>> FROM OUR STATE HOUSE STUDIO IN MONTGOMERY, I'M TODD STACY.

WELCOME TO CAPITOL JOURNAL'S WEEK IN REVIEW.

AND WHAT A WEEK IT HAS BEEN IN ALABAMA GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS.

AN ALABAMA SUPREME COURT RULING FROM A WEEK AGO HAS PRODUCED A GROWING TSUNAMI OF CONTROVERSY THAT ALABAMA LEADERS ARE RUSHING TO FIX.

THE COURT RULED THAT FROZEN EMBRYOS COULD BE CONSIDERED CHILDREN UNDER ALABAMA LAW, AT LEAST AS IT CONCERNS CIVIL LAWSUITS.

THAT LED TO UAB HEALTH SYSTEM AND OTHER CLINICS TO HALT THEIR IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION TREATMENTS AS THEY WEIGH THE RISKS OF BEING SUED IF EMBRYOS ARE DAMAGED.

IN 2018, THE ALABAMA LEGISLATURE PASSED AND VOTERS RATIFIED A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT MADE IT THE POLICY OF THE STATE TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF UNBORN CHILDREN, WHICH IS IN PART WHAT THE RULING RELIED ON.

THIS WEEK STATE LAWMAKERS BEGAN PURSUING A LEGISLATIVE FIX TO THE ISSUE.

STATE SENATOR TIM MELSON, WHO CHAIRS THE SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE, HAS DRAFTED LEGISLATION TO PROTECT IVF CLINICS BY CLARIFYING IN THE LAW THAT ONLY EMBRYOS IMPLANTED IN THE UTERUS CAN BE CONSIDERED VIABLE HUMAN LIFE.

I SPOKE WITH MELSON ABOUT HIS BILL ON THURSDAY.

>> THIS BILL SIMPLY MADE IT WHERE IN VITRO FERTILIZATION, YOU MAY HAVE STORED EMBRYOS, BUT THEY'RE ONLY POTENTIAL LIFE.

THEY DON'T BECOME LIFE TILL THEY'RE IMPLANTED IN THE UTERUS AND ADHERE TO THE WALL AND THEN THEY BECOME LIFE.

I'M NOT SAYING OR TRYING TO DEVAL YOU THE SANCTITY OF THE EMBRYOS, I GET THAT, I KNOW IT'S A TOUCHY SUBJECT, BUT I'M SAYING THAT, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SAYING THERE'S ANY VIABLE LIFE, THAT IT'S NOT UNTIL IT'S IMPLANTED IN THE UTERUS.

I MEAN, YOU REALLY -- WE HAVE -- SCIENCE HAS ADVANCED SO FAR THAT WE HAVE THINGS POP UP THAT WERE NEVER INTENDED TO BECOME A PROBLEM OR A HINDRANCE TO THE PROFESSION, BUT THIS IS ONE OF THEM.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT WHERE A CLINIC AND AN IN VITRO FERTILIZATION CLINIC CAN FUNCTION WITHOUT RISK OF LIABILITY OR CRIMINAL ACTS IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS.

>> THAT FULL INTERVIEW WITH SENATOR MELSON IS AVAILABLE ONLINE AT OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL OR ON APTV.ORG, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO WATCH IT.

I SHOULD ALSO MENTION THAT HOUSE MINORITY LEADER ANTHONY DANIELS HAS ALSO FILED LEGISLATION TO ADDRESS THE IVF ISSUE.

WE'VE HAD LEGISLATORS ASK FOR PROTECTIONS FOR IVF CLINICS.

LATER IN THE SHOW, I'LL TALK WITH DR. MAMIE MCLEAN, A FERTILITY CLINIC SPECIALIST WHOSE PATIENTS HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY THE RULING.

THAT ISSUE ASIDE, IT WAS ANOTHER BUSY WEEK IN THE ALABAMA LEGISLATURE AS THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE MET, DEBATING DIVERSE AT THIS, EQUITY AND INCLUSION OR DEI.

A PENDING BILL WOULD PROHIBIT CERTAIN PUBLIC ENTITIES, INCLUDING K-12 SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES, FROM HOUSING A DEI OFFICE OR PROGRAM.

IT WOULD ALSO PROHIBIT THE TEACHING OR PROMOTION OF WHAT'S TERMED DIVISIVE CONCEPTS RELATED TO RACE OR GENDER.

CAPITOL JOURNAL'S JEFF SANDERS REPORTS.

>> THIS IS SERIOUS.

THIS IS A RACE OF PEOPLE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

>> HEATED MOMENTS ON THE FLOOR OF THE ALABAMA SENATE AS LAWMAKERS DEBATED SENATE BILL 129 BY REPUBLICAN STATE SENATOR WILL BARFOOT.

>> SOME HAVE SAID WE DON'T SEE IT HERE IN ALABAMA, WHY ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT IT?

MY RESPONSE IS WE HAVE SEEN IT, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT, AND SOMETIMES THERE'S THINGS WE DON'T SEE THAT WE DON'T GET A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT.

>> WHILE CONSERVATIVE LAWMAKERS SAY THE BILL IS NEEDED TO STOP A SO-CALLED WOKE AGENDA FROM SWEEPING THROUGH ALABAMA'S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM, DEMOCRATS WORRY IT COULD UNDO DECADES OF GAINS IN DIRTY AND CIVIL RIGHTS.

>> I DON'T CARE HOW MUCH YOU SAY I BELIEVE AND I THINK AND ALL THAT CRAP, YOU AIN'T WALKED IN THESE SHOES.

YOU DON'T KNOW NOTHING ABOUT WHAT REALLY HAPPENS WHEN WALK IN THESE SHOES, AND THEN IT'S BEING DISCARDED.

>> MY PHONE STARTED JUST GOING CRAZY TUESDAY NIGHT JUST FROM ADVOCACY GROUPS, FROM FOLKS THAT WANTED TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AND TALK ABOUT THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

>> DEMOCRATS SUCCESSFULLY NEGOTIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE BILL SECURING PROTECTIONS FOR TITLE 9 PROGRAMS AND STATE MINORITY OFFICES.

THE LEGISLATION PASSED THE SENATE WITH A VOTE OF 26-7 ALONG PARTY LINES.

>> THE PERCEPTION IS IT'S PROHIBITED, PROHIBITED, PROHIBITED.

SO, WHEN YOU SEE THAT, I THINK IT WILL HURT INDUSTRY, RECRUITMENT TO SOME OF THE FLAGSHIP UNIVERSITIES.

>> THE FACT WITH WE REALLY HAVE MORE IN COMMON THAN DIFFERENT AND THE IDEA THAT THAT WOULD BE A FOCUS FOR WHAT WE WANT I THINK IS SOMETHING THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO THIS BODY.

>> FROM THE SENATE, THE BILL NOW MOVES TO THE HOUSE FOR DEBATE AND CONSIDERATION.

FOR "CAPITOL JOURNAL," I'M JEFF SANDERS.

>> I'LL SPEAK IN MORE DETAIL ABOUT THIS ISSUE WITH STATE SENATOR WILL BARFOOT AND STATE SENATOR RODGER SMITHERMAN LATER IN THE SHOW.

THE HOUSE WORKED THROUGH A RELATIVELY NON CONTROVERSIAL AGENDA OF BILLS THIS WEEK, THOUGH PLENTY OF DEBATE TOOK PLACE BOTH ON THE FLOOR AND IN COMMITTEE.

CAPITOL JOURNAL'S RANDY SCOTT CATCHES US UP ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THE LOWER CHAMBER THIS WEEK.

>> A PROPOSAL LAWMAKERS HAVE SEEN IN SEVERAL FORMS WAS ONCE AGAIN IN THE HOUSE CHAMBER.

HOUSE BILL 412 ADDRESSES HANDLING ALABAMA'S HUMAN TRAFFICKING PROBLEM.

>> THIS BILL, UNDER EXISTING LAW, TRAFFICKING IN FIRST DEGREE, IS A CLASS A FELONY, WHICH IS 20 YEARS.

SO WHAT THIS BILL DOES IS CHANGE IT, AS LONG AS IT'S SOMEONE THAT IS 18 YEARS OLD OR YOUNGER, TO A MANDATORY LIFE SENTENCE.

>> YOU KEPT SOMEONE IN PRISON FOR LIFE BUT WHAT DID YOU DO TO STOP THE TRAFFIC OR BEGIN THE PROCESS OF GETTING TO THE TRAFFICKER?

