This bill creates a new way to go after our teachers, our school districts, our public servants, all pretense of enforcing laws that are already on the books.

There is no sanctuary city in Georgia.

Not a single one.

But SB 21 pretends that there is a problem where none exists.

Passionate rhetoric in the Senate today about SB 21.

The so-called sanctuary cities bill, and whether there is a need for the legislation.

Good evening and welcome to Lawmakers.

On this day 17 of the Georgia General Assembly.

I'm Donna Lowry in Atlanta.

Several bills passed in both chambers, and we'll have a rundown in a moment.

Tonight, we're delving into a profoundly emotional topic that touches the lives of many families in vitro fertilization, or IVF.

Two lawmakers on both sides of the aisle discussed their personal stories and the hope that IVF will provide for them.

The legislation regarding IVF and the Georgia and Georgia.

I'm sorry, dropped yesterday and we'll learn what it involves.

Also on the show, two Capitol correspondents join us with their takes on this session so far.

The halfway point is fast approaching.

But first, our Sarah Kallis breaks down the day at the Capitol.

Hi, Donna.

Today at the Capitol, a celebration of new citizens and a debate on immigration policy.

Recently sworn in citizens were honored today for the contributions immigrants and refugees make in Georgia.

The new citizens met with lawmakers to discuss policies that impact their communities.

On the topic of immigration, senators debated SB 21, sometimes referred to as the sanctuary city law.

The bill would allow the state to penalize local authorities who do not follow state and federal immigration laws.

Counties who don't send an immigration detainer notice to ICE when they have an undocumented immigrant in their possession would waive sovereign and governmental immunities.

In our state.

We have seen a politicization of the law, and it has become popular at times to take positions to say that while this may be the law, I'm not going to enforce it.

This bill doesn't seek to try to put anybody, any local official or local government in jail because they're not following Georgia law.

It says instead that we're going to create, if necessary, a financial incentive for you to obey Georgia immigration law.

As a local government or a local government official, and the way we intend to enforce that is by if our citizens are harmed because you did not, as a local government or a local government official, abide by Georgia immigration law.

Well, that citizen has a right to seek redress from you.

Democrats say the bill puts an unnecessary burden on local officials, particularly teachers.

This bill creates a new way to go after our teachers, our school districts, our public servants, all under the false pretense of enforcing laws that are already on the books.

There is no sanctuary city in Georgia.

Not a single one.

But SB 21 pretends that there is a problem where none exists, and in doing so, it puts teachers and local officials in an impossible position.

What do you exactly expect teachers to do underneath this bill?

Do you want them to interrogate their students about their immigration status?

Do you ask a 7-year-old where they were born?

To profile kids based on their last name or the language they speak at home?

Because that's what this bill opens the door to.

It forces educators to choose between following federal law, which protects all students right to an education and risking a lawsuit from an anti-immigrant extremist who would rather drag a teacher to court than see a child succeed.

Despite the Democrats objections, the bill was passed 33-18 In the House.

Members debated a bill that would impact adults under conservatorship or legal guardianship.

House Bill 36 expands the list of professionals that can conduct an evaluation to help determine if someone needs a guardianship to include nurse practitioners, physicians, physician's assistants, and marriage and family therapists.

The question is, why are we expanding this list?

Well, because the reason very shortly is because the professionals currently authorized by statute to perform that evaluation are not doing it.

They are reluctant to do it.

And I'm not trying to blame or censure them at all for that.

I can I don't question their reasons, and I can think of a number of perfectly valid reasons why one of those professions might not be able to provide that evaluation.

But the fact is, they're not doing it.

And as a result, the cases are being delayed and sometimes stalled.

I hope all of you have a power of attorney and advance directive.

I hope everyone that you care about has an advanced directive and power of attorney.

But if you don't or they don't, and they become unable to make decisions for themselves, this is your only option.

Is a conservatorship or a guardianship.

But the bill received some pushback.

But we cannot go for speed when we are talking about freedom.

We cannot shirk on qualifications when we are talking about freedom.

The bill passed 99-70 in a mostly party line vote.

Representatives also passed House Bill 105, which would increase the payout for spouses and children of certain public school employees who lose their life at work from $75,000 to $150,000.

If you've got public school.

Teachers in your district, I think that this would be very important for you to hear.

We are recommending that we increase and listen.

This is a very somber but very important piece of legislation.

In my opinion.

Back in 2017, this body increased the back the blue for when a service member public officer is killed in the line of duty from $100,000 to $250,000, a death benefit.

Our public school safety officers deserved it then and our teachers deserve it now.

