>> DON: GOOD EVENING.

FROM OUR STATEHOUSE STUDIO IN MONTGOMERY, I'M DON DAILEY.

THANKS FOR JOINING US!

TOPPING OUR BROADCAST TONIGHT, THE LEGISLATURE WRAPPED UP IT'S WORK WEEK TODAY WITH BUSY AGENDAS.

THE SENATE DELAYED A VOTE ON A CLOSELY WATCHED BILL THAT WOULD CURTAIL THE GOVERNOR'S EMERGENCY POWERS.

IT'S SPONSORED BY SENATOR TOM WHATLEY OF AUBURN, WHO DEBATED TODAY WITH MINORITY LEADER BOBBY SINGLETON HIS PLAN TO GIVE THE LEGISLATURE OVERSIGHT OF EXECUTIVE EMERGENCY HEALTH ORDERS EXTENDED BEYOND 165 DAYS.

>> NOW, AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WE DETERMINE THAT BECOMES NOT AN EMERGENCY BUT A CONTINUING THING.

AT THAT TIME THE GOVERNOR WOULD NEED TO CALL THE LEGISLATURE BACK IN SESSION TO APPROVE ANY PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY FROM THEN ON.

>> I THINK IF WE HAD TO WAIT ON THE LEGISLATURE WHEN A NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM DIDN'T BELIEVE IN IT, YOU WOULDN'T WEAR MASKS, YOU WOULDN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE, YOU TALKED AGAINST VACCINATIONS.

IF WE HAD TO WAIT ON THIS LEGISLATURE, WE PROBABLY WOULD BE ALL DEAD.

DON: SENATOR WHATLEY'S EMERGENCY POWERS LEGISLATION WILL LIKELY RETURN TO THE FLOOR FOR A VOTE NEXT WEEK.

DON: THE SENATE IS WRAPPING UP A WEEK IN WHICH IT DEFEATED A SWEEPING GAMBLING EXPANSION BILL THAT WOULD HAVE SET UP A LOTTERY AND ALLOWED FOR CASINOS AND SPORTS BETTING IN THE STATE.

SENATE PRESIDENT PRO TEM GREG REED OF JASPER SAID THIS AFTERNOON THAT SENATOR DEL MARSH'S WORK ON THE LEGISLATION WILL ALLOW THE ISSUE TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> THERE HAVE BEEN, I THINK, TWO LOTTERY BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN OFFERED THUS FAR IN THE SENATE.

AND I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH BOTH OF THOSE SPONSORS TODAY AND THEIR LEGISLATION IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT SENATOR MARSH BROUGHT FORWARD.

BUT THOSE TWO LOTTERY BILLS ARE DIFFERENT.

THEY HAVE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS.

SO I THINK IT WILL CONTINUE TO SPAWN QUITE A BIT OF CONVERSATION.

OBVIOUSLY THAT TOPIC AND ISSUE IS NOT OVER.

MEMBERS ARE STILL CONTINUING TO DISCUSS IT AND TALK ABOUT IT.

DON: THE BIG GAMBLING EXPANSIN BILL FAILED ON TUESDAY BY A MARGIN OF 19-13 AND SENATOR REED WAS AMONG THOSE WHO VOTED ‘YES'' AMONG THE ‘NO‘ VOTES WAS SENATE MAJORITY LEADER CLAY SCOFIELD OF GUNTERSVILLE, WHO SAID TODAY THAT CASINOS WERE THE STICKING POINT FOR HIM AND SEVERAL OF HIS COLLEAGUES.

>> I JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, MODERATION ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS NOT A BAD THING.

I THINK A LOTTERY GETTING THAT IN IS A GOOD FIRST STEP.

FROM THERE WE CAN LOOK AT THAT OTHER COMPONENT.

AND YOU LOOK AT THE POLLS, THE GAMBLING PART OF THAT REALLY POLLS A LITTLE -- NOT EVEN CLOSE TO POLLING, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE LOTTERY IS POLLING.

SO I THINK WE START THERE AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, WE DEBATE THE OTHER.

DON: SINCE THE GAMBLING EXPANSION LEGISLATION'S FAILURE, NEW LOTTERY-ONLY BILLS HAVE BEEN FILED BY SENATOR MARSH, SENATOR JIM MCCLENDON OF SPRINGVILLE AND SENATOR GARLAN GUDGER OF CULLMAN.

DON: THE HOUSE ECONOMIC AND TOURISM COMMITTEE TODAY HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING ON SIMULCAST DOG AND HORSE RACING AT FACILITIES IN WHITE HALL, IN LOWNDES COUNTY.

IT'S SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE KELVIN LAWRENCE OF HAYNEVILLE, WHO SPOKE WITH CAPITOL JOURNAL.

>> THIS BILL CAME ABOUT BECAUSE HISTORICALLY WHITE HALL AND LOWNDES COUNTY HAS BEEN KIND OF LEFT OUT OF THE GAMING ISSUE SIMPLY BECAUSE AS A BENCHMARK IT'S BECAUSE OF IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT WE DID PASS IT DIDN'T ALLOW FOR PARAMUTUAL AND DOG RACING.

SO WITH THIS BILL WE WANTED TO TRY TO KIND OF LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD.

