE WHAT THE GOV DID AND PUT THEIR OWN SPIN ON IT.

THEN THE SENATE IS GOING TO PUT THEY EVER OWN SPIN ON IT AND WE'RE ALL GOING TO COME BACK TOGETHER.

IT WILL TAKE TIME BUT WE COULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB GETTING OFF ON THE RIGHT FOOT.

>> PRESIDENT STIVERS.

>> I WAS JUST INTERESTED IN WATCHING THE GOVERNOR AND REPRESENTATIVE JENN SKINS AND SPEAKER GARVEY BECAUSE SENATOR OSBORNE DIDN'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT IT UNTIL THE OTHER DAY.

I DON'T THINK ANYBODY VIOLATES ANY LAWS OR STATUTE.

>> BUT IT IS UNPRECEDENTED, RIGHT?

>> IT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE SEEN THAT, BUT IT DOESN'T STOP US.

AND LET'S MAKE THIS -- A THE BUDGET IS AN APPROPRIATION.

THE LEGISLATURE, BOTH HOUSE AND SENATE, FILE BILLS THAT APPROPRIATE MONEY ALL THE TIME.

THE ONLY THING THAT'S EXCLUSIVE TO THE HOUSE IN THE WAY OF THE BUDGETING IS REVENUE RAISING MEASURES, EITHER UP OR DOWN, BUT APPROPRIATIONS CAN START EITHER PLACE.

FOR THE HISTORY THAT I'VE BEEN HERE, THE REASON WE ALWAYS ATTACH THE BUDGET TO THE HOUSE AND STARTING IN THE HOUSE WAS BECAUSE THEY CONTROL AND HAVE TO BE THE INITIATING BODY FOR RAISING REVENUE, SO IT MADE SENSE TO DO THAT.

BUT THERE'S NO YOU KNOW THE GOVERNOR SHALL PRESENT.

IT DOESN'T SAY THE LEGISLATURE SHALL NOT.

AND YOU SHALL ENACT.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S -- YOU WILL WORK OFF OF RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, AND AS SPEAKER OSBORNE SAID TO REPRESENTATIVE JENKINS, WHEN HARRY MOBERLY WAS THE A&R CHAIR IN 2006 OR '7, THEY WALKED IT UP TOOT TRASH CAN AND DROPPED IT AND SAID, WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY RECOMMENDATION FROM THE GOVERNOR, AND INTRODUCED A TOTALLY NEW BILL JUST AFTERWARDS.

SO IT'S BEFORE OR AFTER.

WHAT DOES IT MATTER?

EVENTUALLY, AT THE END OF THE TIME OF APRIL 15th, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADOPT A BUDGET.

>> SO IS IT IN AN EFFORT TO GET TO OTHER IMPORTANT MATTERS LIKE TAX REFORM, IF YOU GET THE BUDGET OUT OF THE WAY, THEN YOU CAN DEAL WITH THAT BIG JUGGERNAUT.

IS THAT THE PURPOSE OF EXPEDITING THIS PROCESS?

>> YOU KNOW, I'M AMS CAREFUL TO BE AWARE THAT I DON'T HAVE A PARTICULARLY LARGE MEGAPHONE, BUT IF YOU'VE HEARD ANYTHING THAT I HAVE SEVERED THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS AT ANY OF THE GROUPS I'VE SPOKEN TO WITH ANY OF THE FORUMS THAT I'VE BEEN, THAT WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY TAKE THE MOST AGGRESSIVE TIMELINE ON BUDGET IN RECENT HISTORY, AND THAT IS BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TO DO TAX REFORM, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THOSE TWO THINGS SHOULD BE DONE HAND IN HAND.

I THINK THEY ARE COMPETING FORCES.

SO, YES, I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO EXPEDITE THE BUDGET AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

CERTAINLY WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'VE GOT A GOOD PRODUCT THAT WE DON'T RUSH.

BUT WE ALSO DON'T WANT TO DRAG OUR FEET ON THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITIES IN FRONT OF US THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET TO.

>> SO THE GOVERNOR DID KIND OF GIVE A SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARE SOLVENT HOUSE BUDGET AS IT RELATES TO SOME EDUCATION FUNDING AND WHAT HE'S PROPOSING.

TAKE A LOOK.

>> MY BUDGET RECOMMENDATION WILL PROVIDE $685 MILLION MORE IN SEEK FUNDING THAN THE ONE THAT WAS FILED OVER THE TWO YEARS.

OURS HAS UNIVERSAL PRE-K.

THE HOUSE'S DOES NOT.

OURS REQUIRES TEACHER AND SCHOOL STAFF SALARY INCREASES.

THE HOUSE'S DOES NOT.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, WE HAVE $115 MILLION MORE THAN THE HOUSE VERSION.

SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL LEARNING 1 WE INCLUDE FUNDING.

THE HOUSE DOES NOT.

TURN AROUND SCHOOLS INCLUDE FUNDING.

THE HOUSE DOES NOT.

EARLY LEARNING INITIATIVE, WE INCLUDE FUNDING.

HOUSE DOES NOT.

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTERS WE INCLUDE FUNDING, AND THE HOUSE DOESN'T.

ON POST-SECONDARY INSTITUTION, $57.5 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING, AND THE GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATION, IT INCLUDES THE BETTER KENTUCKY PROMISE SCHOLARSHIPS AND POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

SO THAT IS, VERY QUICKLY, WHAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO SEE.

REMEMBER, IN THIS PROCESS CHANGES CAN BE MADE AS IT GOES.

THE SENATE COLONEL CERTAINLY WILL HAVE CHANGES AS WELL WHEN IT REACHES THAT CHAMBER.

BUT IN THE VERY LEAST THE HOUSE SHOULD LOOK AT THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE ON THURSDAY AND SAY, CAN WE DO BETTER?

>> SO ON THURSDAY, AS A REMINDER, WE WILL BE CARRYING KET, THE BUDGET ADDRESS THAT WILL BE DELIVERED LIVE AT SEDGES P.M. EASTERN TIME SO WE HOPE YOU'LL TUNE IN TO THAT.

SPEAKER OSBORN, DID YOU HEAR ANYTHING THAT THE GOVERNOR PROPOSED TODAY TO THINK, OKAY, THIS IS NEGOTIATING ROOM.

WE'RE BILLING TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT HERE IF HE GIVES A LITTLE BIT THERE.

>> I'M SURE THERE WILL.

AGAIN, I HAVEN'T SEEN THE PROPOSAL SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR, BUT I THINK IT MAKES MY EXACT POINT, IS THAT BECAUSE WE PRESENTED OURS EARLY, IT ALLOWS HIM TO MAKE A SIDE-BY-SIDE, JUST AS WE WOULD NORMALLY DO AFTER HIS.

WE'VE GIVEN HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THAT SIDE-BY-SIDE.

I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S MADE ANY CHANGES IN HIS THE BUDGET PROPOSAL BASED ON WHAT WE PRESENTED OR NOT BECAUSE CERTAINLY IF HE WANTED TO, HE COULD HAVE.

HE WOULD HAVE MADE SOME CHANGES.

AND ABSOLUTELY, AS I HAVE SAID ALL ALONG, I SAID LAST FRIDAY WHEN WE DROPPED THE BUDGET, WE WILL ABSOLUTELY 100% GIVE HIS CONSIDERATION -- OR GIVE HIS RECOMMENDATIONS FULL CONSIDERATION.

AND THIS IS A LONG PROCESS THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH UNTIL WE COME UP WITH THE BEST PRODUCT WE CAN.

>> LEADER JENKINS, WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE HOUSE GOP PLAN?

TALKING ABOUT THE SUBS SUBSTANCE NOW, NOT NECESSARILY THE PROCESS OR PROCEDURE.

>> I THINK WHAT THE GOVERNOR LAID OUT THIS MORNING, THE PAYING FOR UNIVERSAL PRE-K, BIG INVESTMENTS INTO EDUCATION, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THE HOUSE MINORITY CAUCUS HAS BEEN WANTING TO HEAR.