And this remedies that disparity in the law.

The bill passed easily, but.

This is a simple yet profoundly important piece of legislation, one that acknowledges the immense value of teachers and the sacrifices that we make every day.

But while I appreciate this Bill, I would be remiss if I would ignore the glaring omission within this two pages.

The silence is deafening.

And so I must ask why?

Why must the identification award for teachers be increased in the first place?

What has changed in the past year that has finally forced us to acknowledge that teachers are on the front lines?

The answer is tragic, but clear.

The leading cause of death for teachers on the job is gun violence.

Also today, representatives wore purple capes and glasses in support of lupus patients and caregivers.

I lay down my burden.

Down by the Riverside.

And Gullah Geechee Heritage Day brought food and a cultural celebration to the Capitol.

That's my Capitol report.

Lawmakers return on Tuesday for day 18.

Donna.

Thanks, Sarah.

For countless individuals and couples, the journey to parenthood is filled with both hope and heartache.

Some turn to IVF for the possibility of expanding their families.

In the US, 19% of women and 11% of men face infertility issues.

In Georgia, the latest numbers from the centers for Disease Control and Prevention show in 2021, more than 2,300 children were born through IVF.

Georgia now has a bill to codify some protections for IVF.

It's something speaker of the House Jon Burns considers a top priority.

We'll go ahead and codify protections for IVF and vitro fertilization.

We know how important that is to families.

Families that have strived to have children, that has been difficult and is an option, a viable option that's a reasonable option that they would enable them to have a family.

We know that's important to them, but it's important to our society.

We know that there are some some rulings in the legal system and our court system and some neighboring states that have clarified some issues.

So we want to make sure that every family in Georgia, every couple that wants to take advantage of IVF can do just that.

Now joining us to discuss the bill is the lawmaker carrying it in the House, Republican Representative Lehman Franklin of Statesboro, also supporting the bill is Democratic Representative Esther Panitch of Sandy Springs.

And thank you for coming on Lawmakers to discuss your personal stories about IVF.

And I'm going to start with you, Representative Franklin, your journey and you and for you and your wife.

It's been going on for a few years, so tell us about it.

Sure.

So, Donna, my wife and I got married late in life, and we've been married about ten years, and we didn't think about or even consider, you know, that there would be a difficulty in having children.

We just didn't really plan on that.

And then but as we progressed, we had it was we found that there was some some difficulty with it and we started to trying IVF.

Um, my wife did it, I think three times.

Three different times and did hormone therapies four times.

And just, um, we just it just never worked out.

And then we even you might not know this, but we even tried to adopt at one point and we got two weeks away.

We had an attorney, a contract, all that worked out, and then that fell apart.

So we it's been a real emotional roller coaster the whole time.

But, um, but I'm happy to say, now that we tried one last time, it worked.

Everything's great.

We're expecting a little girl on June the fourth, and.

Yeah, so we're ecstatic about it.

We're excited about it.

I want to hear more about that.

And your wife, the people that can't see her.

She's in the studio and she looks fabulous.

She looks great.

Um, you have a personal story, too, representative.

So tell us about it.

And it's about your daughter.

Yes.

So this time last year, my daughter, who was 24 at the time, was, uh, had a tumor, a large tumor in her abdomen.

She got tested to and found out that she's BRCA one positive, which.

Elevates everybody who ever has it.

Their risk for getting cancer.

Breast cancer in particular.

Breast cancer particular but other cancers as well.

So the tumor took her one of her ovaries and one of her tubes.

So she has one of each left, which usually is enough.

But because of her elevated risk, she is engaging in IVF and retrieval.

So one day when she wants children, she can have them and I can have grandchildren.

So, you know, the state shouldn't step in between us and deprive me of grandchildren that I would like.

So we're going to talk about your involvement with the bill, because you were the first to sign the bill to.

But let's hear about the bill first.

Okay.

So we believe it's HB 428.

I just wrote that down.

So it's fresh.

You just put it in.

You got a lot of signers and she was the first one.

Tell me about.

It I did yeah it's amazing that just before I go into a little bit, it's amazing the feedback I got with it, because when we got signers on the bill, um, I heard personal stories from just about every single person that did it.

And I think we've got about 90 to almost 100 signers on this bill now.

So it's really been a miracle situation.

And I'll clarify, she was the first Democrat to sign it.

That's correct.

I'll say that.

That's right.

Um, but it was a completely bipartisan bill.

It's been a great a great thing for the House.

But the effort here on this bill, what we want to do is we just want to codify the language of IVF, to safeguard that for Georgian families.

