I have never seen the destruction that this storm did to our state.

Never.

No one has.

And this is just a small portion of what I think we should be doing for the citizens of our state.

And I will continue to try to work, to do something to help those that still have not received any help in this storm.

Providing storm damage relief after Hurricane Helene struck was the main topic in both chambers today, as the House and Senate both passed bills to help the state's timber growers.

Good evening and welcome to Lawmakers.

I'm Donna Lowry in Atlanta.

It's not your imagination.

Your power bill just keeps going up.

One reason is the surge in data centers in the state, driven by demand for AI services, as power companies struggle to keep up with this growing demand.

The costs are being passed along to consumers.

On today's show, we'll discuss legislation looking to help you take control of what you spend on electricity, and a bill to bring back a council to represent consumers on the Public Service Commission.

Also, a bipartisan effort to try to keep people with intellectual disabilities from getting sentenced to death.

But first, let's get the latest on the from the Capitol, from our Capitol correspondent, Sarah Kallis.

Hi, Donna.

The topic of Hurricane Helene damage relief took up a large part of the deliberations in both chambers.

The day started in the Senate, with Democrats rebuffing the Trump administration for federal cuts directly impacting Georgia.

First up, large cuts of personnel at the CDC.

People laid off include experts in infectious disease, diseases, emergency response and public health researchers, many of whom have spent years building up their expertise to keep Americans safe.

And let's be clear that losing all of that expertise will, in fact, end up costing taxpayers more money.

More cuts.

But this time, to the FEMA hurricane recovery funds.

Instead of providing Georgia with the expected 90% federal funding match, the Trump administration has slashed that number to just 75%, forcing our state to shoulder an extra financial burden.

We should not have to bear.

Three bills made their way through the Senate today one addressing the storm damage directly.

The Timberlands recovery exemption and earnings Stability or Trees Act was created to help timber growers throughout the state recover from the massive damage caused by Hurricane Helene.

SB 52 would allow tax relief levied on the harvest or sales of timber growers in hurricane damaged areas.

Because the logs are not worth anything.

This adds some relief to go to the meal and keeps the government out of a cut.

They're not having to pay taxes on.

They've already lost 90% of the value of their of their timber.

They're not having to pay another tax on top of that, after they've already lost 90%, as well as it helps the counties that the rural counties like mine that that depend on the timber tax to help fund local school boards and counties.

The bill passed unanimously.

SB 58, will make it safer and speedier for patients to receive vital transplant organs.

Many of you may have seen on the roads that there are organ vehicles that look very similar to either a fire response or an ambulance.

They have red lights and sirens on them, the very same that we do on other emergency vehicles.

I was proud to work with our Colonel of the State Patrol and our Commissioner of Public Safety, Billy Hitchens, to come up with a protocol that matches everything else in Georgia law to make sure that these vehicles have the same exact rules, follow the same permitting process, and have the same trained and qualified personnel at the times they need to run full emergency.

And finally, Senate Bill 81 would protect consumer data with regards to auto sales in the state.

The data protection piece is is the most important part of this bill.

Just some of the highlights there.

Prevents unauthorized access, sharing or selling of dealership data from their data dealer management systems.

Prohibits third parties from limiting dealerships ability to protect, store, or use its data.

Permit dealers to continuously monitor or audit data access from or written to their data systems without interference.

Both of those bills also passed.

In the House.

A visit from a familiar face and former member, U.S. Representative Sanford Bishop, visited the chamber to send his well wishes to representatives.

It's very nostalgic to come back where I got my.

Beginning, where I understood the fundamentals of the legislative process and politics.

There was no better training for me than the 14 years I spent in this house, and the two years over in the Senate.

Uh, which really, really underscored how important the work is that you do.

Bishop spent 14 years in the Georgia House and two years in the Georgia Senate before he was elected to U.S. Congress.

Similar to the Senate's Trees Act, the House passed HB 223, also addressing Helene relief.

It would exclude taxes on the relief funds timber farmers receive.

Those of you who did not experience the 2:00 A.M. Wake up call of destruction do not know what we in the area and in the line of this storm experienced.

It was scary.