>> ANOTHER PROPOSAL BEFORE LAWMAKERS, HOUSE BILL 62 SEEKS TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF TOO MANY CASES CLOGGING THE STATE JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

>> THE SUBSTANCE OF THIS BILL IS TO ALLOW RETIRED JUDGES TO BE CALLED BACK INTO SERVICE FOR THE PURPOSE MOSTLY OF GETTING RID OF BACKLOGS.

>> BOTH BILLS ARE APPROVED.

IN THE CHAMBER, MEMBERS DEBATE HOUSE BILL 113 DEALING WITH PREPARING CHILDREN FOR THE FIRST GRADE.

>> THIS BILL SIMPLY IS A FIRST GRADE READINESS BILL TO ENSURE THAT WHEN A CHILD ENTERS THE FIRST GRADE, THEY ARE READY AND THEY CAN BE COMFORTABLE IN THE CLASSES.

ONE OF THE THINGS, SINCE I HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS BILL, HAT HAS DISTURBED ME, I HAD A TEACHER TO CALL ME AND SHE SAID THAT THE MOST PAINFUL THING SHE HAD TO DO AS A FIRST GRADE TEACHER WAS TO REPEAT A CHILD IN THE FIRST GRADE.

>> I'M FOR THE READINESS PORTION OF IT, BUT I'M NOT FOR MOVING THE DATE FROM SEPTEMBER 1 TO DECEMBER 31 BECAUSE WHAT THAT WILL DO IS A SON OR A DAUGHTER WHO HAS A DECEMBER BIRTHDAY WILL BE FOUR YEARS OLD GOING INTO KINDERGARTEN, AND A FOUR-YEAR-OLD IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT DIFFERENT FROM A FIVE-YEAR-OLD.

>> HOUSE BILL 113 IS APPROVED.

AT THE STATEHOUSE, RANDY SCOTT, "CAPITOL JOURNAL."

>> THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CONVENED TODAY FOR ITS REGULAR MEETING, BUT THE SUBJECT MATTER DREW A MUCH LARGER CROWD THAT USUAL.

THAT SUBJECT?

GENDER AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS.

HOUSE BILL 111 FROM STATE REPRESENTATIVE SUSAN DEBOSE OF HOOVER IS DUBBED THE WHAT IS A WOMAN ACT.

IT WOULD CODIFY INTO STATE LAW THE BIOLOGICAL DEFINITIONS OF MEN AND WOMEN.

DUBOSE AND BILL SUPPORTERS SAID IT IS NEEDED TO PROTECT WOMEN IN A WORLD OF GENDER FLUIDITY.

BUT THE BILL DREW CRITICISM FROM LGBT ACTIVISTS WHO CALLED THE BILL DISCRIMINATORY.

>> THIS BILL HB111 IS A DEFINITIONS BILL.

IT CODIFIES THE TIME-HONORED DEFINITIONS OF MALE, FEMALE, MAN, WOMAN, BOY, GIRL, MOTHER, FATHER AND SEX.

IS IT IMPORTANT?

IT IS IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE IN THIS BILL THAT SEX IS DEFINED AS THE STATE OF BEING MALE OR FEMALE AT BIRTH.

SEX IS OBJECTIVE AND FIXED.

>> I SHARE MY EXPERIENCE TODAY TO EXPLAIN WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR ALABAMA LEGISLATURE TO PASS THIS BILL BECAUSE, IF PASSED, THIS BILL WOULD GUARANTEE THAT WHEN AND ONLY WHEN THE STATE DESIGNATES SPACE FOR WOMEN, ONLY FEMALES MAY ENTER THEM.

HOW DOES THIS DO THIS?

BY DEFINING COMMON SEX-BASED WORDS, WORDS LIKE WOMAN AND FEMALE, WHICH ARE ALREADY USED IN 160 UNIQUE ALABAMA STATUTES, BY CODIFYING THE MEANING OF THESE WORDS, WE PROTECT OUR LAWS FROM BEING MANIPULATED BY THOSE WHO WOULD GASLIGHT WOMEN INTO THINKING THEIR PRIVACY IS BIGOTRY.

LET ME BE CLEAR, THIS BILL DOES NOT ERASE TRANSGENDER PEOPLE, IT SIMPLY ENSURE LAWS ENACTED TO PROTECT OPPORTUNITIES AND SPACES THAT STATES SETS ASIDE FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS DO WHAT THEY WERE INTENDED TO DO.

>> HB111 ATTEMPTS TO ADOPT A DISCRIMINATORY UNWORKABLE DEFINITION OF SEX AIMED AT EXCLUDING MARGINALIZED L.G.B.T.Q.

ALABAMIANS FROM STATE PROTECTIONS, WITH A PARTICULARLY HARMFUL IMPACT ON OUR TRANSGENDER ALABAMIANS.

IT WILL ALSO HAVE THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF MAKING IT HARDER FOR ALL WOMEN TO UTILIZE STATE NON-DISCRIMINATION LAWS TO ADDRESS SEX STEREOTYPING.

THIS IS DIRECT AND BLATANT DISCRIMINATION, AND IT'S UNCONSTITUTIONAL, PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

>> NO VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE BILL SINCE IT WAS JUST A PUBLIC HEARING.

IT COULD COME UP FOR A VOTE IN COMMITTEE NEXT WEEK.

THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ALSO TOOK UP THE ISSUE OF GUNS, AND SPECIFICALLY, DEVICES THAT CAN BE ATTACHED TO HANDGUNS TO CONVERT THEM INTO DEFECT MACHINE GUNS.

HOUSE BILL 36 FROM STATE REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIP ENSLER OF MONTGOMERY WOULD PROHIBIT SUCH DEVICES AND SET PENALTIES FOR THOSE CAUGHT WITH CONVERTED WEAPONS.

ENSLER EXPLAINED THE BILL TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.

>> AND A VERY SIMILAR ONE CAME UP IN COMMITTEE LAST YEAR AND PASSED, BUT THE ONE LAST YEAR DID NOT MIRROR FEDERAL LAW, SO WITH THIS VERSION THIS YEAR, IT MIRRORS FEDERAL LAW, BUT THEN HAS SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.

BIG PICTURE, I'VE HEARD FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT THROUGHOUT THE STATE THAT HAVE BEEN PICKING UP WEAPONS WITH THESE DEVICES ON THEM.

BUT THERE'S CURRENTLY NO STATE CRIME THAT PROHIBITS THEM.

THEY'RE ONLY PROHIBITED UNDER FEDERAL LAW, SO THIS WOULD JUST ADD A TOOL TO THE TOOLBOX ON THE STATE LEVEL WHEN IT COMES TO WEAPONS WITH THESE DEVICES.

THE TWO CHANGES IN THE SUBSTITUTE, ON LINE 61 WE ADDED IN EXPLICIT LANGUAGE THAT SAYS THAT ANY PARTS THAT ARE LICENSED UNDER FEDERAL LAW WOULD BE EXEMPT, SO THEY'RE ALREADY EXEMPT BUT WE EXPLICITLY PUT THAT IN.

AND THEN THE SECOND PART, ON LINE 48, WE JUST PUT LANGUAGE CLARIFYING THAT IT'S NOT POSSESSION OF THE DEVICE ITSELF BUT IT'S POSSESSION OF THE FIREARM THAT HAS THE DEVICE ON IT.

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION HOWEVER ON THE PENALTY PIECE.

>> SURE.

>> UNDER FIRST VIOLATION, IT'S PUNISHABLE BY NOT LESS THAN 100 HOURS OF COMMUNITY SERVICE.

THE SECOND SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION JUMPS TO A FELONY.

THAT'S A BIG LEAP BETWEEN THE TWO.

CAN YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT THE FIRST VIOLATION WHY WE SET IT SO LOW AT COMMUNITY SERVICE?

>> THE FEEDBACK I'VE GOTTEN FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT IS IT'S OFTEN YOUNGER PEOPLE, YOUNGER ADULTS THAT HAVE THESE.

THEY HAVE BEEN SEEN ON SOCIAL MEDIA OR HEARD THEY'RE POPULAR AND THEY'RE GETTING THEIR HANDS ON THEM.

SO THE FIRST TIME AROUND, WHAT WE WOULD WANT TO DO IS TO STEER THEM TOWARDS MENTORSHIP PROGRAMS, MAYBE WORKING WITH CLERGY, TO STEER AWAY FROM THAT CULTURE OF GUN VIOLENCE.