I THINK FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MANY YEARS, WE HAVE MONEY TO ARGUE ABOUT HOW WE SPEND IT INSTEAD OF ABOUT WHERE THE CUTS ARE GOING TO BE.

SO I THINK THAT'S VERY EXCITING AND VERY POSITIVE FOR KENTUCKY.

AND I THINK IF WE ARE GOING TO MAKE BIG BOLD INVESTMENTS, THE PLACE TO DO IT IS WITH OUR YOUNGEST CITIZENS, AND WE KNOW THAT WE GET SO MUCH BANG FOR OUR BUCK BY GETTING PRE-SCHOOLERS IN FULL DAY ALL DAY SCHOOL.

I ALSO LIKE WHAT THE GOVERNOR HAS BEEN SAYING ABOUT FUNDING CHILD CARE.

ONE OF THE LESSONS THAT WE'VE LEARNED FROM COVID AND THE PANDEMIC IS HOW MUCH WORKING MEN AND WOMEN RELY ON GOOD, AFFORDABLE CHILD CARE AS WELL AS WHAT PRE-K AND FULL-DAY KINDERGARTEN WILL DO FOR WORKING FAMILIES.

>> SO TERRY BROOKS WHO YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT THE KENTUCKY UTHE ADVOCATES HAS WRITTEN AN OP ED A WHILE BACK AND HE WANTS TO ASK WHAT PUBLIC POLICIES CAN WE SEE ENACTED THAT WILL HELP KENTUCKY KIDS.

IS IT UNIVERSAL PRE-K?

TO HELP KIDS?

>> I THINK THERE'S STILL MORE THAT WE CAN DO BY INVESTING IN OUR K THROUGH 12, TO MAKING SURE THAT DISTRICTS ARE FULLY FUNDED IN THEIR TRANSPORTATION COSTS SO THEY CAN DO OTHER THINGS, LIKE TEXTBOOKS AND WRAPAROUND SERVICES.

I THINK WE HAVE MANY KIDS COMING BACK FROM THE PANDEMIC THAT ARE GOING TO NEED MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND TO MAKE THOSE AVAILABLE.

NURSES, SCHOOL NURSES I THINK ARE A BIG ITEM THAT CAN MEAN A WHOLE LOT FOR KIDS AS THEY ARTICULATE THROUGH.

>> SO, PRESIDENT STIVERS, WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD COMING FROM THE HOUSE GOP AND FROM THE GOVERNOR, ANYTHING THAT YOU THINK, OH, WE CAN GO FOR THAT?

I MEAN, I KNOW IT'S EARLY FOR YOU ALL, BUT WHAT WOULD YOU GREEN LIGHT?

>> NOTHING YET.

WE GOT A COPY OF THE BILL.

WE'VE HEARD THE GOVERNOR JUST A FEW HOURS AGO SPEAK OF SOME THINGS IN GENERIC TERMS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL EXPENDITURES ARE FOR.

THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE, AND INCLUDING ME, I'M NOT A FAN OF PRE-K.

I THINK KIDS NEED TO BE KIDS.

LET THEM BE OUT AND BE IN THEIR SYSTEM AND -- NOW, AS TO WHAT REPRESENTATIVE JENKINS TALKS ABOUT IN THE WAY OF CHILD CARE, THAT'S THE NUMBER ONE IMPEDIMENT FOR PEOPLE GETTING BACK INTO THE WORKFORCE.

I THINK THERE'S SOME POTENTIAL TO DISCUSS THERE.

BUT I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE A STATE-RUN PROGRAM.

LET'S INCENT BUSINESSES TO START THEIR OWN DAYCARES.

LET'S LOOK AT HOW WE DO THAT TO ASSIST THEM TO DEVELOP WHAT THEIR EMPLOYEES NEED TO GET BACK INTO THE WORKFORCE.

AND IF MONEY WERE THE CURE, I'M GOING TO LOOK TO MY COLLEAGUES HERE, IT'S APPARENT THE MONEY AND THE JCPS EP HASN'T BEEN WELL SPENT, AND YOU CAN LOOK AT THE WHOLE SERIES OF ARTICLES THAT THE COURIER-JOURNAL JUST WROTE AND HOW IT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR THE LAST 15 OR 20 YEARS, SO 911 IS NOT THE CURE-ALL TO EVERYTHING.

>> MONEY IS NOT THE CURE-ALL TO EVERYTHING.

>> I WANT TO GET YOUR PERSPECTIVE ABOUT THAT, SENATOR McGARVEY.

AND YOU'RE NOT FOR PRE-SCHOOL.

WHAT'S YOUR PHILOSOPHICAL DISAGREEMENT WITH THE BENEFITS OF PRE-K?

>> WELL, I'VE HEARD MY FRIEND DAMON THAYER TALK ABOUT RECALLED TO GRAVE.

YOU KNOW, CHILDREN DON'T HAVE TO BE IN SCHOOL.

THERE WERE STUDIES ON IT THERE THAT SAID PRE-K AND ALL-DAY KINDERGARTEN WERE NOT THAT BIG OF AN INFLUENCE TO ACADEMIC SUCCESS.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND FUND THIS.

WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO BE?

IN OUR SCHOOL SYSTEMS FROM THE TIME THEY'RE NOW THREE, FOUR ALL THE WAY UNTIL THEY'RE 18 OR 19?

I'M NOT SO SURE THAT'S THE TYPE OF SOCIETY THAT I WANT TO DO THAT WE ARE BASICALLY INSTITUTIONALIZING OUR CHILDREN FROM A VERY YOUNG AGE TO THEY GET TO BECOME YOUNG ADULTS, AND I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY DATA, AND EVERYBODY'S GOING TO SAY, OH, THERE'S DATA THIS WAY OR THAT WAY, THAT CONVINCES ME THAT PRE-K IS OF SUBSTANCE.

I DIDN'T HAVE PRE-K. MY CHILDREN DIDN'T HAVE PRE-K. MY NIECES AND NEPHEWS DIDN'T HAVE PRE-K. AND WE'RE ALL BASICALLY GRADUATES OF COLLEGES, UNIVERSITIES, MASTERS AND DOCTORATE PROGRAMS.

>> LEADER McGARVEY.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

FIRST OF ALL, I'LL START WITH SAYING I THINK THIS SESSION SHOULD BE ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO, NOT TALK ABOUT WHAT WE CAN'T DO, WHAT WE CAN DO.

WE REALLY DO HAVE A ONCE IN A GENERATION OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW PFM WE HAVE $5 BILLION?

FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE MONEY COMING INTO KENTUCKY.

WE HAVE $1 BILLION IN THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT.

WE HAVE $1 BILLION IN SURPLUS THIS YEAR.

WE HAVE $2 BILLION IN PROJECTED SURPLUS FOR THIS BUDGET.

WE HAVE A RAINY DAY FUND THAT IS OVERFLOWING.

WE CAN MAKE THE INVESTMENT IN OUR MOST IMPORTANT ASSET IN KENTUCKY, AND THAT'S HUMAN CAPITAL.

NOW, I'LL START WITH PRE-K BECAUSE I THINK IT'S HUGELY IMPORTANT, AND I'M THE ONLY PERSON HERE RIGHT NOW WHO HAS A CHILD IN PRE-K RUNNING AROUND MY HOUSE RIGHT NOW.

I HAVE A THREE-YEAR-OLD AT HOME WHO I HOPE IS IN BED, AND THERE'S A HUGE BENEFIT.

WE KNOW THAT 95% OF THE BRAIN IS WIRED BY AGE FIVE.

WE KNOW THIS IS NOT SENDING KIDS TO INSTITUTIONALIZE THEM.

THIS IS MAKING SURE KIDS HAVE SOCIAL ABILITIES AND FINE MOTOR SKILLS AND CAN KIND OF PICK OUT COLORS AND ARE KINDERGARTEN READY SO THAT THEY CAN ACHIEVE THAT LIFELONG LEARNING.

HAVING PRE-K IS HUGE.

IT'S NOT JUST THE PRE-K AND THIS IS WHAT PRESIDENT STIVERS DIDN'T POINT OUT, THERE'S A CHILD CARE COMPONENT TO IT.