Um, you know, we I guess you could say we're getting ahead of the curve there to make sure that nothing comes in to threatens that ability in Georgia currently, you can you can use IVF, you can have it.

You go through the process and everything's fine.

But we don't want anything from the outside or anything from satellite issues.

I guess you can say confusing the issue to stop it.

So we're going ahead and codifying it and making sure the language is correct and safeguarding it and putting the law where it can stay.

Okay, we're getting a little bit into what other states have done in a moment.

But Representative Panitch, you were the first Democrat to sign it and you are an attorney.

So what are the important aspects that you wanted to see codified in this bill?

So our neighboring state, Alabama, there were embryos that were destroyed.

And the parents who sued the lab where the embryos were destroyed.

And ultimately, the Alabama Supreme Court said that the embryos were people, so that the parents of those embryos could recover on a wrongful death, so that that stopped all of Alabama's IVF.

And it really made people in Georgia nervous that it would happen here.

So the Republicans, the speaker, indicated that he wanted this to go through.

And I contacted the speaker's office last year.

As soon as I heard about it.

And this is really a policy statement and a law that says that individuals will have access to IVF, that it will not be prohibited to them.

So this is just a great bipartisan measure.

I'm grateful for the representative to allow me to be the first Democrat to sign it.

It's important for all Georgia families.

Yeah, and you're just two stories, and there are so many people.

Is there anything you want to add about the law in particular that she didn't get into?

Well, especially given what?

Alabama.

What happened in Alabama?

Yeah, I guess I just want to say that I think that the heart behind what Alabama did was they were trying to, you know, do the right thing, but they had unforeseen situations with it.

And then they they shifted gears and then tried to correct it, which they did.

So seeing that we just wanted to make sure that we go ahead and solidify it and do it.

But I have to say that, you know, I call them satellite issues with this bill.

You know, that we're not even getting into any of that, and that's not even a topic.

So you can believe all that you want to believe or any side of this issue and still be supportive of this bill, because all this does is secure it for the families of Georgia.

So, um, it doesn't go into the weeds of that.

Now, we can have that debate at another time.

I'm happy to have those other debates.

I'm happy to look into it.

But I kind of look at this as a first step solidify IVF, make it safe, make it secure for families in Georgia, and then we can talk on other issues all we want to.

Yeah.

So the big thing was protecting the IVF providers in particular, and then the families and all of that and protecting the embryos too, I guess that that's it.

Anything else you wanted to add with this?

Well, this is my second big bipartisan bill.

Yeah, in two years.

And I'm grateful that that there are things that rise above politics that we can agree on for the good of Georgians.

And you're, you're you're feeling really good about it.

So many signers on this.

Yeah.

It's very well, like I said, I haven't had anybody that's really come against this bill because they see the benefits of this bill.

They know that this is a good thing for Georgia.

And we've heard that the governor and the lieutenant governor are also supportive.

So, um, you know, we've had where something will happen in one chamber and the other chamber, you know, we have to wait and see.

But you're feeling really good about it.

Well, thank you so much for coming on and talking with us.

And yeah, we want to see pictures when the baby is born.

Okay.

We just want to get that on Lawmakers.

Thanks again.

Thank you.

Well, coming up, an analysis of the session from two journalists.

They'll dish on proposed changes to the homestead exemption law, immigration bills, legislation to appoint the state's school superintendent, and more.

We're watching Lawmakers on GPB.

Georgia Farm Bureau, a grassroots organization dedicated to preserving Georgia agriculture.

Farm Bureau advocates for all Georgia farmers at the state Capitol during the session and year round.

Georgia Farm Bureau, the Voice of Georgia farmers.

It's good to have everyone back together.

Good news indeed.

Put your feet up a minute.

It's beautiful.

How does that sound to you, man?

It's what I love doing.

Cup of tea?

I was thinking more.

A double whiskey.

Harriet.

Oh.

Freshly baked biscuits.

Always.

Well, this is all proving rather cozy, isn't it?

I got my head out the sewing room.

Oh.

Oh, my la da da da da.

I keep.

What I.

Understanding the past.

Gives a sense of the future.

Heart like a lion.

This is the first time that anyone has seen this in 2000 years.

Sunday.

Oh, something big is happening.

So hurry up.

We're diving in.

What?

This is amazing.

Well, I'm excited now.

Pompeii is a battle against time.

Wide open.

All day.

You think I'm joking?

But look at this.

It did really happen.

Don't let anybody tell you who you are.

Yeah.

Love this life.

History teaches us to honor the past.