It made you question your life.

Am I going to make it through this?

The bill passed unanimously and HB 92 extends the period of time a municipality can opt out of the homestead exemption tax.

From March of this year to March of 2029.

That bill passed 170 3-1 Tomorrow.

Is Mental Health Parity Day at the Capitol, where mental health advocates will meet with lawmakers.

That's my Capitol report.

Donna, back to you.

Thanks, Sarah.

Georgia is the only state that allows for the execution of people with intellectual disabilities.

Even though in 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a matter versus the state of Virginia, ruled that it violated the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution to execute a person with a low IQ.

The court ruled it cruel and unusual punishment.

Now we're going to talk about a bill to keep people with intellectual disabilities from getting the death penalty.

This has bipartisan support, led by Republican Representative Bill Werkheiser of Glennville.

He's chairman of labor and Industry.

Also here is Democratic Representative Karen Lupton of Chamblee, and her committees include Education and Human Relations and Aging.

Well, welcome to lawmakers.

To both of you.

Chairman Werkheiser, let's start with you.

You have the bill that would try to keep defendants with intellectual disabilities from getting the death penalty.

Give us a little bit of background from your perspective on all of this.

And you're leading with exactly right.

We're the only state that does this.

Um, those that argue against the bill said that they're not executing those.

But I can tell you, two of the last seven, um, had IQs of less than 70.

And the the case that really got me started on this was in 2015.

Um, the both sides, uh, there was no argument whether the person was intellectually disabled.

The question before them was, do we execute?

And it was a split decision with the Georgia Supreme Court 4-3 Three of them saying that the Supreme Court, um, as you just mentioned, has already ruled on this.

But the other four said, and I quote one Supreme Court justice said, until the legislature fixes this, we have no other choice.

And so they voted 4-3 to execute the guy.

And so, um, I just think we need we need to fix this.

The bill does two things that, um, changes from beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a impossible bar to to clear on that matter to a preponderance of evidence.

And then it also moves.

The determination of somebody who has intellectual disability to the beginning of the trial, because someone either is intellectually disabled or they're not.

But if you do it at the end of the trial, after the jurors have heard two weeks of horrendous testimony, seen pictures they wish they could unsee.

Um, there's no way that a jury is not biased by that.

And so, um, we just want to move it and to have a separate hearing to make that determination before the trial starts.

So the yeah, the pretrial part of it is that the key in all of this from the and it has a lot to do with this decision on whether or not it's beyond a reasonable doubt to preponderance of evidence.

Right.

Your thoughts on all of this?

Well, I support, uh, Representative Werkheiser in this very sensible bill.

Um, you played in a little clip beforehand that said that this a Da was saying that this would kill the death penalty in Georgia.

And to that, I say, and so.

We're going to play it.

We're going to.

Play it for the audience to have it in a moment.

They haven't heard it yet.

Yeah.

So the thing about it is you just feel that this, it's just because of what the Supreme Court has ruled that people who have low IQs should not be put to death.

If that's the law of the land.

And more more than that, it's the humane thing to do.

Um, I don't think that we need a Supreme Court ruling to say that people with intellectual disabilities should not be put to death by the state.

That, to me, seems just a very simple, compassionate, and reasonable request to make of our of our laws.

They should go through the court process.

So nobody is saying that, right?

That is correct.

And unlike a insanity plea where someone is innocent by by rule of it, no one's getting away.

They're going to spend the rest of their life in prison without the possibility of parole.

And so it's it's merely taking away the the punishment of executing them.

Yeah.

So I want to I want to get to the sound you talked about earlier because among those this this went be you went before the House judiciary Non-civil, um committee.

And there was a hearing a few weeks ago.

And among those who spoke was T Wright Barksdale, the third.

He's the district attorney for the Okmulgee District Attorney's office.

He only supports the portion of the bill that would change the standard of proof.

And in 1999, there were 128 people on death row.

Currently, there are 34 people on death row.

Since 2011, there have been five death sentences rendered in the state.

I want to be clear.

Nobody with intellectual disabilities has been put to death in the state of Georgia.

Nobody.