IT'S NOT JUST WAGES KEEPING 100,000 KENTUCKY WOMEN FROM GOING BACK INTO THE WORKFORCE RIGHT NOW.

WE CAN DO THIS AND I THINK WE ABSOLUTELY SHOULD.

LOOK AT THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

WE CAN FIX OUR ROADS AND BRIDGES BUT NOT JUST THAT INFRASTRUCTURE.

LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE REALLY WANT AND THAT'S THE INFORMATION SUPER HIGHWAY.

WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT EVERY KENTUCKY HASSAN ACCESS TO HIGH SPEED INTERNET.

WE CAN PROVIDE HEALTH CARE.

WE CAN DO SO MANY THINGS, NOT JUST PRE-K.

THE BUCKS FOR BRAINS.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRE-SCHOOL TO BUCKS FOR BRAINS.

STATE EMPLOYEES.

STATE EMPLOYEES HADN'T HAVEN'T HAD A MEANINGFUL RACE IN 13 YEARS ALL THE WHILE EAVE WEAN WHIMELING AWAY THE RETIREMENT BENEFITS.

NO STATE EMPLOYEE RIGHT NOW WHO STARTED THIS YEAR, INCLUDING TEACHERS, GETS A DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION AS PEOPLE THINK ABOUT IT.

IF WE WANT TO RUN GOVERNMENT UK LIKE A BUSINESS WEEK THEN WE'VE GOT TO MAY PAY OUR WORKERS.

A PERSON WORKING IN MARY HURST RIGHT NOW DEALING WITH OUR MOST VULNERABLE AND MARGINALIZED GIRLS IS MAKING $11.

YOU CAN MAKE $19 STOCKING SHELVE AT WALMART.

WE MUST DO BETTER BY OUR EMPLOYEES AND BETTER BY OUR PEOPLE.

ONE OF MY PREDECESSOR DAVID CARRIE-ANNE DESCRIBED THE BUDGETTATION MORAL DOCUMENT.

I WE CAN SIT HERE AND TELL YOU WHAT WE CARE ABOUT IF WE ARE NOT PUTTING MONEY IN THIS BUDGET IN PARTICULAR THEN WE'RE NO DOING IT RIGHT.

>> THE HOUSE WAS PROPOSED RAISES FOR STATE EMPLOYEES, 6%, THE FIRST PART OF THE FISCAL YEAR.

RIGHTS NOT MENTIONED FOR THE SECOND PART BUT THE PERSONNEL CABINET WOULD HAVE TO DO SOME CLASSIFICATION TYPE OF THINGS.

IS THAT REALLY WHERE YOU WANT TO GO, 6%?

DO YOU THINK NEACE A GOOD NUMBER?

AND HOW DID YOU COME TO THAT?

>> IT WAS A NUMBER THROUGH RESEARCH BASICALLY TO TRY TO GET US BACK UP TO A LEVEL THAT WE WERE ABOUT TEN OR 12 YEARS AGO IN COMPARABLE TERMS.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S THE END NUMBER OR THE ULTIMATELY NUMBER BUT THAT WOULD BE KIND OF THE MINIMUM NUMBER.

IT WOULD OBVIOUSLY INCREASE, LARGER INCREASES FOR SOCIAL WORKERS, FOR STATE POLICE, SOME TARGETED AREAS WOULD HAVE LARGER INCREASES THAN THAT.

>> WHY NOT A DOLLAR AMOUNT OR A PERCENTAGE AMOUNT FORT SECOND PART OF THE FISCAL YEAR?

>> IT'S BASICALLY TO KEEP US -- TO DEVELOP A BETTER PERSONNEL SYSTEM.

YOU KNOW, I DO THINK THAT IS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE'VE GOTTEN INTO IN STATE -- WITH STATE EMPLOYEES, AND SENATOR McGARVEY ALLUDED TO IT, THAT BASED ON WHERE YOU LIVE, THE PAY MAY NEED TO BE DIFFERENT BASED ON COST OF LIVING, BASED ON WORKING CONDITIONS.

THOSE SALARIES MAY NEED TO FLUCTUATE, MAY NEED TO BE DIFFERENT THAN THEY ARE IN MORE PARTS OF THE STATE WHERE HOUSING ISN'T AS EXPENSIVE OR COST OF LIVING ISN'T AS EXPENSIVE.

I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE MORE THOUGHTFUL IF N. HOW WE PAY OUR STATE EMPLOYEES, AS WELL AS COMPENSATING THEM BETTER.

>> SENATOR STIVERS, DO YOU AGREE THAT PUBLIC WORKERS, STATE WORKERS SHOULD BE COMPENSATED BETTER AND THEY DESERVE 6%, 5% RAISE?

>> I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO SAYING WHAT'S APPROPRIATE.

WHAT I THINK WE HAVE TO BE IS JUST EXACTLY, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE AREAS I THINK WE COULD POTENTIALLY REACH SOME AGREEMENT ON, STATE WORKERS WILL HAVE TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR, AND THERE IS A DIFFERENCE, AND I KNOW SENATOR McGARVEY KNOWS THIS, ON THE HOUSE ON THE EASTERN PARKWAY.

THAT HOUSE THAT I PAID FOR ON EASTERN PARKWAY FOR MY KIDS TO LIVE AND GO TO SCHOOL AT COSTS THREE TIMES AS MUCH AS IT WOULD IN CLAY COUNTY.

I LOOKED AT ALMOST A SIMILAR HOUSE THERE.

AND SO DIFFERENTIAL OF WHAT SPEAKER OSBORNE IS TALKING ABOUT, COST OF LIVING IS MUCH DIFFERENT IN RURAL AREAS VERSUS METROPOLITAN AREAS.

SO WHAT IT SHOULD BE, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I KNOW WE NEED TO DISCUSS IT AND COME UP -- AND I LIKE THE SPEAKER'S APPROACH.

LET'S DO SOMETHING NOW.

LET'S LET THE PERSONNEL CABINET AND SEE WHAT THEY CAN COME BACK WITH IN RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND THEN SECOND YEAR WE CAN LOOK AT DIFFERENT SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE THERE WILL HAVE TO BE CERTAIN GROUPS THAT WILL HAVE TO BE TARGETED TO KEEP THEM IN OUR RANKS OF THE EMPLOYEE EMPLOYED FOR STATE EMPLOYEES.

AND FROM OUR POSITION, WE HAVE SEEN HUGE TURNOVER JUST IN THE LRC BECAUSE WE CAN'T BE COMPETITIVE WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

>> LEADER JENKINS, WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THIS KIND OF DIFFERENTIATED SALARY ADJUSTMENT OR INCREASE?

>> I THINK WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING.

WE'RE SEEING CRISIS LEVEL STAFFING AMONG OUR SOCIAL WORKERS, ESPECIALLY IN LOUISVILLE, AND OUR PRISONS.

THE CORRECTION OFFICERS ARE BEING RUN AT I THINK BARELY A SAFE LEVEL.

AND PART OF THAT IS THE PAY AND PART OF IT IS THE BENEFITS PACKAGE, THAT FOLKS NO LONGER KNOW THAT IF I STAY AT THIS JOB FOR 15 TO 20 YEARS, I'M GOING TO HAVE A ACCIDENT RETIREMENT.

SO I THINK -- A DECENT RETIREMENT.

SO I THINK ALL OF THE THINGS WE HAVE DONE OVER THE YEARS TO CHISEL AWAY AT THOSE PENSION BENEFITS, NOBODY NOW COMING TO WORK IS GOING TO GET A DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION.

MANY OF THE SOCIAL WORKERS WHO ARE STILL THERE SAY, "I'M JUST THERE BECAUSE I KNOW I'VE PUT IN 20 YEARS.

I'M GOING TO BE TAKEN CARE OF."

WHEREAS NEWER SOCIAL WORKERS ARE SAYING, "I CAN GO AND STOCK SHELVES AND MAKE $19 AN HOUR AND I CAN GO HOME AND I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY THAT SOMETHING TERRIBLE IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE PEOPLE I SERVE."