BUT THE SECOND TIME AROUND, IT'S TELLING THEM, WELL, HEY, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN EVEN MORE SEVERE CONSEQUENCE.

>> THAT BILL WAS ADVANCED BY THE COMMITTEE AND NOW GOES TO THE FULL HOUSE.

ONE PROFILE ISSUE THAT IS IDLE FOR THE MOMENT IS THE COMPREHENSIVE GAMBLING PACKAGE PASSED BY THE HOUSE LAST WEEK.

SENATORS SAY THEY WANT TO TAKE THEIR TIME WITH THE LEGISLATION AND REVIEW IT.

STATE SENATOR GREG ALBRITTON, WHO IS CARRYING THE PACKAGE IN THE SENATE, SAYS HIS COLLEAGUES ARE IN THE PROCESS OF ASKING QUESTIONS AND PERHAPS MAKING CHANGES TO THE BILLS.

>> THE MORE WE DISCUSS, THE CLOSER WE GET.

THE MORE WE EXPLAIN AND GO THERE WHERE WE ARE -- BECAUSE, LOOK, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR -- THIS PARTICULAR BILL, IF YOU WILL, FOR TEN YEARS.

AND MANY OF THE FOLKS THAT HAVE THESE QUESTIONS HAVEN'T BEEN INVOLVED IN A LOT OF THAT.

AND THE COST AND EVEN SOME QUESTIONS HAVE COME UP AS TO THE CRIMINAL ASPECTS OF IT.

AND, SO, THOSE, WE'VE GOT TO DEAL WITH.

AND ALL OF THESE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS AND HEARINGS IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, BUT THE MEMBERS HAVE GOT TO BE ASSURED THAT WE DEALT WITH THEIR ISSUES.

>> ADVOCATES GATHERED AT THE CAPITOL THIS WEEK TO RALLY FOR GREATER ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE CHILDCARE.

MANUFACTURE ALABAMA AND THE WOMEN'S FOUNDATION OF ALABAMA HAVE JOINED FORCES TO PROMOTE LEGISLATION THAT WOULD OFFER TAX CREDITS TO BUSINESSES AND WORKERS FOR CHILD CARE.

THEY SAY ITS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF INCREASING THE STATE'S WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION RATE.

>> THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO BRING TOGETHER HUNDREDS OF WOMEN FROM ALL PARTS OF THIS GREAT STATE TO TALK ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT MATTER MOST TO ALABAMA'S ECONOMY THROUGH THE LENS OF HOW THEY ARE EXPERIENCED BY WOMEN IN ALABAMA.

CHILDCARE DOES WORK, AND ALABAMA WILL WORK WHEN SHE WORKS FOR WOMEN.

>> IN 2022, 85,000 HARD-WORKING ALABAMA FAMILIES NEEDED ACCESS TO CHILDCARE, BUT NO QUALITY OR AFFORDABLE OPTIONS IN THE COMMUNITIES WERE AVAILABLE.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE PLAN ON CHANGING THIS SESSION.

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] >> THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TO ADDRESS THE CHILDCARE SHORTAGE IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA, EXPANDING ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR FAMILIES ALL ACROSS THE STATE OF ALABAMA.

MOTHERS AND FAMILIES THAT HAVE HAD TO MAKE A DECISION BETWEEN GOING INTO THE WORKFORCE AND BREAKING EVEN TO PAY FOR CHILDCARE OR STAYING HOME WITH THEIR CHILD.

NO MOTHER AND NO FAMILY IN THIS STATE OR IN THIS COUNTRY SHOULD HAVE TO MAKE A CHOICE BETWEEN BREAKING EVEN TO PAY FOR CHILDCARE OR STAYING AT HOME.

>> THIS YEAR IN THE LEGISLATURE WE'RE COMMITTING TO MOVING OBSTACLES FROM PREVENTING ALABAMIANS FROM ENTERING THE WORKFORCE AND UNLEASHING THEIR FULL POTENTIAL, ESPECIALLY WOMEN.

THE BEST WAY FOR US TO DO THAT IS SUPPORTING PARENTS ESPECIALLY MOTHERS.

NO ONE SHOULD HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN CARING FOR THEIR CHILD AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR FAMILY.

IT'S TIME TO INVEST IN AN INDUSTRY THAT KEEPS ALABAMA WORKING -- THAT IS, CHILDCARE.

>> THURSDAY WAS HIGHER EDUCATION DAY HERE AT THE STATE HOUSE.

THOUSANDS OF COLLEGE STUDENTS MARCHED AND RALLIED TO URGE LAWMAKERS TO SUPPORT HIGHER EDUCATION.

SGA PRESIDENTS FROM THE STATE'S 14 PUBLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES SIGNED A PLEDGE TO WORK TOGETHER TO PROMOTE HIGHER ED.

>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A REAL QUICK OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO HEAR ABOUT HOW WE WANT TO WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE ALABAMA A BETTER PLACE, RIGHT?

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] >> AND WE KNOW THAT UNIVERSITIES HAVE A ROLE IN MAKING THAT HAPPEN, RIGHT?

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] SO LET'S SHOW OUR SOLIDARITY AND SHOW OUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK TOGETHER.

WE'RE HERE TO MAKE A SYMBOLIC STATEMENT, WE BELIEVE IN ALABAMA AND WE ARE PART OF THE TEAM!

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] >> LISTEN, YOU ALL ARE SO IMPORTANT TO US.

YOU ARE OUR FUTURE.

WE WANT TO DO EVERYTHING WOMEN TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT YOUR UNIVERSITIES AND SUPPORT YOU INDIVIDUALLY, TO BE ABLE TO BE ALL THAT YOU WANT TO BE.

AS I'VE TALKED TO STUDENTS TODAY, I'VE TALKED TO ART MAJORS, I'VE TALKED TO ACCOUNTANTS, I'VE TALKED TO THOSE WHO WANT TO BE NURSES AND PHYSICIANS AND EVERY OTHER CATEGORY AND, WOW, WE NEED YOU DESPERATELY TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE AND BE SUCCESSFUL IN WHAT YOU'RE DOING WITH YOUR EDUCATIONS, SO YOU CAN BE GREAT PRODUCTIVE CITIZENS TO HELP ALL OF US MOVING FORWARD IN ALABAMA.

>> Y'ALL ARE OUR FUTURE.

WE LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW IN ALABAMA, IT'S AMAZING.

YOU KNOW, THE ECONOMY IS THE BEST IT'S BEEN IN YEARS.

I MEAN, YOU TALK ABOUT OPPORTUNITY, I TALK TO BUSINESSES ALL OVER, TALK TO PEOPLE, AND THEY WANT TO CONTINUE TO MOVE TO ALABAMA BECAUSE OF THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE HERE, BUT, MORE IMPORTANT, THE PEOPLE.

AND, YOU KNOW, MY MESSAGE TO Y'ALL IS Y'ALL ARE OUR FUTURE.

CONTINUE TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE YOU DIVE IN ON YOUR MAJOR.

AND THEN WE WANT YOU IN ALABAMA AFTER YOU GRADUATE SO YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

>> AND THAT'S THE WEEK THAT WAS IN THE ALABAMA LEGISLATURE.

COMING UP NEXT I'LL SPEAK WITH DR. MAMIE MCLAIN, A FERTILITY SPECIALIST WHO HAS INSIGHT INTO THE SUPREME COURT'S RULING ON EMBRYOS.

AFTER THAT, I'LL SIT DOWN WITH HOUSE SPEAKER NATHANIEL LEDBETTER TO REVIEW THE WEEK AND GET AN UPDATE ON GAMBLING LEGISLATION PASSED BY THE HOUSE LAST WEEK.

AND AFTER THAT, WE'LL GO DEEPER ON THE DEI ISSUE.

I'LL SPEAK WITH BILL SPONSOR SENATOR WILL BARFOOT AND DEMOCRATIC SENATOR RODGER SMITHERMAN, WHO OPPOSED THE BILL.

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> WELCOME BACK TO "CAPITOL JOURNAL."

AS WE'VE REPORTED, SOME FERTILITY CLINICS IN ALABAMA PAUSED THEIR IN VITRO FERTILIZATION TREATMENTS AFTER THE ALABAMA SUPREME COURT RULED THAT A FROZEN EMBRYO COULD BE CONSIDERED A CHILD UNDER ALABAMA LAW.