The bill, as it is currently drafted after having meaningful and fruitful conversation with, uh, Mr. Werkheiser, the district attorneys are willing to agree to have the standard of proof changed.

We recognize that there are a number of states, uh, that have a different standard than what we currently have.

However, understand this.

The procedural changes to this bill would all but kill the death penalty in the state.

Okay.

Pretty strong words.

Procedural changes with all but kill the death penalty in the state.

So your response.

My response is and so I mean, I'm a Democrat.

So I'm going to be generally anti-death penalty to begin with.

I believe it's not a deterrent.

It's very, very costly in terms of our legal system because someone gets sentenced to death.

That's not the end of it.

There's an appeals process, and by our rights, we have that process.

But that's not the end of the story.

These things are often dragged out for many, many years.

Um, and to allow someone with an intellectual disability to be put to death by the state, again, I think this is just common sense, common sense, compassion rule that we don't do that here in Georgia.

I think Barksdale talked about two corrections officers who were killed, who killed somebody who were killed by someone who was determined to have intellectual disabilities years ago.

And you were going to say something.

Well, in that case, his his argument against the bill, he was using that as an example of someone who was not intellectually disabled, but they were claiming it to not get the death penalty has nothing to do with this bill for a couple of reasons.

That guy was trying to use that defense and the process worked.

It was proven he did not have intellectual disabled, but we have put to death, as proven by the case.

I just said.

And then later last year on, um, on March 30 of of last year, we executed a guy that had a 68, 69 IQ, which in any state is considered intellectually disabled.

And so we have an we just I'm just trying to fix that.

But isn't that the fear that people will use that as an excuse?

Well, but they're already using it as an excuse.

And so let the process work.

And that's why I think the hearing at the front of the trial, um, make that determination.

They either they either are and you don't.

It's not a disease that happens upon you when you're in your 30s or 40.

If you have intellectually disabled.

Generally you're that from birth.

So there's a record, there's an IP folder.

There's years of clinics and doctors reports.

And just in special ed.

And so if you try to use that in a defense, again, if you're making the analogy like a, like a insanity defense where you suddenly become insane, you don't suddenly become intellectually disabled.

So I just think it's a false premise that it will be used, uh, to get a lighter punishment.

Okay.

We're going to keep following this, but I want to get to something else really quick because, Representative Lupton, you also have the sponsor of legislation that would make sure that no one disposes of unreported rape kits.

And when you brought this to me, I said, how does that happen?

How are there unreported rape kits?

That's a great question.

And it's something that I've been able to try to educate folks about.

I'm a 27 year sexual assault survivor, so these sort of issues are very near and dear to my to my heart.

Um, when a rape kit is taken after someone has been assaulted, um, the victim has a choice whether to involve law enforcement in this process or not.

Now, there are a lot of very.

I call them very human reasons that people decide not to do that.

Um, most people are sexually assaulted by someone that they know, someone that they're in relationship with already.

This could be someone that you work with.

This could be somebody in your family.

This could be a neighbor.

So our human entanglements can sometimes make it a little difficult to just run to the police.

Um, in today's atmosphere, maybe this person doesn't have papers and says, I'm not going to let the police come near me even though this bad thing has happened.

Um, I call unreported these unreported kits.

Um, unrealized evidence.

Potential evidence.

Um, when someone has some space and some healing, perhaps in five years they can reclaim that kit.

We have a wonderful system.

Thanks to our laws that are already in place to track our rape kits that are taken.

This is potential evidence for future cases.

In five years, somebody says, oh, he.

I just heard that he did this again to somebody or there's a case brought forward.

Oh, I still have my evidence right now, the law says that if you do not involve law enforcement immediately, you can keep that kit for 12 months and get rid of it afterwards.

And that's what's been happening.

Yes, that's what's been happening.

Is that that evidence, once you lose that evidence, you can't get it back.

So if you don't do anything with it, it doesn't stay with the state.

It doesn't stay with the state.

Now, sexual assault centers, we could go.

We could I could talk about this all day.

Some people are holding on to it longer than the 12 months because they they have better relationships with the victims.

Um, but not every police precinct has room to store untested kits.