THE PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR STATE GOVERNMENT, MANY OF THEM WORK WITH THE MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS THAT WE HAVE, THOSE IN PRISONS, THOSE IN FOSTER CARE, THOSE WHO ARE IN REALLY BAD SITUATIONS.

>> SO ONE BUDGET ITEM THAT I THINK THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME BROADER CONSENSUS ON IS THE TORNADO RELIEF, DISASTERS RELIEF.

SENATE BILL 5, HOUSE BILL 5, THEIR COMPANION BILL.

HOUSE BILL 5 WAS FILED TODAY.

HOUSE BILL 5 WAS APPROVED BY THE ON US A&R APPROPRIATION REVENUE COMMITTEE.

YOU TESTIFIED ALONG SHIED WITH RICHARD HEATH WHO REPRESENTS MAYFIELD.

TELL US ABOUT THE LEVEL OF DISASTER RELIEF THAT THESE BILLS PROPOSE.

>> IT'S KIND OF A BIFURCATED BILL.

IT APPROPRIATES AN OVERALL $200 MILLION AMOUNT WHICH IS WHAT THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE ESSENTIALLY ASKED FOR.

IT HAD $45 MILLION IN IMMEDIATE SPENDING, WHICH GOES TO TEMPORARY HOUSING, TO SCHOOL RELIEF, TO SOME REPAIRS, SOME INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIRS THATTAL SCHOOLS NEED, TRANSPORTATION COSTS FOR SCHOOLS.

WE APPROPRIATED WITH THAT WE COULD IDENTIFY AT THIS POINT.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A HUGE NEED, SO WE WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND SIGNAL THE OVERALL APPROPRIATION OF $200 MILLION.

BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE JUST CAN'T IDENTIFY YET.

AND AS WE IDENTIFY THOSE, UNDERSTAND HOW TO DIRECT THOSE MONEYS, THEN THIS WILL PROBABLY BE A SERIES OF TWO, THREE, FOUR, MAYBE EVEN FIVE BILLS, AND WILL LIKELY EVEN GO INTO THE NEXT SESSION BEFORE WE FULLY HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE TRUE NEED OUT THERE.

>> SO THE $45 MILLION IS IMMEDIATE.

THE $155 MILLION LEFTOVER FOR YOU TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED.

SO IF YOU'RE NOT IN SESSION, DOES THE GOVERNOR HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO SPEND AS HE SEES FIT OR WOULD YOU HAVE TO BE IN SESSION IN ORDER FOR YOU ALL TO ALLOCATE THAT MONEY?

>> WE WILL CERTAINLY MAKE PROVISIONS OF THE FOR THAT BEFORE WE LEAVE SESSION.

AS I SAID, WE WILL PROBLEM DO ANOTHER THREE OR FOUR BILLS WHILE WE ARE IN SESSION.

PROBABLY DO ANOTHER THREE OR FOUR BILLS.

AS OF RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE CRATER AS TO WHERE THOSE EXACT MONETARY NEEDS ARE AND HOW TO DEPLOY THOSE MONEYS RIGHT THIS SECOND.

>> AND IS IT EVEN ENOUGH?

>> AND EVEN THAT, WE DON'T KNOW.

IT WAS A BEST-GUESS SCENARIO.

T. IN SPEAKING WITH THE ADMINISTRATION, THEY KIND OF TOOKNER BEST GUESS ESTIMATES AT WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST.

NOBODY KNOWS WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST TO GET THOSE COMMUNITIES BACK ON THEIR FEET.

SO CERTAINLY WHATEVER 23 HAVE TO DO, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE -- WHATEVER WE HAVE TO DO, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE UNANIMOUS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AMONGST BOTH CHAMBERS AND BOTH PARTIES ON THOSE ISSUES.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU WILL SEE A SQUABBLING MUCH ABOUT THOSE ISSUES.

>> SENATOR STIVERS, ARE YOU ON THE SAME PAGE.

>> >> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S VERY COMPLEX.

WHY NOBODY KNOWS WHAT IT COSTS TO RECONSTRUCT, YOU'VE SEEN THE FLUCTUATION BUILDING MATERIALS.

WHERE DOES FEMA STEP IN AND HOW MUCH DO THEY REIMBURSE?

DO THEY REIMBURSE 100%?

DO THEY REIMBURSE 80%?

WHAT DOES INSURANCE DO?

AND HOW QUICKLY WILL THEY REACT?

WILL BE RIGHT BACK REPLACEMENT COST OR VALUE?

YOU KNOW 1 SO THERE ARE SO MANY UNKNOWN AND SO MANY VARIABLES OUT THERE THAT GETTING TEMPORARY HOUSING, GETTING THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR TEMPORARY HOUSING, G8 OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM BACK UP AND RUNNING FOR THESE STUDENTS IS CRITICAL, AND SO THAT'S WHAT WAS THERE, AND AS WE GET MORE INFORMATION, WE'LL CONTINUE TO PARSE THAT OUT.

AND AGAIN I'LL AGREE WITH THE SPEAKER AND I THINK EVERYBODY HERE, WE WENT THROUGH MORGAN COUNTY SEVER EVERLY YEARS AGO, AND THAT WAS IN MY DISTRICT, NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO BEINGS MASSIVE AND AS EXTENSIVE, BUT YOU LETTERS WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'VE GOT TIGHT CONTROLS ON THOSE FUNDS BECAUSE YOU START SEEING THE PREDATORS COME IN AND TRY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A SITUATION LIKE THIS.

AND YOU'VE SEEN SOME OF THE MONEYS BE MISHANDLES AND MISSPENT IN SUMMATIONS LIKE THIS.

SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE APPROPRIATE GUARDRAILS AROUND THE MONEY AS IT GOES DOWN THERE.

>> AND THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT THE GOVERNOR HAS PROPOSED.

ISN'T THAT RIGHT, LADDER McGARVEY?

>> LOOK, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE BIPARTISAN AGREEMENT ON THIS.

ANYBODY KNOWS ME KNOWS HOW MUCH I LOVE MUSIC, AND I THINK ONE OF THE GREAT ARTISTS OUT IN THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW IS FROM KENTUCKY, A GUY NAMED TYLER CHILLED% HEAP SINGS A SONG FROM PRESIDENT STIVERS AREA OF THE STATE CALLED -- AND HE SAYS I'LL FOLLOW TO YOU VILLAGERY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT US TOBIAS ARE FOR TO HELP YOU DOWN WHEN YOU GET WEAR YOU AND YOU WANT GO NO MORE.

THAT'S WHAT WE DO AS KENTUCKIANS.

WE HELP EACH OTHER OUT.

AND A BIG PORTION OF PEOPLE IN OUR STATE ARE HURTING RIGHT NOW, AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THEY GET THE HELP THEY NEED, AND PART OF WHAT WE CAN DO WITH STATE MONEY IS SPEED UP THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE.

WE CAN PURCHASE A LOT OF THESE ITEMS RIGHT NOW AND EVEN GET REIMBURSE GUIDE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR THEM.

THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME LEGISLATIVE COOPERATION, AND IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME EXECUTIVE SPENDING AUTHORITY AS WELL, AND ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK THAT THIS IS A MISTAKE WE DID LAST YEAR WAS LIMIT THE GOVERNOR, THE GOVERNOR, THE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR'S POWER TO 30 DAYS IN A STATE OF EMERGENCY.

BUT WEE HAVE UNTIL APRIL 15th HERE IN SESSION, WE'RE HERE NOW, AND I THINK THAT WE CAN AND EL WOO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE HELPING OUR FELLOW KENTUCKIANS OUT.

>> LEADER JENKINS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT?

>> I THINK WE HAVE TO BE VERY CREATIVE BASS WE KNOW THAT IN MANY OF THOSE INSTANCES FOLKS WHO LOST THEIR HOMES HAD NO INSURANCE WHATSOEVER, AND ETHEN AREA OF KENTUCKY THAT IS LOSING POPULATION ALL THE TIME.

THE POPULATION IS MOVING.