JOINING ME NEXT TO TALK ABOUT IT IS DR. MAMIE MCLEAN OF ALABAMA FERTILITY, A CLINIC THAT SPECIALIZES IN IVF.

DR. MCLANE, THANKS FOR COMING ON "CAPITOL JOURNAL."

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME, TODD.

>> LET ME ASK YOU, WHAT HAS BEEN THE REACTION IN THE IVF COMMUNITY BOTH FROM THE INDUSTRY SIDE ON THE CLINICS BUT ALSO THE COUPLES WHO ARE PURSUING IVF IN ORDER TO HAVE CHILDREN.

TODD, WE'RE SO WORRIED.

WE GOT WORD THIS MORNING ONE OF THE MAJOR SHIPPING COMPANIES FOR EMBRYOS IS NOT GOING TO BE PROVIDING SERVICES IN ALABAMA.

SO THAT MEANS OUR PATIENTS NOT ONLY CAN'T RECEIVE THE TREATMENTS THAT THEY NEED TO HAVE CHILDREN, BUT THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO TAKE THEIR EMBRYOS TO A DIFFERENT STATE TO HAVE CHILDREN.

SO OUR PATIENTS ARE JUST FEELING POWERLESS, BUT THEY'RE ANGRY.

THEY FEEL CERTAIN THAT THE SUPREME COURT DID NOT INTEND THIS CONSEQUENCE, AND WE ARE PLEADING WITH THE LAWMAKERS IN ALABAMA TO PLEASE HELP US OFFER ADVANCED FERTILITY TREATMENT TO THE WOMEN AND FAMILIES OF ALABAMA.

WE SIMPLY DESERVE IT.

IT'S A BASIC HUMAN RIGHT OR AMERICAN RIGHT TO DECIDE WHETHER TO HAVE CHILDREN, WHEN TO HAVE CHILDREN, AND FOR A PATIENT AND HER HUSBAND AND THE DOCTOR TO DECIDE HOW BEST IT IS FOR THEM TO HAVE CHILDREN.

>> YOU KNOW, MANY OF OUR VIEWERS AND ME INCLUDED MAY NOT REALLY UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING ABOUT THE IVF PROCESS.

CAN YOU KIND OF WALK US THROUGH WHAT THE SCIENCE IS?

WHAT IS A FROZEN EMBRYO AS OPPOSED TO ONE IMPLANTED?

CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF HOW IVF WORKS?

>> MM-HMM.

SO IVF TREATMENT HAS TWO PHASES.

THE FIRST PHASE IS WHERE THE PATIENT TAKES ABOUT TWO WEEKS OF FERTILITY INJECTIONS, TWO TO THREE SHOTS PER DAY.

THE RESULT OF THAT IS TO MATURE AND GROW EGGS WITH INSIDE THE EVERY.

THE PATIENT THEN UNDERGOES THEIR FIRST PROCEDURE WHICH IS CALLED AN EGG RETRIEVAL WHERE WE REMOVE THE EGGS.

WE ARE THEN ABLE TO FERTILIZE THE EGGS WITH SPERM AND THE EMBRYOS ARE ABLE TO DEVELOP AND GROW IN OUR LAB.

ONCE THE EMBRYOS HAVE REACHED A STAGE WHERE THEY ARE ABLE TO BE ASSESSED FOR HEALTH AND VIABILITY, THEN WE ARE ABLE TO EITHER TRANSFER AN EMBRYO BACK TO THE UTERUS FOR A PREGNANCY OR FREEZE EMBRYOS FOR FUTURE USE.

AND MODERN-DAY FERTILITY CARE INVOLVES CRYOPRESERVATIONS.

IN THE OLD DAYS THE FREEZING TECHNIQUES WEREN'T VERY GOOD AND WE WERE WORRIED THE EMBRYOS WOULDN'T SURVIVE.

BUT NOW CRYOPRESERVATION IS ALLOWING COUPLES TO HAVE A BABY.

>> LAWMAKERS HERE IN MONTGOMERY ARE WORKING ON A LEGISLATIVE FIX TO THIS.

ALREADY MULTIPLE PIECES OF LEGISLATION AIMING TO PROTECT IVF CLINICS TO MAKE SURE THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A PROBLEM AND THEY CAN CONTINUE OPERATIONS.

WHAT WOULD BE YOUR MESSAGE TO THE LEGISLATURE AS IT CONSIDERS FIXING THIS IN ALABAMA LAW?

>> WE ARE SO GRATEFUL THAT THEY ARE HEARING US.

OUR PATIENTS ARE BRAVE, THEY'RE RESILIENT, AND WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A BASIC AMERICAN RIGHT, THAT THEY ARE ARGUING ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS OF ALABAMA.

THE WORK THEY'RE DOING IS IMPORTANT FOR THE FUTURE OF ALABAMA, FOR FUTURE FAMILIES AND, FRANKLY, IN THE WEST INTEREST OF OUR STATE, AND WE ARE SO GRATEFUL THAT THEY ARE WORKING HARD.

WE WANT TO SUPPORT THEM IN WHATEVER WAY WE CAN, AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO KEEP MOVING FORWARD.

>> WELL, WE'RE GOING TO BE FOLLOWING THIS VERY CLOSELY MOVING FORWARD.

BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME COMING ON "CAPITOL JOURNAL" TO EXPLAIN THIS AS AN EXPERT IN THE FIELD.

DOCTOR, THANKS AGAIN.

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> WELCOME BACK TO "CAPITOL JOURNAL."

JOINING ME NEXT IS THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, NATHANIEL LEDBETTER.

MR. SPEAKER, THANKS FOR COMING ON THE SHOW.

>> IT'S GOOD TO BE HERE, TODD.

>> WE ARE ONE-THIRD THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

IT'S GONE QUICKLY.

>> IT HAS.

>> ARE YOU PLEASED WITH THE PROGRESS?

>> WE'VE HAD HEAVY LIFTS AND MOVED A LOT OF BILLS THIS WEEK.

SO I AM.

I THINK WE GOT BEHIND A LITTLE BIT.

WE'RE CATCHING BACK UP.

WE'VE HAD 250 BILLS FILED.

I THINK WE'LL HAVE PROBABLY A THIRD OF THEM THROUGH THE BODY, AND, SO, WE'RE ON PACE, WE'LL BE ON PACE BY THE END OF THIS DAY.

>> BEEN GOING FAST, THESE THREE-DAY WEEKS WHERE COMMITTEE MEETINGS ON WEDNESDAY BUT ALSO CHAMBER MEETINGS.

I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU, IS THERE ANY CONCERN ABOUT THE PACE BEING SO FAST, MAYBE THINGS GETTING LOST IN THE SHUFFLE, MAYBE RUNNING OUT OF TIME AT THE END?

>> WELL, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE TAKE IT ALL INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE MEET.

I MEET EVERY TUESDAY WITH THE PRO TEM AND THE SENATE AND WE GO OVER THE SCHEDULE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT AND SEE WHAT WE'RE MOVING, WHAT'S COMING NEXT AND THEY DO THE STATEMENT THING FOR US.

I FEEL COMFORTABLE ABOUT WHERE WE'RE AT.

I KNOW WE WILL HAVE A SPRING BREAK COMING UP SOON AND WE'LL MOVE A LOT OF BILLS BEFORE THAT.

YOU WILL SEE US GO BACK TO TWO DAYS AND USE THE WEDNESDAY BACK FOR COMMITTEE DAYS.

>> UH-HUH.

WELL, THE HOUSE WASTED NO TIME PASSING THE COMPREHENSIVE GAMBLING TWO-BILL PACKAGE.

IT'S A BIG DEAL.

WHAT'S THE NARRATIVE?

ALWAYS DIES IN THE HOUSE.

HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU HEARD THAT?

BUT PASSED THIS TIME, REALLY THE FIRST THING TAKEN UP.

NOW GOES TO THE SENATE.

WE'LL SEE WHAT THEY DO TO IT.

I'D LIKE YOU TO TAKE ME BEHIND THE SCENES.

WHAT WAS THE DIFFERENT-MAKER?

WHAT DID IT TAKE TO EARN THE SUPPORT OF THE CAUCUS LIKE IT DID?

>> WELL, I THINK IT WAS JUST TIME.