We're jumping in with our eyes wide open.

When you look back, you're like, wow, that was pretty special.

This is something that's actually altering the course of history.

You're charged with keeping these stories alive.

Why don't you?

Welcome back to Lawmakers.

I'm Donna Lowry.

Two journalists who cover the General Assembly join us to talk about a variety of issues.

Michele Bachman is a politics, news and enterprise reporter for the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

She covers political issues from all over the state.

And Rahul Bali is politics reporter for WABE radio and former GPB Lawmakers Capitol correspondent and producer.

Uh, welcome to Lawmakers.

I should pull the video of when you filled in for me that one time when I had a little fender bender on the way from the Capitol to the studio, but we didn't do that.

So bills really began heating up this week under the gold Dome, and a flurry of legislation will only it will just grow in the coming weeks.

So let's jump to into some of it, beginning with the conversation we just had about the IVF bill.

And I'll be I'll begin with you a little bit your your thoughts on how you think this will do.

Um, it seemed to have strong support from the House speaker last year.

Um, Representative Scott Hilton introduced a resolution that was supported by him.

I believe it had the backing of the speaker pro tem as well.

Um, so definitely strong Republican support.

And then I also believe many Democrats are in support as well, because they want to enshrine protection for reproductive access.

Yeah.

Your take.

I'm still going to be looking and watching for opposition.

One of the people I did talk to that's raising concerns with this legislation is Cole Muzzio.

He's a activist that we see at the Capitol.

He's with frontline policy counsel.

And, you know, he advocates for religious conservative issues.

And he's he's looking for Lawmakers.

He's not, you know, openly opposing it, but he's raising concerns of, you know, if you believe that life begins at conception, is this the type of legislation to be following?

So that's I'm going to see if, you know, follow Lawmakers kind of follow what he's talking about there.

The other thing that I'm watching for is a different piece of legislation, kind of similar to what Representative Panici was talking about, and that's around the idea of insurance companies covering, uh, some of some of the reproductive treatments when there's something like cancer going on or other things.

So there's a piece of legislation like that that I'm also following.

Yeah.

So the moral and ethical issues, we may see some things rise up when it comes to that.

Rahul, let's jump into something else.

The homestead exemption bill.

So it became law last year.

Then voters approved the amendment by about 63% in November.

It essentially ties home values to the inflation rate.

It was created to lower tax bills for homeowners.

But it's become a problem for governments who worry they'll lose money.

And some have opted out.

But now there's a new bill to somewhat overhaul everything.

So explain that.

Well, here's here's where this is all coming from.

There is some frustration among lawmakers that there are governments and school systems that are opting out, especially in areas where, you know, these got passed by 60, 70, 80%.

And yet those local governments have decided to opt out.

So there's frustration around among lawmakers.

And there is a piece of legislation, House Bill 92 from Shaw Blackmon.

And what originally was going to do was give counties and governments more time to opt out.

Right.

Because March 1 is the deadline.

Exactly.

March 1, what the changes that we've learned that have been made to the bill since now allows, if a if a government opts in allows, you know, this exemption to kick in, they're going to get four years to opt back out if they need to.

That's giving them more time.

That's kind of you know what they're hoping that's going to help, you know, get more governments to do this, giving them the option of, hey, it kicks in, it's not working.

So now we can get out.

There's some other changes that have been made to the legislation around acreage, also around homestead.

If a spouse passes away.

The other thing that you may start seeing is those lawmakers who are frustrated may pass local legislation to force a referendum.

Local referendums on that issue.

So that's something I'm going to start watching for.

For example, in in some of the counties represented by Representative Franklin just a moment ago.

Yeah.

So the big thing is having the ability to opt out down the road that some aren't going to get after they see how the money comes in.

You know, because I know some districts are.

Well, we'll keep an eye on that.

Michelle.

Um, this week we saw the first of several proposed immigration bills go through.

So talk about a little of what we saw this week.

So the bill that passed today in the Senate was Senate Bill 21.

And that bill, um, would punish any cities or county governments or law enforcement agencies that try to enact sanctuary policies.

Um, being a sanctuary city is already has already been illegal in Georgia, and a sanctuary city is one that gives safe harbor to someone who is in the country illegally.

From being deported back to that country.

Um, so the bill that passed today would allow any citizen to bring a lawsuit against a county or city government or law enforcement agency that has violated that, um, that principle, and it would waive their sovereign immunity, which is intact, to to allow governments to function so that they're not being sued all the time.

This comes after House Bill 11 0-5 last year, which enacted harsher penalties for cities and counties to force them to comply with federal immigration policies.