AND WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE CITIES IF PEOPLE DO NOT COME BACK AND REBUILD?

SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT A LOT OF THOSE KINDS OF THAT MAY TAKE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE APLAYFIELD THAT APLAY MAY FIELD THAT COMES BACK TO BEING WHOLE AS MUCH AS POLLEN.

>> SPEAKING OF POPULATION SHIFTS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT REDISTRICTING BUT FIRST THIS QUESTION FROM DREW SHY ROCK FROM LOUISVILLE.

THIS IS TO THE REPUBLICANS.

A WITH A NEARLY $2 BILLION SURPLUS ARE MACHINES IN THE KENTUCKY RETIREMENT SYSTEM GOING TO RECEIVE A COLA, COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT, THIS YEAR?

SINCE WE HAVE NOT, HE SAYS, RECEIVED ONE IN TEN YEARS TO HELP WITH THE COST OF INFLATION.

>> THERE'S NOT ONE CONTEMPLATED IN OUR BUDGET, AND THE ONE THAT WE FILED ON FRIDAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE GOVERNOR HAS PROPOSED ONE OR NOT.

>> ARE YOU FOR THAT, SENATOR STIVERS?

>> WHAT I AM FOR IS TO STABILIZE AND USING SOME OF THESE ONE-TIME MONEYS TO STABILIZE THE PENSION SYSTEM.

I WANT TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING THAT REPRESENTATIVE JENKINS SAID.

WE SAID ONCE WE GOT THE PENSION SYSTEMS UNDER CONTROL, THEN WE WOULD START MOVING TOWARDS HIGHER SAM SALARIES.

IN THIS SITUATION WE HAVE A ONE LOT OF ONE-TIME MONEYS, AND I THINK IT WOULD BENEFIT US TO PUT THEM INTO THE PENSION SYSTEMS BECAUSE IT WILL HAVE, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT UNFUNDED LIABILITY, YOU HAVE 30 YEARS OF COMPOUNDING, AND SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE USE SO WE'RE NOT AT 18% IF WE CAN GET UP TO 25% OR 30%.

TO ME THAT HAS TO BE -- >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LEVEL FUNDING.

>> RIGHT, RIGHT.

THE UNDER FUNDED LIABILITY.

REDUCING TO UNFUNDED LIABILITY SO WE KNOW WE CAN CONTINUE TO MAKE THESE PENSION OBLIGATIONS.

>> LEADER McGARVEY.

>> OF COURSE LET'S REDUCE THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY.

I THINK ALL OF US, YOU HAVE AGREEMENT.

WE WANT OUR PENSIONS FUNDED FOR OUR RETIREES AND FOR THE EMPLOYEES WHO QUALIFY FOR THEM, SO LET'S DO THAT.

AGAIN, LET'S MAKE THIS BUDGET ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO.

FOR ONCE WE HAVE MONEY IN THIS BUDGET.

WE CAN REDUCE UNDER THE FUNDED LIABILITY AND WE CAN DO IT BY PUTTING DIRECT PAYMENTS INTO THE PENSION SYSTEM.

LET'S TALK ABOUT ANOTHER WAY WE CAN DO IT AND GIVE STATE EMPLOYEES A RAISE.

THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT DOES.

IF WE ARE RAISING THE PAY OF STATE EMPLOYEES, THEN WE ARE RAISING THEIR CONTRIBUTION INTO THE PENSION FUND.

SO THEY ARE PUTTING MORE MONEY INTO THE PENSION FUND WHEN WE GIVE THEM A RAISE.

WHAT ELSE ARE THEY DOING?

THEY'RE SPENDING MONEY IN KENTUCKY.

MOST STATE GOVERNMENT CODE WORKERS AREN'T SAYING I'M GOING TO GET A 10% RAISE.

THANK GOODNESS.

I'VE BEEN LOOKING FOR TO INVEST IN STOCK MARKET.

THEY'RE GOING TO SPEND IT RIGHT HERE IN KENTUCKY.

THAT COMES BACK IN THE FORM OF SALES TAX, COMES BACK IN THE FORM OF INCOME TAX.

THIS IS A DIRECT INVESTMENT NOIR WORKERS, IN OUR PEOPLE THAT WILL GO TO SOME OF THESE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO I THINK THIS IS WHAT WE CAN DO AND WE CAN DO BOTH.

WE CAN PROTECT OUR RETIREES AND WE CAN BENEFIT OUR STATE WORKERS.

>> SO THIS EMAIL JUST CAME IN FROM SCOTT COUNTY.

IS ALL THE MONEY YOU'RE DISCUSSING FROM THE FEDERAL GOT GOING TO BE AVAILABLE EVERY YEAR OR IS THIS A ONE ATOM DEAL?

IF ONLY ONE YEAR, WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM NEXT YEAR?

REMEMBER THAT WE HAVE UNPAID RETIREMENT FUNDS.

>> I THINK CLEARLY THAT'S WHY WE HAVE GOT TO BE VERY FOCUSED ON NOT SPENDING ONE-TIME MONEY ON SOMETHING THAT CREATES RECURRING EXPENSES.

AND THAT TAKES THOUGHTFUL PROCESS, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE TRULY INVESTING ONE-TIME MONEYS IN ONE-TIME OPPORTUNITIES.

I WILL POINT OUT IN THE BUDGET WE PROPOSED ON FRIDAY WE PUT $215 MILLION STRAIGHT INTO HAZARDOUS DUTT RETIREMENT.

THAT GETS THE FUNDING LEVEL UP ENOUGH IN HAZARDOUS DUTY THAT THE CONTRIBUTION RATE GOES FROM 1.45% UP TO 100%.

SO IT'S A HUGE SAVINGS LONG TERM BUT ALSO ALLOWS US TO PAY OUR STATE POLICE AND HAZARDOUS DUTY EMPLOYEES MORE AS WE GO THROUGH BECAUSE YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT EXCESSIVE PENSION CONTRIBUTION FOR THOSE EMPLOYEES.

I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON ONE THING THAT MORGAN SAID, THOUGH, REGARDING THE STATE OF EMERGENCY.

WE PASSED HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION, I THINK IT WAS A JOINT RESOLUTION, 29 TODAY WHICH EXTENDED THE STATE OF EMERGENCY FOR WEST KENTUCKY.

CONSENSUS OPINION WITH GENERAL CONSENSUS OF EVERYBODY THAT'S LOOKED AT IT IS THAT THE SENATE BILL 1 THAT WE PASSED LAGS YEAR DOES NOT APPLY BECAUSE PATROL GOVERNMENTS ARE IN PLACE.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS NECESSARY, BUT WE DID IT BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR ASKED US TO.

AND WE WANTED TO EXPEDITE THAT PROCESS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

SO WEREN'T AHEAD AND DID IT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS NO DISAGREEMENT, NO MISUNDERSTANDING, BUT I BELIEVE BY THE TIME IT ROLLS BACK AROUND AGAIN, THAT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WILL BE ABLE TO INVITE THEIR PARTICIPATION OF THEMSELVES.

>> ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT BEFORE WE MOVE OVER AND TALK ABOUT REDISTRICTING IN THE LAST 17 MINUTES REMAINING?

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT -- SENATOR STIVERS?

>> THERE IS ANOTHER WAY TO BE AN EFFECTIVE PAIN CREASE FOR PEOPLE, AND THAT'S TO CUT THEIR TAXES.

THAT MIGHT BE A NOVEL IDEA IN SOME PLACES IN THIS STATE, BUT YOU HAVE MORE INCOME IF THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT TAKING AS MUCH OF IT, SO WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER SOME TAX RENORMS THAT REFORMS TO THAT LETS PEOPLE KEEP MONEY IN THEIR POCKET.

>> IS IT EITHER/OR OR BOTH AND?

>> YOU CAN DO A LITTLE BIT BOTH.

>> I WANT TO JUMP IN THERE REALLY QUICKLY TOO ONE, IT'S WHY WE SHOULDN'T DO THE BUDGET BEFORE WE KNOW WHAT AAA REFORM LOOKS LIKE.