I MEAN, LIKE YOU SAID, THE SENATE'S ALREADY PASSED A BILL SIMILAR TO THIS TWICE AND THE LOTTERY BILL ONCE.

THEY'VE ALREADY VOTED ON GAMING THREE TIMES IN THEIR CHAMBER AND WE HAVEN'T.

SO FOR MY OFFICE, ALL YEAR LAST YEAR, IT WAS EVERY DAY, EVERY WEEK.

WE WOULD HAVE SOMEBODY COMING IN WANTING TO DO A C.A.

OR A COMPREHENSIVE BILL OR THIS OR THAT, AND I JUST PUSHED THEM OFF BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS FAIR FOR A FRESHMAN.

THEY HADN'T BEEN THERE LONG ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS AND WHAT WAS HAPPENING.

WITH ALL THE PEOPLE COMING TO ME AND TALKING ABOUT IT, WE PUT AN AD HOC COMMITTEE TOGETHER, NOT A STANDING COMMITTEE, SAYING DO THE RESEARCH, WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE STATE AND WHY ARE WE GETTING SO MANY REQUESTS?

ONCE THEY DID THAT, IT SHINED A LIGHT ON A LOT OF ILLEGAL OPERATIONS.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE WITHOUT QUESTION.

I SEE PEOPLE TALK ABOUT EXPANDING GAMING.

THIS DOES RIGHT THE OPPOSITE.

THIS CUTS IT WAY DOWN.

WE KNOW THERE'S PROBABLY OVER 500 ILLEGAL SITES IN JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTY.

SOMETIMES JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T SEE THEM DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE NOT THERE.

THEY ARE.

SOME HAVE BEEN TURNED INTO DRUG HOUSES AS WELL.

SO I THINK THAT IS PART OF IT, AND JUST HAVING THE CONVERSATION, STARTED LAST YEAR, IT TOOK A YEAR, THEY WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS AND DIFFERENT FACILITIES AND KIND WATCHED AND SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON, AND THEN THEY BROUGHT IN EVERYBODY INVOLVED.

THEY BROUGHT THE SENATE IN, THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE IN AND WORKED ON THE BILL.

AND I THINK THE LAST TIME THE CHAIRMAN TOLD ME AT THAT TIME, THEY HAD TEN DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIVES THAT ADDED TO THE BILL.

SO THEY HAD A CHANCE TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION WITH THE BILL, AND HE AND CHAIRMAN BLACKSHEAR DID A GREAT JOB SPENDING HOURS ANSWERING ANY QUESTIONS THE MEMBERS MAY HAVE HAD.

THEY WERE OPEN.

BEFORE WE PUT THE BILL OUT, WE HAD THE BONE WORK TO HAVE THE BILL THAT THEY HAD.

MEMBERS COULD COME BY AND SEE IT AND READ IT AND CHECK TO SEE IF THERE WERE ANY CHANGE ALSO.

SO I THINK THAT'S PART OF IT.

I THINK THE PROCESS WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

IT WAS SLOWED DOWN.

PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT IT MOVED FAST.

IN FACT, IT DIDN'T.

WE'D WORKED ON IT FOR OVER A YEAR.

IT WAS A TOPIC OF CONVERSATION IN THE CAUCUS RETREAT.

SO IT HAD BEEN ON THE TABLE FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK, ALL IN ALL, THAT'S PROBABLY THE REASON THAT IT MOVED THIS TIME BECAUSE THE DIALOGUE WAS THERE AND THE MEMBERS HAD A CHANCE.

>> MM-HMM.

YOU DID HEAR CONCERNS COMPRESSED ON THE FLOOR BY SOME OF YOUR CAUCUS MEMBERS, HEARING SOME OF THE SAME THINGS IN THE SENATE.

SO HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THOSE CONCERNS?

YOU KNOW, ABOUT ADDICTION, FEARS OF CORRUPTION, SOCIAL ILLS, WHEN THOSE CONCERNS ARE PLACED AT YOU, HOW DO YOU RESPOND?

>> YEAH, I THINK THOSE ARE ALL LEGITIMATE CONCERNS.

IF YOU THINK THAT, YOU SHOULD VOTE FOR THE BILL BECAUSE IT DOES AWAY WITH ALL OF THAT.

IT PUTS A LAW ENFORCEMENT ARM IN PLACE TO SHUT DOWN THE ILLEGAL OPERATIONS.

AS YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE BEEN AROUND A WHILE, OUR GAMING LAWS IN ALABAMA IS TERRIBLE.

THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THIS.

THIS FIXES ALL THAT.

IT SHUTS DOWN 18C.A.S WHERE PEOPLE'S ALREADY VOTED ON WHERE THEY'RE ALREADY RUNNING OPERATIONS.

I THINK THAT'S THE MISUNDERSTANDING BEHIND THIS, THESE FACILITIES ARE ALREADY OUT THERE BUT ARE NOT REGULATED.

NOT ONLY ARE THEY NOT REGULATED, THERE'S NOT A LAW ENFORCEMENT ARM THAT REALLY GOES IN AND CAN SHUT THEM DOWN OR SHUT DOWN SOMETHING THEY'RE NOT DOING RIGHT, THEY DON'T HAVE AN AUDITING PROCESS.

AND AS THE SUPREME COURT SAYS, THEY'RE ALL ILLEGAL.

OKAY, IF THEY'RE ALL ILLEGAL, WHY ARE WE RUNNING DOG GAMES, YOU KNOW, DOG TRACK GAMES?

SO THEY JUST MOVED FROM WHAT THEY WERE RUNNING TO NOW BECAUSE OF LEGISLATION IN THE PAST, IT MAKES DOG RACING LEGAL.

THEY WENT TO THOSE TYPE MACHINES.

SO, NO, IT'S NOT CLEAR, IT'S NOT CRYSTAL CLEAR, AND I THINK THIS BILL MAKES IT CRYSTAL CLEAR AND SHUTS DOWN ON A LOT OF THE CORRUPTION.

YOU KNOW, WITHOUT QUESTION, THERE IS ILLEGAL OPERATORS IN OUR STATE THAT IS ORGANIZED CRIME, AND I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF NARRATIVE GOING ON DURING THIS BILL THAT'S MISLEADING INTENTIONALLY, NOT ONLY FROM THE ILLEGAL OPERATORS BUT ALSO FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES FROM OTHER STATES THAT DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS BILL PASSED BECAUSE THEY'RE MAKING MONEY OFF ALABAMIANS.

SO, NO, YOU THINK THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS IT SHUTS DOWN MOST TO HAVE THE CORRUPTION -- MOST OF THE CORRUPTION.

>> SWITCHING TOPICS, IT'S BEEN A RELATIVELY SMOOTH SAILING IN THE HOUSE, NOT A LOT OF BLOWUPS, THINGS LIKE THAT, STILL EARLY.

>> YEAH, REALLY.

>> SO IT MIGHT BE GET BUMPIER DOWN THE STRETCH.

IN THE SENATE THEY'RE HEARING ARGUMENTS ON DEI, GENDER ISSUES ALWAYS THORNY, KNOWING THOSE ISSUES ARE GOING TO PERK LATE UP, WHAT'S YOUR PLAN TO LET THEM COME DO THE FLOOR AND BE DEBATED BUT NOT LET ORDER GET OUT OF CONTROL?

>> THE THING IS, I THINK IT WAS BENEFICIAL FOR ME BEING THE MAJORITY LEADER BECAUSE I WAS ABLE TO WORK THOSE ISSUES SOMETIMES BEFORE THEY EVER CAME TO THE FLOOR.

I DO THINK CONVERSATIONS WITH MEMBERS OPPOSED TO OR AGAINST IT, IN THOSE CASES, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S THE DEMOCRATS OPPOSED TO IT, HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING.

I'M NOT ONE OF THOSE THAT LIKES TO RUN OVER PEOPLE.

I WANT THEM TO BE INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION AND I WANT US TO TRY TO WORK IT OUT.

AND I UNDERSTAND IF THEY'VE GOT CONCERNS AS LONG AS WE DON'T GET REPETITIVE, AND IT'S A GOOD CONVERSATION, I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

IT'S WHEN IT GETS REPETITIVE, IT'S TIME FOR US TO MOVE ON.

I THINK LAST YEAR, WHEN WE WENT THROUGH SOME OF THOSE ISSUES, YOU'VE SEWN THAT.

WE HAD GOOD CONVERSATIONS.