Um, so they're more likely to get rid of them.

So your bill isn't.

You haven't actually introduced it yet.

You're in the process.

How long would you like to have them?

Just indefinitely.

We'd like to make it the same as reported kits, which is 30 years.

30 years.

30 years.

So that.

Is that's kind of the standard.

Do you have any idea how many kits we're talking about.

Right now?

We're talking about not even 275 kits for one year.

Okay.

We'll keep up with your bill once you once you introduce it.

And we'll keep up with the the other bill that you guys are talking about.

I appreciate you coming on the show.

And thank.

You so much for having us.

Appreciate it as always.

Well, coming up, find out why your power bill keeps taking more of your money.

We'll hear from a senator who's trying to change that and give consumers representation before the state Public Service Commission.

You'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.

Where does that sound with you, man?

That's what I love doing.

Good.

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.

Oh.

Whoa!

La la la la la.

What are you 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.

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.

Glennville.

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.

I love it.

You.

Welcome back to Lawmakers.

I'm Donna Lowry.

We're going to focus on the reason why your power bill has been skyrocketing in recent years.

Joining us is Republican Senator Chuck Hufstetler of Rome.

He chairs the Senate Finance Committee.

Welcome to Lawmakers this.

We're going to dig right into this.

Georgia is one of the top data center markets in the nation.

And so let's start by telling people what data centers are and how they're affecting your phone bill.

I'm sorry, your electricity bill.

I'm sorry.

When you think of data, you know, on your phone, but.

It's great to be on here again.

Yeah.

And, you know, data centers are are good, I support them.

I went to Nevada six years ago and helped bring one here, but they do use well.

They pay a lot of property taxes.

They don't hire a lot of people, but there's there's benefits to them.

But they do use a lot of water and a lot of power.

And so we've had consumers and I got to back up and say how we got to where we are here.

We've had six rate increases in less than two years.

A lot of that is because of Plant Vogtle, which they paid for 14 years of surcharge.

We all did prepaid it, though.

It didn't pay any of the capital.

It was just the interest, the taxes on Georgia Power profit and their profit.

Now the capital is being paid for, so they're paying for it for 60 years.

Now.

It's kind of like having a mortgage that's been put on there for 60 years to pay for it, to pay it back.

What we've ended up with is we're in the top five consumer bills in the country.

Sometimes people will try to say, well, kilowatts and this and we don't pay in kilowatts, we pay in dollars.

It's all the surcharges and everything.

So we're in the top five in the country, and we've got these data centers that the Public Service Commission has said they're going to be about 80% of the demand, and the consumers just can't take any more.

We need to make sure that whatever the cost is there, that they pay for.

Now, they've told me they want to pay their their power.

And the PSC even came out.

And I think Chairman Shaw was really trying to work on this as well.

Some of this he inherited, but they came out with a ruling, but it was just sort of a meh.

And at your discretion of Georgia Power.

This bill makes it really clear if you cost for the construction, the transmission, the distribution, anything, then you pay the bill.

So let's break this down.

So these data centers like meta has one Google.

You know they all have these centers.

And with AI that's also part of it.

In order to produce the AI everything they have these big data centers I'm sorry, data centers that take up a lot of land, but they don't hire a lot of people.

And they you get property taxes from them and then they pass that information that cost on to Georgia Power, who's passing it on to consumers.

Right.

Well, it has been the case for a lot of years.

The consumers have been paying for all the construction, I think, unfairly targeted for, for all of that.

And so this would simply say you make the cost for any new construction and you distribution, uh, substations, anything like that.

It's your bill.

It puts it back on these data centers to take care of that instead of the Georgia Power or the power companies, because they're AMC's to, um, putting it on the consumer.

So you you spoke before the Senate Regulated Industries Committee, but so did a gentleman who an attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, his name is Bob Shearer, and he talked about the impact of data centers.

So what we're talking about is a huge new demand on our energy and our electric grid.

Some of the projections going forward expect that we might get close to doubling the amount of power that we need in this state in the next couple of years.

Doubling the amount of power.

So if things continue the way they are, we're going to just keep seeing our bills go up for our power.