THEY SAY -- THE SPEAKER SAID EARLIER -- >> WHICH IS OPPOSITE OF WHAT HE SAID.

>> BUT HOW DOUGH WE ACCOUNT FOR THAT IN THE BUDGETING PROCESS?

NUMBER TWO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REVENUE THAT IS HERE.

SOME OF IT IS BUDGET SURPLUS SURPLUS, PROJECTED BUDGET SURPLUS.

SOME OF IT IS ONE-TIME MONEY.

I BELIEVE WE SHOULD TALKING ABOUT ONE-TIME MONEY ON ONE-TIME EXPENDITURES.

LET'S TALK ABOUT NEW REVENUE.

KENTUCKY IS THE ONLY STATE IN THIS PART OF THE COUNTRY.

VIRGINIA TOOK IN $50 MILLION IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER FOR THE STATE GOVERNMENT OFF SPORTS BETTING.

WE'RE THE HORSE CAPITAL OF THE WORLD YET WE REFUSE TO BELIEVE THAT SPORTS BETTING --, OF COURSE, WE DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S SPORTS BETTING IN KENTUCKY.

GO NO-TO-ANY -- IN MARCH TO SEE IF THERE'S SPORTS BETTING IN KENTUCKY.

I THINK WE SHOULD DO FULL ON GAMING IN KENTUCKY.

WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT MEDICAL OR RECREATIONAL CANNABIS ON THIS PROGRAM.

THEY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH TAXES.

>> MEDICAL MARIJUANA YOU SAY WOULD BE TAXED?

>> MEDICAL MARIJUANA WOULD GENERATE JOBS.

DOES MEDICAL MARIJUANA GENERATE A TON OF REVENUE?

NO, IT'S NOT A HUGE REVENUE PRODUCER.

IS IT REVENUE POSITIVE?

YES.

AND IT'S POPULAR.

PASSED THE HOUSE, IN FACT.

AND SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT ALSO GENERATE REVENUE.

OH A SURE FROM MACE OP COUNTY SAID LET'S TALKING ABOUT MEDICAL EXIST.

IS THE HOUSE GOING TO VOTE ON IT?

90% OF ALL KENTUCKIANS ARE IN FAVOR OF MEDICAL CANNABIS IF THEIR DOCTOR SENATOR STIVERS ARE YOU CONVINCED YET?

>> MORNING McGARVEY HAS NOW SHOWN HIS TRUE LIBERAL CREDENTIALS.

HERE WE ARE WITH A $1.9 BILLION SURPLUS AND HE'S STILL LOOKING FOR MORE TAXES.

SO I JUST GIVE YOU THAT.

MORGAN AND I HAVE A GREAT RELATIONSHIP BUT THERE'S DEFINING MOMENT RIGHT THERE.

AS TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA, THERE'S NO WAY YOU TAX MEDICINES IN THIS STATE, AND FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE SUGGESTED THAT, WHY HAVE YOU NOT TAXED ANY OTHER TYPE OF MAINTENANCE MED OR ANYTHING ELSE?

TO THAT EXTENT ON MARIJUANA, MEDICAL MARIJUANA, I'VE BEEN CLEAR, I THINK THERE IS STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT INTEREST CARED BECAUSE I READ 20 STUDIES AND THOSE ARE THE KEY BUZZ WORDS, THE THAT IT CAN HELP IN NAUSEA SUPPRESSION, HELPING YOU EAT, SPASTICITY, THAT SOMEBODY HAS A SEIZURE, IT REDUCES THE IMPACT, JOINT SWELLING.

THERE ARE STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANT INDICATORS.

THAT'S NOT MY TERMINOLOGY.

THAT'S THE RESEARCH ASSISTANCE OR THE INVESTIGATORS I THINK IS WHAT THEY'RE CALLED.

BUT THERE'S ALSO WELL-KNOWN, ONE, SENATOR McGARVEY TALKED ABOUT BRAIN DEVELOPMENT.

IT IS ADVERSE TO BRAIN DEVELOPMENT IF YOU'RE UNDER 25.

TWO, YOU'RE MORE LIKELY TO A PSYCHOTIC EVENT IF YOU HAVE OVEREXPOSURE TO THC.

AND THREE, IF YOU SMOKE IT, IT HAS 50% MORE CARCINOGENS THAN TOBACCO DOES.

SO IT BECOMES THE PROCESS OF HOW SHOULD IT BE USED, AND EVERY STUDY, BECAUSE FOR YEARS I'D SAY, HERE'S ALL THE STUDIES THEY'VE GIVEN ME.

NONE.

BUT THEY GAVE ME 20.

I READ THEM ALL.

EVERY ONE OF THEM HAD THE SAME CONCLUSION, STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT INDICATORS, BUT BECAUSE THE SAMPLE SIZES WERE TOO SMALL, THE DURATION WAS TOO SHORT, MORE STUDY WAS NEEDED.

>> AND SO YOU'RE SAYING NO TO A VOTE ON MEDICAL CANNABIS BILL SHOULD IT COME FROM THE HOUSE.

>> I DON'T SEE THAT ANYBODY CAN SIT HERE LIKE A JOHNS HOPKINS OR THE FDA OR A GROUP LIKE THAT AND SAY, THIS IS THE WAY IT NEEDS TO BE USED.

NOBODY HAS BEEN ABLE TO BUT THAT TOGETHER.

AND WE'VE SEEN -- AND I'LL GO BACK.

I'VE BEEN READING THE COURIER MAYBE TOO MUCH.

SOME PEOPLE NEED TO READ THE ARTICLES ABOUT WHAT'S GONE ON IN CALIFORNIA WITH THE BLACK MARKET OF MARIJUANA WHERE THEY'VE HAD THE CARTELS GET INVOLVED AND THAT THE VIOLENCE HAS GONE UP.

THEY FOUND A PERSON BEHEADED AND PEOPLE BURNED IN THEIR CARS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THIS.

IT IS NOT A PANACEA THAT PEOPLE THINK IT IS AND GO LOOK AT COLORADO AND CALIFORNIA AND SEE ALL THE PROBLEMS THEY'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW.

>> BUT THE PEOPLE OF KENTUCKY WANT IT, RIGHT, LEADER JENKINS.

AND LEADER-INCOME GARVEY?

>> I THINK 90% OF KENTUCKIANS WANT MED MARIJUANA OR MEDICAL CANNABIS I GUESS I SHOULD SAY THAT.

SHOWING MY AGE HERE.

I THINK WE HAVE PASSED IT OUT OF THE HOUSE ONCE IF NOT TWICE.

>> ONCE.

>> I THINK MOST OF MY CAUCUS WAS A COSPONSOR OF IT.

I THINK THE PEOPLE WANT IT.

>> AND A REPUBLICAN WAS THE SPONSOR.

>> A REPUBLICAN WAS THE SPONSOR.

>> AND I'LL JUST POINT OUT THE THINGS I BROUGHT UP, MEDICAL CANNABIS AND SPORTS BETTING AND GAMING HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH RAISING TAXES ON KENTUCKIANS.

>> ALL RIGHT.

SO NOW -- >> I WILL POINT OUT, THOUGH, THAT YOU SUGGESTED THAT WE DO TAX REFORM BEFORE WE DO A BUDGET SO WE'LL KNOW EXACTLY HOW MUCH MONEY WE CAN RAISE AND AND I THINK -- >> IF YOU'RE GOING TO CUT TAXES IN YOUR TAX REFORM 1 SHOULDN'T WE KNOW THAT FOR THE BUDGET FOR TO PROJECTED REVENUES?

>> OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE GOT TO CONSIDER IT, MORGAN, BUT, NO, YOU DON'T RAISE MONEY TO PAY YOUR BUDGET.

YOU DO NOT RAISE TAXES TO BASE YOUR BUDGET NUMBERS ON.

>> NO, BUT I MEAN THE CONSENSUS FORECASTING GROUP TELLS US WHAT OUR MONEY INCOMING IS GOING TO BE, AND WE'RE BASING OUR BUDGET NUMBERS OFF THAT.