WE WORKED WITH THE MINORITY LEADER AS WELL AS THE MAJORITY LOWERED AND TRIED TO WORK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES.

WE HAD SOME ON THE FLOOR YESTERDAY BUT WE WORKED WITH THEM.

THE PROCESS, SOME BILLS WE'LL BRING BACK.

SOME OF THE BILLS WE'VE ALREADY PASSED.

THE RED MEAT BILLS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE DEI -- >> YEAH, CRITICAL RACE THEORY.

>> WE'VE ALREADY PASSED ALL THOSE.

>> RIGHT.

>> SO THEY JUST DIDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH THE SENATE FOR SOME REASON OR ANOTHER.

SO WE'LL GET THOSE BACK AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GET THEM PASSED.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, I THINK, IN A PROFESSIONAL WAY.

I COMMENDED OUR BODY TODAY BECAUSE I FELT LIKE WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE GAMING LEGISLATION, THEY WERE VERY PROFESSIONAL, WHETHER YOU WERE FOR IT OR AGAINST IT, THAT'S YOUR PRIVILEGE BUT YOU'RE PROFESSIONAL IN HANDLING IT.

THAT'S ALL I ASK FOR OUR MEMBERS ON BOTH SIDES.

LET'S RESPECT EACH OTHER AND BE PROFESSIONALS.

>> WHILE YOU HAVE YOU, I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT WORKFORCE.

THIS HAS BEEN THE WATCH WORD OF THIS YEAR LEADING UP TO THE SESSION.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT ON THIS SHOW.

WE'RE AWAITING LEGISLATION FOR THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR ON HIS REPORT.

BUT I'VE ALSO MENTIONED ON THE WORKFORCE ISSUE HEALTH CARE AND HOW THAT CAN BE A BARRIER TO THE WORKFORCE AND FINDING A SOLUTION FOR THOSE WHO DON'T HAVE AND CAN'T AFFORD HEALTH INSURANCE, FINDING A SOLUTION TO THAT.

THERE'S THIS TALK OF A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP THAT WOULD USE MEDICAID EXPANSION DOLLARS BUT MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY BE MEDICAID EXPANSION.

IS THAT SOMETHING YOU THINK CAN TRULY HAPPEN IN ALABAMA, IS THAT FEASIBLE?

>> WE'LL SEE.

WE'LL HAVE THE CONVERSATION.

I'VE ALWAYS BEEN AGAINST EXPANDING MEDICAID.

I DON'T THINK THAT BENEFITS US.

THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE IS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL BECAUSE ABOUT HALF TO HAVE THE PEOPLE THAT ALREADY DOES HAVE INSURANCE, IT WOULDN'T BE TAKEN OFF INSURANCE, THEY'D ACTUALLY STAY ON COMMERCIAL INSURANCE.

ARKANSAS DID A VERY SIMILAR PROGRAM TO THAT AND THERE ARE OTHERS OUT THERE THAT HAVE, AND I THINK IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T HURT TO LOOK TO SEE HOW SUCCESSFUL THEY HAVE BEEN AND HOW IT'S AFFECTED THEM.

MY BIGGEST THING, I HAVE BEEN IN GOVERNMENT BEFORE AND THE MAYOR OF SMALL TOWNS, I'VE SEEN FEDERAL PROGRAMS COME AND GO.

THEY'RE FINE WHEN YOU'RE PAYING FOR IT BUT WHEN THEY GO YOU HAVE TO PICK UP THE DOLLAR.

THAT'S NOT ALWAYS EASY BUT THAT'S BEEN MY BIGGEST CONCERN WITH THE EXPANSION OF MEDICAID.

WE DO NEED TO HAVE A DIALOGUE, THAT'S THE POSITION WE'RE IN AND WHAT WE WERE ELECTED TO DO IS HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT.

WE'LL HAVE TO SEE HOW IT GOES.

>> SOMETHING TO WATCH GOING FORWARD.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

WE'LL CATCH UP GOING FORWARD.

>> THANK YOU, TODD.

APPRECIATE IT.

>> WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> WELCOME BACK TO "CAPITOL JOURNAL."

JOINING ME NEXT IS STATE SENATOR WILL BARFOOT FROM HERE IN MONTGOMERY.

SENATOR, THANKS FOR COMING ON THE SHOW.

>> GLAD TO BE HERE, THANK YOU, TODD.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

WELL, YOU SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THE FLOOR THIS WEEK BECAUSE YOUR BILL WAS UP.

THIS IS THE DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION BILL, DEI.

LONG FILIBUSTER, A LOT OF DEBATE.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT EXACTLY THIS BILL DOES?

>> SURE.

LET ME EXPLAIN THE ATTEMPT TO DO WITH IT AND WHAT THE BILL ACCOMPLISHES AND WHAT SOME OF THE NAYSAYERS SAID IT DOES THAT IT DOESN'T DO.

DEI HAS BEEN A PROBLEM THROUGHOUT THE NATION SPECIFICALLY IN ALABAMA.

DEI OFFICES AT HIGHER INSTITUTIONS OF EDUCATION, PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES, HAVE REALLY WORKED TO DIVIDE US RATHER THAN UNIT US, AND THE DEI OR DIVERSITY EQUITY AND INCLUSION SOUNDS INVITING AND IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING WE SHOULD ALL GET BEHIND BUT, IN FACT, THOSE DEI OFFICES AROUND THE STATE HAVE BEEN USED TO KIND OF SILO PEOPLE BY RACE, BY COLOR, BY RELIGION, ETHNICITY AND NATIONAL OR GIN.

SO WHAT THIS BILL DOES IS EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATES THE DEI OFFICES THAT HAVE BEEN USED TO DIVIDE RATHER THAN UNIT US.

>> I REMEMBER, YOU KNOW, LATE LAST YEAR AND REALLY EVEN THIS YEAR THE HARVARD SITUATION, YOU HAD THE COLLEGE PRESIDENT, DEI WAS A WATCH WORD.

IS THAT PART OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE?

>> IT IS.

AND THE NATURAL EXTENSION, IF YOU REMEMBER LAST SUMMER, THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT CAME OUT WITH THE S.F.F.A., THE STUDENTS FOR FAIR ADMISSIONS VERSUS HARVARD OPINION WHICH BASICALLY SAID YOU CAN'T CONSIDER RACE OR YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE RACE TO BE A CONSIDERATE FACTOR OR PREDOMINANT FACTOR WHEN IT COMES TO ADMISSIONS.

THAT CASE DEALT SPECIFICALLY WITH ADMISSIONS AND DIDN'T GO FURTHER THAN THAT.

BUT THE NATURAL EXTENSION OF THAT CASE HANDED DOWN BY THE NATE SUPREME COURT IS THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE PROMOTING ONE RACE OR ANOTHER OR WE SHOULD NOT BE DEMOTING ONE RACE OR SEX OR NATIONAL OR GIN OR ANOTHER.

THERE ARE TOO MANY THINGS THAT UNIT US AND WE SHOULDN'T TRY TO FOCUS ON THE THINGS THAT DIVIDE US.

THIS BILL IS AN ATTEMPT TO REMOVE THE IMPEDIMENTS AND THE DIVISIONS WE HAVE ESPECIALLY WITH STATE DOLLARS AND THAT'S THE WHAT THE BILL WAS AIMED AT.

YOU'RE WELCOME TO FEEL OR SAY WHAT YOU WANT, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR DIVISIVE CONCEPTS OR DIVISION AT OUR UNIVERSITIES.

>> I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WHAT I HEARD FROM THE OPPONENT OF THE BILL, THE DEMOCRATS, SENATE SMITHERMAN AND OTHERS, SAY WE NEED THESE PROGRAMS.

WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN BEYOND RACIAL PROBLEMS.

THEY BROUGHT UP SPECIFIC INCIDENTS OF RACIST COMMENTS AND SAID WE NEED THIS NOT JUST IN COLLEGES BUT OTHER INSTITUTIONS.

HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO ARGUMENTS THAT SAY WE NEED DEI TO PROMOTE DIRTY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION?

>> SO I WOULD SAY SOME OF THE COMMENTS BY MY COLLEAGUES ARE EXACTLY RIGHT.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE DO HAVE RACISM AND SEXISM, WE DO CATEGORIZE PEOPLE AND TRY TO VALUE THEIR WORK BASED ON EXTERNAL FACTOR WE SHOULDN'T CONSIDER TO FALL VIEW THEIR WORK BY.