Is that what the fear is?

The fear is.

And I do think the PSC is finally starting to address that.

But I feel like we need something ironclad, codified into law that makes sure we do.

You know, the the plant.

Vogel's brought 7.5% power increase for Georgia Power.

As I said, a huge, actually 40% increase in the in the cost of the mortgage, but a 77 5% power increase.

But they've told us two data centers will take up all that power.

Everything.

So everything that's been planned up to this point would already be.

Eaten up.

And why are the consumers continue to pay this?

And that's that's the issue.

It's just a fairness issue.

Again, I'm not against data centers.

I think that they've got a place and I think we need to to have them in the state.

But I do want them to pay their way.

And they seem to be saying, yeah, we want to pay our way.

Okay, so that's SB 34, but I want to talk about another bill that's similar to this.

This legislation also has bipartisan support.

And both of your bills, this one is SB 94.

And that would create a utility council to represent consumers before the Public Service Commission.

And I spoke earlier to Democratic Representative Mary Frances Williams of Marietta about the bill.

When I go out into my district and talk to people, I always say, what are you worried about?

What's you know, what are your main concerns?

What are your issues?

And I have had so many people talk to me about the cost, you know, the day to day cost of living.

And many of them have brought up their utility bills.

They feel like they've been going up and up and up and that, you know, all these rate increases have been are being approved and that they just don't know.

They feel like, you know, a lot of people are on fixed incomes and it just feels like it's out of control.

And people are just really worried about being able to pay their utility bills.

And they don't feel that they have a voice.

But you feel that there may be this bill may be an answer to a voice.

So we're talking about SB 94.

This bill is huge.

So it would create a consumer utility council in statute with legal authority to represent ratepayers and consumers.

At the PSC, there was a bill last.

There was a bill last session.

Chuck Hufstetler.

Senator Chuck Hufstetler was the author of that as well.

I believe it passed the Senate almost unanimously, but it got stopped in House AG and Consumer Affairs.

And um, to me, it just was kind of a no brainer that we would, you know, if that we should have a consumer utility council.

So I looked into it since then and actually talked to Senator Huffstetler about his plans and learned that we used to have a consumer utility council until 2008, during the recession, when Sonny Perdue cut it, cut it.

During all that budget cutting, we're one of only four states that doesn't have a consumer utility council, which to me is significant.

Um, and it would be in the Department of Law and they would they would just they would have the authority to research issue.

Research.

Um, increases, you know, is there a legitimate reason for the increases?

Because there have been.

Uh, six increases in two years in Georgia power rates, and the last one was over 12%, I think.

Yeah.

So you mentioned that earlier, these increases that we keep seeing and the fact that there there was a commission, there was this it existed.

And then the Great Recession came along.

From the 1970s until 2008, we had somebody representing the consumers, 46 states.

Representative Williams said, have this, um, it gives the consumer legal standing in these issues.

Now, the PSA would say, we'll say we've got people that work on the consumer side, but I don't think they're independent, and I don't think they have legal standing to challenge these things.

We passed it last year out of the Senate almost unanimously.

We've already passed it out of Regulated Industries Committee.

This year.

It's eligible for the Senate vote.

I hope we can get it through there and get some action on the House on this, because the consumers need somebody to represent them on these issues.

Um, I think that many things happened that probably weren't in the consumer's interest after that happened in 2008, and we need to get them some representation.

Uh, many states say it's great.

I think we need to join the 46 who think that it's worthwhile.

Who was on the commission before and who who would be on the commission on this council?

Well, they have experts that weigh in.

Generally.

You've got a lawyer that would head it up because they they have to challenge these rulings.

And so you have people that are, uh, statistical people getting data for him, but he's the one that would challenge it in court if he thinks something's wrong.

And that people don't need another rate increase or something like that.

Right.

We'll keep up with it.

Thank you very much, both of your bills.

I appreciate you coming on the show.

Thanks for having me here again.

Thank you.

Well, that does it for Lawmakers today.

Tomorrow on the show, we'll talk about the liability for the disposal of Forever Chemicals in Georgia.

Have a good night.

See you.