And, of course, all of this comes after 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley was killed near University of Georgia's campus.

Um, the the bill allows um the bill allows any citizen to bring these lawsuits which could, Democrats say, could open up a lot of liability.

And then on top of that, Democrats have criticized the bill because, um, they're they're saying that Georgia sheriffs have said that these jails are already crowded and they just don't really have the space.

Yeah, there's a lot we're going to see in the coming weeks on that.

But yeah, this is just the beginning.

Okay.

Switching gears again, um, you have details on a bill that would add to appoint state school superintendents and not elect them.

So tell us about that.

So, you know, one of the things, you know, when we look at a piece of legislation, I like to see who's who's names are on a piece of legislation.

And, and House resolution 174 jumped out at me because it has the House pro tem Jan Jones the appropriations chair for education.

Matt Dubnik, who's the lead sponsor of that resolution, and Chris Erwin, who's the House education.

So I went, oh, I need to look at this.

And basically right now, you and I, every four years elect or reelect a state school superintendent.

This proposal would change it to an appointed position appointed by the state school board.

But it also makes changes to the state school board.

Right now, that's appointed by the governor.

That would change that, too.

It would change it to an election structure similar to how the Georgia Department of Transportation Board is put together.

So it would be by congressional district, by the representative state representatives and state senators from those districts would elect elect the state school board, completely changing it.

Of course, state Superintendent Richard Woods not very happy about it.

You know, you know, a statement that he put out was basically like, look, don't take the people expect to be able to vote for this position and you're taking their rights away for that.

So it's something I'm watching.

And we're talking as soon as the 2026.

This is this.

It would make the 2026 election the last time.

The last time.

The school superintendent would be on the board would would be on the ballot, and then it would go after that.

Okay.

Turning to you, you've written this week about some health care legislation that we saw passed.

Talk about that a little bit.

Yeah.

So, um, as far as health care on, I think we're looking a lot at mental health and behavioral health when we're talking about Republican priorities.

Um, this comes after the deadly shooting at Appalachia High School in Barrow County.

Republican lawmakers want to, um, add more school counselors, um, more screening of students and more funding for mental health in schools and for youth.

Um, Democrats want those things as well.

Um, they also are, of course, continuing for the 15th year to talk about pushing for Medicaid expansion.

Um, that is unlikely to happen, uh, because, uh, the governor is very opposed to that happening and is is doing his best to, to make sure that doesn't happen.

Um, and then last year, the big health priority was around certificate of need that did end up passing.

Um, but just yesterday there was a discussion, again to revise some parts of that.

Oh, that will be interesting to see.

Okay, then, uh, we're running out of time, but I want to get in something with you because we we, you and I in particular.

She's young, but we've been we've been covering the General Assembly for a while.

Uh, this week, we're all offering our prayers for the for this health speaker's chief of staff, Terri England.

He's the former House appropriations chair.

And so your thoughts a little bit on he had an accident.

Um, and you know, a mechanic with a machine.

Yeah.

So for those who don't know, he had an accident on his farm, sustained some serious spinal injuries.

And from what I understand, there's still more assessment to be done to see what's next.

It sounds like it's going to be a long road to recovery, but, you know, he's one of those important people for our jobs.

You know, we have somebody you have conversations on the background.

You learn what's going on.

Somebody who answers questions in the middle of the night.

As you mentioned, he was the appropriations chair.

Um, and that's such a people don't realize.

Yes.

These are part time legislators.

That's a full time job.

And we learned so much from him.

You know, the 1 hour show that we would do when I was here on Lawmakers, um, you know, and again, a joy to work with.

Um, you know, when I saw him Thursday, you know, a wisecrack at him and a wisecrack back at me.

So again, we're all thinking about him.

We're all praying for him, his wife and his family.

Uh, so, you know.

Yeah, we're thinking about him.

Well, you gave us.

You both gave us lots to look at in the future.

And, yes, we are thinking about him.

I appreciate you both coming on the show.

I love these conversations where we kind of discuss things that we talk about, that other people don't get a chance to hear, I appreciate it.

Well, that does it for Lawmakers today.

The Capitol Hill will be quieter tomorrow and on Monday for a long double holiday weekend.

We return on Tuesday when the chambers gavel in for day 18.

Be sure to check out Gpb's Instagram and Facebook Reels to meet two of the couples who met while working at the Capitol.

It's called legislative love.

Happy Valentine's Day tomorrow, everybody!

Um, that girl who.

Yeah, that's.

Don't you, Terri?

Do you?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.