THE CONSENSUS -- >> WE CERTAINLY WILL BASE OUR BUDGET NUMBERS OFF OF THAT.

ANY BUDGET THAT WE FAST THIS YEAR WILL BE BASED ON THE NUMBERS THE CONSENSUS FORECASTING GROUP HAVE GIVEN US.

>> RIGHT, BUT EVEN IF THE BUDGET IS GOING TO LOWER TAXES, OR THE TAX REFORM WOULD LOWER TAXES, DOESN'T THAT INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF MONEY COMING IN, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IS AVAILABLE TO SPEND?

WE DON'T BORROW MONEY IN STATE GOVERNMENT.

>> OF COURSE NOT, AND WE'RE STILL NOT GOING TO SPEND MORE THAN WE TAKE IN.

>> RIGHT.

SO I THINK WE SHOULD JUST KNOW IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS -- >> AS LONG AS WE DON'T BUDGET EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE GOT -- >> ALL RIGHT.

>> WE'RE NEVER GOING TO SPEND AS MUCH AS YOU WANT TO US SPEND, I CAN PROMISE.

>> YOU AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO RAISE REVENUE BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY GOT PLENTY OF REVENUE.

LET'S TALK ABOUT REDISTRICT.

THE LAST TEN MINUTES.

I WANT TO GO RIGHT TO SOMETHING THAT UK ELECTION LAW AND VOTING RIGHTS PROFESSOR SAID JOSH DOUGLAS, AND WE HAVE HIS STATEMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT ON THE SCREEN.

THIS IS ABOUT THE KENTUCKY HOUSE MAPS MAY VIOLATE SECTION 2 OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT VRA, THE PROVISION PROHIBITS MINORITY VOTE DILUTION.

IF MEMBERS OF A RACIAL MINORITY LIVE THAT TO A GEOGRAPHICALLY AM COMPACT AREA SUCH THAT YOU DRAW A COMPACT DISTRICT HAS OVER 50% VOTING AGE MINORITY, THEN THE VRA SAYS THE MAP SHOULD COMPLIMENT CASE LAW DOESN'T SUPPORT ADDING DIFFERENT MINORITY GROUPS TOGETHER TO REACH 50% IF THOSE MINORITY GROUPS DON'T SHARE A COMMUNITY OF INTEREST OR HAVE SIMILAR NEEDS.

IT'S ALSO NO ANSWER TO THAT IT HAD PREVIOUS MAP DID NOT INCLUDE MAJORITY MINORITY DISTRICTS.

THE PREVIOUS MAP IS IRRELEVANT.

IF THE CURRENT DEMOGRAPHICS SHOW THERE COULD BE MAJORITY MINORITY.

THE KENTUCKY CONTRADICT HAS ZERO BLACK MAJORITY DISTRICTS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC DATA, IT'S INCLUDING THE LATINO, THE HISPANIC VOTE, NOT THE BLACK VOTE.

OR A COMBINATION OF.

SO TO SAY THAT WE HAVE FOUR MAJORITY MINORITY DISTRICTS, THAT MIGHT BE MISINTERPRETED OR MISUNDERSTOOD OR IS THAT INTENTIONAL?

>> IT'S ALL USE OF TERMINOLOGY, BUT I THINK EVERY ATTORNEY THAT WE HAVE ASKED TO WEIGH IN ON IT BELIEVES THAT HE IS SIMPLY WRONG ON THIS, AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS IF YOU INTENTIONALLY DRAW A MAJORITY MINORITY DISTRICT, THEN YOU'RE ACTUALLY PACKING A DISTRICT, WHICH IS A VIOLATION OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT.

2 FACT OF THE MATTER IS THERE WERE NO MAJORITY MINORITY DISTRICTS BEFORE.

THERE ARE NO MAJORITY MINORITY DISTRICTS NOW.

YOU'RE PROBOT FROM CONSIDERING RACE WHEN YOU ACTUALLY DRAW THE MAPS.

YOU LOOK AT THE IMPACT ON THAT OF A YOU DRAW THE MAPS.

BUT TO SPECIFICALLY PACK A DISTRICT IS WHERE THE VIOLATION IS.

I THINK WHAT HE IS SUGGESTING IS ACTUALLY THE VIOLATION.

BUT AGAIN, THAT IS FOR ATTORNEYS TO FIGURE OUT.

I DON'T PLAY ONE ON TV.

>> AND THE CAUCUSES SAID REPEATEDLY THAT THEY BELIEVE IT'S CONSTITUTIONAL BUT THIS SIDE WILL SAY JUST BECAUSE IT'S COOLING DOESN'T MEAN IT WAS FAIR.

>> RIGHT.

AND I THINK THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH PERCEPTION.

THE MAPS CAME LATE BECAUSE THE CENSUS WAS LATE.

THEY WERE DONE WITHOUT MUCH TRANSPARENCY.

I THINK EVERYBODY, INCLUDING THE MINORITY, SAW THEM WHEN THEY PUT THEM UP ON THE WALL THE THURSDAY BEFORE WE WENT INTO SESSION.

SO I THINK THERE'S SOME SUSPICION AROUND THESE MAPS.

AND I THINK IT MAKES THE ARGUMENT FOR SOMETHING THE SPEAKER SPONSORED SOME YEARS AGO TO HAVE A MORE BALANCED COMMISSION THAT LOOKS -- >> A THIRD PARTY INDEPENDENT.

>> WELL, NO.

THE BILL THAT THE SPEAKER FUTURE PUT FORTH WITH MINORITY AND MAJORITY MEMBERS SOME TIME AGO WAS TO HAVE A EQUAL NUMBER OF MAJORITY MONEY IT FOLKS ON COMMITTEE WITHIN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO LOOK AT THE MAPS.

I THINK WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION LOOK AT THEM FOR ALMOST LIKE A RESET, AND I WILL ADMIT THE FORMER MAJORITY TOOK SOME LIBERTIES WITH THE MAP, AND I THINK IT'S TIME FOR US TO HAVE A COMPLETE VET OF THAT.

>> AND SPEAKER OSBORNE SAID ON FRIDAY OR SATURDAY -- I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH DAY IT WAS -- THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO CORRECT SOME OF THOSE MISSTEPS OF THE PAST.

>> WELL, I THINK YOU CAN LOOK AT THE HOUSE MAP, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE SENATE MAP, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE CONGRESSIONAL MAP AND SEE WHERE YEARS AND YEARS OF GERRYMANDERING HAVE SET US TO A POINT, AND I THINK HAVING INDEPENDENT EXPERTS IN MAP MAKING WOULD BE A GREAT THING FOR THE STATE OF KENTUCKY.

>> DO YOU BELIEVE THE FINAL PRODUCT FOR PARTICULARLY THE LEGISLATIVE MAPS DILUTES THE VOTE OF THE URBAN CENTERS, BOWLING GREEN, COVINGTON, LEXINGTON, LOUISVILLE?

NOT SO MUCH LOUISVILLE.

>> ON THE SO MUCH LOUISVILLE BUT I DO BELIEVE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AS THE WARREN COUNTY, YOU'RE LOOKING AT NORTHERN KENTUCKY AND ESPECIALLY LEXINGTON WHERE LEXINGTON HAS GROWN IN POPULATION THAT LOST A STATE HOUSE RACE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SENATE MAP OF LEXINGTON WHERE IT IS CERTAINLY IT HAS ENOUGH POPULATION TO HAVE AT LEAST TWO FOLKS WHO LIVE IN LEXINGTON REPRESENT THEM IN THE STATE SENATE, IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY TOOK A PIZZA CONSIDER IT TO IT.

THERE IS A VERY SMALL -- CUT ARE TO IT.

THERE IS A VERY SMALL KANSAS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TWO PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN LEXINGTON REPRESENTING LEXINGTON IN GENERAL ASSEMBLY?

SO FROM ALL OF THE NARRATIVE THAT THE DEMOCRATS OF GIVEN ABOUT THIS REDISTRICTING PROCESS, THAT IT REALLY DILUTES THE CONFIDENCE THAT THE PUBLIC HAS IN GOVERNMENT WHEN THEY SEE THIS KIND OF RESULT.

YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT, PRESIDENT STIVERS, IS?

>> ACT 3, SCENE 2, THE LADY DOTH PROFIT TOO MUCH ME THINKS.

WHICH IS OUT OF OF MAC BETH AND AS REPRESENTATIVE JENKINS SAID, YEARS OF GERRYMANDERING, WHICH WERE -- AND I GAVE THIS LITTLE DISSERTATION IN THE COMMITTEE, THE CONGRESSIONAL MAP WAS BASICALLY STARTED BY THEN UNITED STATES SENATOR WENDELL FORD, WHICH THIS DOESN'T LOOK MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THAT, AND CONGRESSMAN NATCHER BECAUSE THEY DID NOT WANT OWENSBORO IN THE FIRST DISTRICT, WHEN YOU USED TO LOOK AT PULASKI COUNTY AND LAUREL COUNTY FROM HOUSE MAPS, THEY NEVER HAD SINGLE OR MULTIPLE HOUSE DISTRICTS IN IT.

THEY WERE CUT UP FIVE WAYS, EACH ONE OF THEM, BECAUSE IT WAS CONDUCIVE TO THE JENN MAJORITY PARTY.

-- THE THEN MAJORITY PARTY TO DO THAT.

THESE MAPS, TO ME, AND I CAN SAY THIS ABOUT THE SENATE MAP, YOU KNOW THE TERM WAS BEING CALLED GETTING AKERSONED WHERE YOU GOT MOVED FROM LOUISVILLE TO MCCREARY COUNTY BECAUSE YOU WERE OF THE WRONG PARTY AT THE TIME, WHICH HAPPENED TO BE A REPUBLICAN.

SO THE YEARS OF GERRYMANDERING WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT A VET, WE'VE GONE MORE TO RESET IN THE LAST TWO TERMS, WHICH IS TWO CYCLES WAS WHICH IS THE LAST EIGHT YEARS, THAN THOSE YEARS OF GERRYMANDERING BECAUSE NEITHER CHAMBER WERE CONTROLLED BY THE REPUBLICANS FOR 90-PLUS YEARS.

>> LEADER McGARVEY?

>> YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAVE PARTISAN REDISTRICTING ON EITHER SIDE, YOU GET A PARTISAN RESULT.

AND SO I THINK THAT IS WHY WE'RE ULTIMATELY ALL HERE MAKING THE CASE RIGHT NOW WHETHER INTENTIONALLY OR UNINTENTIONALLY TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF NON-PARTISAN INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION OVERSEEING THE MAPS.

ALSO, I WILL STAY THAT I'VE BEEN CONSISTENT ON THIS.

I WAS ABLE TO OPPORTUNITY FOR SENATE IN 2012 BECAUSE THE SENATE REPUBLICAN MAPS WERE THROWN OUT AS BEING UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND THE COURT ORDERED EVERYONE TO RUN UNDER THE OLD MAPS I AM ALSO SAY THAT THE SENATE HAD A DIFFERENT PRESIDENT WHEN THOSE MAPS WERE DRAWN.

I CAME IN IN 2013 AND SENATOR STIVERS WAS PRESIDENT THEN WITH & HE MADE MAPS THAT WERE CONSTITUTIONAL.

I'LL GIVE THE MAJORITY A LITTLE PRAISE AS WELL.

THE MINORITY WAS CONSULTED ON HOPEFUL JEFFERSON COUNTY WAS DRAWN, AND I THINK OUR INPUT WAS RECEIVED AND ACCEPTED BY THE MAJORITY PARTY FOR THE SENATE MAP.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE'S NOT SOME PARTISANSHIP DO IT.

BOWLING GREEN HAD TO BE SPLIT.

THE DEMOCRATS HAD DRAWN IT, I DIPLOMACY YOU IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SPLIT DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REPUBLICANS SPLIT IT.

FAYETTE COUNTY WAS CURED OF LIKE A CHRISTMAS TURKEY.

ARE THERE SEVEN DISTRICTS THERE NOW AND ONLY ONE CAN LIVE IN FAYETTE COUNTY AND NORTHERN KENTUCKY HAS BEEN SPLIT UP IN A WAY.

THESE ARE EMERGING DEMOCRATIC AREAS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU GET PARTISAN REDISTRICTING.

>> AND LAWSUITS ARE INEVITABLE IN THIS?

>> I DON'T THINK THE SENATE'S PLANNING ON CHALLENGING THE SENATE MAP AT THIS POINT.

>> THE HOUSE?

>> EVERY VOTER OR EVERY CITIZEN IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY HAS STANDING TO FILE A REDISTRICTING COMPLAINT.

>> WE SHALL SEE.

>> A QUESTION.

THE REAL EQUIPMENT TO THE INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION, THOUGH, BOTH LEADER JENKINS AND REPRESENT THE BUDDY WHEATLEY HAD AMENDMENTS FILED ON THE HOUSE FLOOR ON SATURDAY, AND BOTH OF THEM GOT TO SPEAK.

BOTH OF THE AMENDMENTS WERE FILED IN A TIMELY MANNER.

ET YET NEITHER ONE OF THEM CALLED THEIR AMENDMENT.

SO IF THEY HAD REALLY WANTED TO CONTINUE THAT DEBATE TO FORCE THAT DEBATE, I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN TO ACTUALLY PUT A PIECE OF LEGISLATION ON THE FLOOR -- >> BUT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A FUTILE EXERCISE, RIGHT, TO DO THAT?

>> BUT WHY NOT AT LEAST MAKE PEOPLE VOTE TO IT?

>> WHY DIDN'T YOU LET PEEP VOTE ON IT?

>> I ACTUALLY FORGOT ABOUT IT.

>> WHICH MAKES MY POINT THAT WE'RE A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN GIN WIN ABOUT OUR TRUE DESIRE TO DO THAT OR THINK THAT THE TRUE BELIEF THAT IT'S GOING TO SOLVE THINGS.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS LISA WILNER, REPRESENTATIVE LISA WILNER FROM LOUISVILLE, STOOD ON THE FLOOR ON THURSDAY, I GUESS IT WAS, AND PROCLAIMED, FINALLY SHE WAS THE ONE THAT PROCLAIMED IT, SAID THERE'S NO THINKING PERSON THAT COULD STAND ON THE FLOOR AND LOOK AT THE MAP OF JEFFERSON COUNTY AND NOT THINK IT IS ABSURDLY GERRYMANDERED AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE DID SIT HIT A RESET BUTTON IN MUCH OF IT.

THERE'S ROUGH MATH.

WE LOOKED AT IT.

JEFFERSON COUNTY IS 93 SQUARE MILES, AND SEVEN OF THE 18 LEGISLATOR IN JEFFERSON COUNTY LIVE IN A 5 SQUARE-MILE BLOCK.

THEY CAN'T POSSIBLY BE REPRESENTATIVE OF JEFFERSON COUNTY.

>> I DON'T HAVE TIME TO ASK ABOUT THE 1st CONGRESSIONALLAL DISTRICT, AND I THINK MINORITY CAUCUS CHAIR DERRICK GRAHAM SAID THIS WAS A WAR ON FRANKFORT RIGHT NOW, THAT IT'S NOT IN THE 6th AND IN THE 1st.

TEN SECOND.

>> REASONED BRIDGES SAID AT LEAST PEOPLE IN FRANKFORT WILL KNOW THAT WESTERN KENTUCKY EXISTS.

>> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL LEAVE THAT THERE.

ANY OTHER QUICK RESPONSE?

>> WOULD I JUST SAY THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE JEFFERSON COUNTY MAP, IT'S SOMEWHAT COINCIDENTAL I GUESS WHO GOT DRAWN IN TOGETHER IN INCUMBENTS WERE OUTSPOKEN FEMALES ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU ALL.

APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

THANK YOU AT HOME FOR WATCHING AND WE HOPE TO SEE A THURSDAY NIGHT FORT THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET ADDRESS RIGHT HERE ON KET AND I'LL SEE YOU REALLY SOON.