THIS BILL DOES AWAY WITH THAT.

CAN'T CHANGE THE HUMAN HEART BY LEGISLATION BUT WE CAN SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT TAXPAYER DOLLARS INTO AN ISSUE OR TO A GOVERNMENT PROGRAM THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY STRIVE TO DIVIDE US.

THERE ARE UNIVERSITIES AROUND THE STATES, FOR INSTANCE TROY UNIVERSITY NEVER HAD AND DOESN'T HAVE A DEI PROGRAM, AND I'M HAPPY THEY DON'T AND HAPPY THIS BILL WILL NOT AFFECT THEM, BUT THEIR DIVERSITY LEVEL IS 40-SOMETHING PERCENT MINORITIES WITHOUT A DEI OFFICE.

WE SHOULD CELEBRATE THE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS, COLORS, RELIGIONS TO COME TOGETHER AND TO LEARN TOGETHER BUT WITHOUT CATEGORIZING PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE TO HAVE THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN OR BACKGROUND.

>> LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I WOULD IMAGINE UNIVERSITIES, HIGHER EDUCATION WOULD BE PRETTY INTERESTED IN THIS BILL.

IT WOULD REALLY DICTATE WHAT THEY CAN DO AND CAN'T DO ON THEIR CAMPUSES.

WHAT'S BEEN THE REACTION FROM THE HIGHER ED COMMUNITY?

DO THEY HAVE CONCERNS?

HAVE Y'ALL BEEN IN DIALOGUE?

>> THEY DID HAVE CONCERNS AND THERE WERE SOME EASEMENTS WE TOOK ON THE FLOOR BY SOME OF MY DEMOCRAT COLLEAGUES AND THEY WERE RIGHT TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE INTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

SOME OF THE AMENDMENTS CURED THAT.

WE DON'T WANT TO CAUSE PROBLEMS WITH TITLE 9 SPORTS.

THERE ARE SOME THINGS IF LEFT IN THE BILL WOULD HAVE CAUSED PROBLEMS AND WE WERE ABLE TO CURE THAT ON THE FLOOR AND I AM THANKFUL FOR MY DEMOCRATIC COLLEAGUES TO POINT THOSE OUT.

>> THE BILL ALSO CONTAINS A MEASURE THAT YOU BROUGHT LAST YEAR DEALING WITH DIVISIVE CONCEPTS.

USED TO BE CALLED CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND KIND OF MORE SPECIFICALLY, BUT IT'S MORE BROAD, DIVISIVE CONCEPTS PROHIBITING THE TEACHING AND PROMOTION OF THAT IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO PUT THAT IN THIS BILL AND MAKE IT MORE EXPANSIVE.

>> THE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS BILLS THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP THE PATHS TWO YEARS, THESE TWO CONCEPTS MELD INTO EACH OTHER.

I FORGET WHAT CHIEF JUSTICE IT WAS THAT SAID MAYBE HE COULDN'T DEFINE WHAT PORNOGRAPHY WAS BUT HE KNEW IT WHEN HE SAW IT, RIGHT?

THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THE OPPOSITION TO CRT HAS BEEN IS TELL ME WHAT CRT IS.

WE DON'T USE THE WORD CRT IN THIS BILL AT ALL, IS DIVISIVE CONCEPTS.

THOSE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS IS YOU CANNOT MAKE SOMEBODY AGREE TO OR CONSENT THAT ONE RACE IS SUPERIOR TO ANOTHER OR SOMEONE'S MORAL CHARACTER IS BASED ON THEIR SKIN COLOR, GENDER OR BACKGROUND.

THOSE ARE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS WE DON'T ALLOW IN THIS BILL.

HOPEFULLY WHEN IT MAKES IT THROUGH THE HOUSE AND GETS THE GOVERNOR'S IT IS, WE DON'T ALLOW FOR TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO PAY FOR IT.

FREE SPEECH, YOU BELIEVE WHATEVER YOU WANT.

HAVE RACIST THOUGHTS, WE CAN'T CONTROL THAT, BUT WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR IT.

>> ONE OF THE COMMENTS YOU MADE ON THE FLOOR IN RESPONDING TO SENATOR SMITHERMAN WAS, YOU KNOW, HE HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT SLAVERY, JIM CROW AND PAINFUL TO TALK ABOUT SUBJECTS THAT NEED TO BE TAUGHT AND YOU SAID, ABSOLUTELY, TEACH IT.

>> 100%.

>> YOU'RE CONFIDENT THIS BILL WOULD NOT IMPACT THAT?

>> 100%.

I'VE USED THIS BEFORE.

MY MOMMA WAS A HISTORY TEACHER.

SHE PASSED AWAY, UNFORTUNATELY, BUT IF SHE WERE ALIVE TODAY AND THOUGHT THIS BILL WOULD ERASE HISTORY OF ANY KIND SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN AGAINST IT AND THEREFORE I WOULD HAVE BEEN AGAINST IT.

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE GOOD, BAD AND UGLY.

THERE'S PLENTY OF THAT TO GO AROUND AND UNLESS WE TALK ABOUT ALL THAT INCLUDING THE BAD AND UGLY, WE'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO BENEFIT FROM THE EXPERIENCES, TO BENEFIT TO KNOW HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE'RE AT.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT THOSE, QUITE HONESTLY, THE COMMENT THE OTHER DAY THAT I MADE ON THE FLOOR, TOO, MY WIFE TALKS ABOUT VALENTINE'S DAY.

THERE ARE 364 OTHER DAYS YOU SHOULD TREAT ME THE WAY I DO ON VALENTINE'S DAY.

I USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE.

WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT BLACK HISTORY ALL MONTH LONG.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE BEEN A FEMALE, HISPANIC, INDIGENOUS PERSON, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE CHANGES AND THE INCREMENTAL CHANGES IN HISTORY THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF ALABAMA BASED ON WHAT THEY HELPED US DO.

>> WE'LL WATCH THIS BILL.

A LONG DEBATE ON THE SENATE FLOOR.

LEAVE IT TO THE HOUSE AND WE'LL WATCH THAT BILL GOING FORWARD.

THANK YOU, SENATOR.

SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

>> AWESOME, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> WELCOME BACK TO "CAPITOL JOURNAL."

JOINING ME NEXT IS STATE SENATOR RODGER SMITHERMAN FROM BIRMINGHAM.

SENATOR, THANKS FOR COMING ON THE SHOW.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

I MEAN THAT.

THANK YOU.

>> IT'S BEEN A LONG COUPLE OF WEEKS.

YES.

>> IN THE LEGISLATURE.

Y'ALL HAD A PRETTY LONG NIGHT ON THE FLOOR, DAY AND NIGHT, DEALING WITH REALLY JUST ONE BILL.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> THAT WAS THIS DEI, DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION.

IT WOULD REALLY PROHIBIT PUBLIC ENTITIES, UNIVERSITIES FROM HAVING DEI PROGRAMS, OFFICES, BUT ALSO GOING INTO THE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS, THE RACE, GENDER, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO IT WAS A PRETTY EXPANSIVE BILL.

YOU HAD FIERCE OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL.

CAN YOU SPELL OUT YOUR MAINLY OBJECTIONS TO THE BILL AS IS?

>> YES, I CAN.

THE BILL WHETHER INTENDED OR UNINTENDED, IT WAS BASICALLY GOING TO WIPE OUT ALL THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT HAD BEEN PRESENTED FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS TO BE A PART OF THE FIBER OF THIS COUNTRY.

THE BILL JUST TOOK AWAY THOSE OPPORTUNITIES AND, AS SUCH, IT REALLY SET A GENERATION AN A SECTION OF THIS WHOLE STATE'S POPULATION BACK FROM ALL THE PROGRESSES THAT WE HAVE MADE.

AND MANY TIMES PEOPLE THAT BRING THESE BILLS DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT WHEN YOU EVE LIVED A LIFE -- BUT WHEN YOU'VE LIVED A LIFE, AND I HAPPEN TO HAVE LIVED A LIFE WHERE, AT 16, I LIVED A LIFE WHERE SEGREGATION WAS LEGAL, JIM CROW WAS LEGAL, AND AT 17 IT WAS NOT.

SO I'VE SEEN STRUGGLES STARTING FROM NOTHING AND OPPORTUNITIES TO GET TO THIS POINT IN LIFE.

AND THERE WERE MANY OF THOSE OPPORTUNITIES WERE MADE BECAUSE OF THE PATHWAYS THAT THE OPPORTUNITIES OUR SCHOOLS MADE IN GETTING OUR STUDENTS IN SCHOOL AND GIVING THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO THOSE SCHOOLS.

YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE MAY NOT UNDERSTAND, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A SUBJECTIVE DECISION THAT CAN BE MADE BY SOMEONE AND THAT INDIVIDUAL CAN CHOOSE BETWEEN SOMEONE WHO IS BLACK AND SOMEONE WHO IS WHITE FOR THE SAME POSITION AND THE SAME QUALIFICATIONS, MANY TIMES RACISM WILL RAISE ITS HEAD AND, WHEN IT DOES, THAT BLACK PERSON IS NOT GOING TO GET AN OPPORTUNITY.

AND WHAT THESE DIVERSE PROGRAMS DO IS A PATHWAY FOR THEM TO GET INTO THOSE AREAS, I.E.

ACADEMY AND EMPLOYMENT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE CERTAIN CERTIFICATIONS TO GET IN.

SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT A PATHWAY EXISTED FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS AND NOT JUST AFRICAN-AMERICANS BUT PEOPLE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO ENJOY WHAT THIS COUNTRY CAN PROVIDE FOR.

>> I LISTENED TO SOME OF YOUR DEBATE WITH SENATOR BARFOOT.

YOU HAD GOOD BACK AND FORTH GOING.

ONE OF THE POINTS HE WAS MAKING ON THE DIVISIVE CONCEPTS PART IS HE WANTS IT ALL TAUGHT, GOOD, BAD AND UGLY.

YOU KIND OF WENT BACK AND FORTH ON DIFFERENT ISSUES.

WERE YOU SATISFIED?

I CAN SEE HIS POINT ABOUT NOT WANTING ONE, YOU KNOW, RACE OR ONE GENDER PROMOTED OR ONE RACE OR ONE GENDER DEMOTED, YOU KNOW.

THAT WAS KIND OF THE POINT HE WAS MAKING.

HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT?

>> WELL, I PERFECTLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT HE WAS SAYING AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS TO SO THAT WHAT HE'S TRYING TO AVOID HAPPENING.

THAT WAS NEVER ANYBODY'S INTENT, ALTHOUGH I'M SURE THAT THERE ARE SOME INSTANCES HE CAN QUOTE AND PROBABLY WILL THAT THOSE KIND OF THINGS TOOK PLACE.

BUT, AT THE SAME TIME, WE DIDN'T WANT TO GET TO A POINT WHERE YOU CAN'T HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT ANOTHER RACE, YOU KNOW, SUCH AS THIS IS BLACK HISTORY MONTH.

I'VE TOLD THEM ABOUT THINGS BLACK PEOPLE INVENTED AND DONE, IT'S NOWHERE IN HISTORY.

>> INTENTIONALLY LEFT OUT.

>> YES, AND, SO, HE MAKE SURE OUR HISTORY CAN BE TOLD, AND NOT JUST DO IT IN ONE MONTH, WHICH IS OCTOBER, BUT IN THE BOOKS YOU KNOW.

AND WE TALK ABOUT TRUE FACTS AND TRUE HISTORY.

SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS IN THAT AREA THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS INCLUDED, AND IT WILL BE INCLUDED, YOU KNOW, AND BE ABLE TO HAVE THOSE KINDS OF DISCUSSIONS AND CONVERSATIONS.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE, THOUGH, IS SIMPLY THIS -- AND YOU MAY HAVE HEARD ME SAY THIS ON THE FLOOR -- IS THAT NO ONE IS BLAMING ANYBODY PRESENTLY FOR WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST, BUT WHAT WE ARE SAYING, BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST, THEN IT PROVIDED A COMPLETE OPPORTUNITY, YOU KNOW, FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION TO MOVE FORWARD AND GO FORWARD.

SO IF THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION ARE GOING TO CONTROL THE ASSETS -- IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO CALL IT -- THEN SURELY THEY'VE GOT TO BE INVOLVED IN HELPING TO BRING THE PEOPLE WHO WERE SUPPRESSED, LIKE IN SLAVERY, DENIED READING FOR 400 YEARS.

IN FACT, WE ONLY HAVE BEEN FREE A FEW YEARS, AND IT TOOK UNTIL 1964 TO GET THE RIGHT TO VOTE, AND STILL HAS TO BE REAUTHORIZED EVERY 25 YEARS NOW.

SO WHAT WE WERE SAYING IS THAT THOSE KIND OF SITUATIONS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE ADDRESSED.

AND WE WERE SAYING, LOOK, A COMPANY -- I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.

YOU GO BACK TO THE PAST, THIS COUNTRY, SLAVE LABOR AND THEY'RE NOW ABLE TO BE PROSPEROUS, THEY NEED TO PARTICIPATE AND TRY TO REMEDY AND PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE SAME PEOPLE, THE FOREFATHERS, WHO WERE DENIED THAT.

IT'S LIKE A RACE.

IF YOU TAKE OUT THE RUNNING AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO BIRMINGHAM, AND YOU TELL ME, SIT HERE UNTIL I GET TO ALABASTER, NOW YOU TAKE OFF RUNNING -- >> I GOT A HEAD START.

>> AIN'T NO WAY TALKING ABOUT WE'RE EVEN NOW.

I'M TALKING ABOUT AS A RACE.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT NOBODY IS SAYING LET'S JUST GO FORWARD BECAUSE WE'RE STILL NOT AT THE STATEMENT POINT.

>> SHORT ON TIME, BUT WHILE I'VE GOT YOU, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT YOUR BILL DEALING WITH LOITERING ON HIGHWAYS.

I KNOW IT PASSED THROUGH COMMITTEE THIS WEEK.

EXPLAIN WHAT THIS BILL DOES.

>> WELL, THE BILL WAS A BY-PRODUCT OF -- WHEN I GO HOME, I GET OFF GREEN SPRINGS AVENUE, AND, AT 5:00 IN THE EVENING, THE FREEWAY IS ALREADY BACKED UP.

THAT LANE MANY TIMES THE BACKED ALL THE WAY UP AND IN PART IT'S BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE OUT THERE ARE RIGHT ON THE RAMP.

AND, SO, YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE WHO ARE BACKED UP, WHO CAN'T GO, WHO THEY STOP AT THAT MOMENT, BUT YOU'RE ENDANGERING ALL THESE OTHER CARS AND PEOPLE ALL THE WAY OFF THE INTERSTATE BECAUSE YOU HAVE PEOPLE COMING OFF THE INTERSTATE AT 70 MILES AN HOUR.

>> A PANHANDLING KIND OF THING?

>> I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE TRYING TO GET REVENUE BUT THAT'S THE WRONG PLACE TO DO IT.

>> IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE.

>> IT'S A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE.

THAT'S WHAT THE BILL IS SAYING, YOU CAN'T DO THAT ON THESE RAMPS.

WE'RE NOT SAYING YOU CAN'T DO IT AT DESIGNATED PLACES AND WE'RE NOT TRYING TO STOP THEM PER SE FROM DOING IT, BUT WE ARE TRYING TO SAY THIS IS VERY UNSAFE, AND THE HAZARD YOU MAY BE INFRINGING ON IS WE NEED TO ELIMINATE THAT AND THAT'S WHAT THE BILL DOES.

>> I WISH YOU HAD MORE TIME, COME ON BACK AND WE'LL GET INTO SOME OF THE OTHER LEGISLATION.

BECAUSE I KNOW THE DEI TOOK UP A LOT TODAY AND THIS WEEK.

THANK YOU, SENATOR.

SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

>> GOOD TO BE HERE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> THAT'S OUR SHOW FOR THIS WEEK.

THANKS FOR WATCHING.

WE'LL BE BACK NEXT WEEK STARTING MONDAY FOR OUR NIGHTLY COVERAGE OF THE LEGISLATURE AT 10:30 HERE ON ALABAMA PUBLIC TELEVISION.

AS WE CLOSE THE SHOW HERE'S SOME MORE FOOTAGE OF HIGHER ED DAY THIS WEEK.

MAYBE YOU CAN FIND YOUR FAVORITE MASCOT.

FOR OUR CAPITOL JOURNAL TEAM, I'M TODD STACY.