DON: A COMMITTEE VOTE ON REPRESENTATIVE LAWRENCE'S BILL COULD COME NEXT WEEK.

HE'LL JOIN US ON THE BROADCAST SHORTLY TO TALK MORE ABOUT IT.

DON: THE HOUSE TODAY APPROVED A BILL THAT WOULD CREATE A NEW CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR THE ‘DOXING' OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS.

‘DOXING' IS ONE WHEN SOMEONE POSTS PRIVATE IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ONLINE WITH THE INTENT TO HARM OR HARASS SOMEONE.

THE LEGISLATION IS SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE SHANE STRINGER OF CITRONELLE.

>> THEY'RE PUTTING OUT INFORMATION ON WHERE YOUR CHILDREN GO TO SCHOOL, WHERE YOU'RE -- YOU KNOW, WHAT VEHICLE YOUR WIFE DRIVES, WHERE YOU LIVE -- INFORMATION THAT CAN BE USED TO EITHER HARM OR HARASS YOU.

AND TO TRY TO HINDER YOUR EFFORTS IN WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

THIS IS FOR POLICE OFFICERS, FIREMEN, JUDGES, LEGISLATORS.

THIS IS A LARGE ARRAY OF PUBLIC SERVANTS THAT THIS BILL WILL PROTECT.

DON: WITH TODAY'S HOUSE PASSAGE, REPRESENTATIVE STRINGER'S ‘DOXING' BILL NOW MOVES TO THE SENATE.

DON: THE HOUSE TODAY ALLOW PASSED A BILL THAT WOULD ALLOW PHOTOS OF INDIVIDUALS ARRESTED FOR HIRING PROSTITUTES TO BE MADE PUBLIC.

REPRESENTATIVE MERIKA COLEMAN OF PLEASANT GROVE SPONSORED THE LEGISLATION, CONTENDING THAT THERE IS A DIRECT LINK BETWEEN HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND PROSTITUTION AND THAT ALLOWING THE PHOTOS OF THOSE ARRESTED FOR HIRING PROSTITUTES TO MADE PUBLIC MIGHT HELP DRIVE DOWN THE CRIME.

THE HOUSE TODAY ALSO PASSED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD LIFT THE BAN ON YOGA IN STATE SCHOOLS.

IT'S SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE JEREMY GRAY OF OPELIKA, WHO HAS BROUGHT THE BILL FOR THREE YEARS NOW.

YOGA WAS BANNED IN SCHOOLS 23 YEARS AGO AMID CONCERNS OVER IT'S CONNECTION TO EASTERN RELIGIONS.

BOTH THE YOGA AND PROSTITUTION BILLS NOW MOVE TO THE SENATE.

DON: LEGISLATION THAT WOULD HAVE EXEMPTED CRYPTOCURRENCY, OR BITCOIN, FROM AD VALOREM TAXES FAILED ON A HOUSE PROCEDURAL VOTE THIS AFTERNOON.

IT WAS SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE ANDREW SORRELL OF MUSCLE SHOALS, WHO RECENTLY SPOKE TO CAPITOL JOURNAL.

>> SO RIGHT NOW IF YOU HAVE CASH IN YOUR BANK ACCOUNT OR IF YOU HAVE DOMINICAN PESOS, YOU ARE NOT TAXED BASED ON THE FACT YOU HAVE THAT CASH SITTING IN A BANK ACCOUNT.

NEITHER SHOULD YOU BE TAXED IF YOU CHOOSE TO HOLD CRYPTO CURRENCY IN YOUR DIGITAL WALLET.

I JUST WANT CRYPTO CURRENCY ON A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD WITH OTHER CASH AND CURRENCY.

DON: SORRELL HAS SAID THAT HE BELIEVES HIS WAS THE FIRST BILL DEALING WITH CRYPTOCURRENCY TO COME BEFORE THE ALABAMA LEGISLATURE.

DON: REPRESENTATIVE WILL DISMUKES OF PRATTVILLE WAS TAKEN BY AMBULANCE TODAY FROM THE HOUSE FLOOR TO A MONTGOMERY HOSPITAL AFTER COMPLAINING OF CHEST PAIN AND SHORTNESS OF BREATH.

REPORTS LATER QUOTED DISMUKES AS SAYING THAT HIS PROBLEMS WERE THE RESULT OF AN IRREGULAR HEARTBEAT AND THAT HE IS OK.

IT WAS NOT IMMEDIATELY CLEAR IF DISMUKES WOULD REQUIRE OVERNIGHT HOSPITALIZATION.

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> NEXT UP, KELVIN LAWRENCE OF HAYNEVILLE IS BACK WITH US.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> ALWAYS NICE TO SEE YOU.

>> THE HOUSE PASSED THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET THIS WEEK.

YOU AGAIN CARRIED^ THE LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PROVIDE A COST OF LIVING INCREASE FOR STATE EMPLOYEES.

IT'S 2 PERCENT AGAIN THIS YEAR; RIGHT?

>> CongregationTHAT'S CORRECT.

>> IT MUST BE GRATIFYING TO CARRY THAT LEGISLATION AND TO BE ASKED TO CARRY THAT LEGISLATION, TO THANK OUR STATE EMPLOYEES FOR WHAT THEY DO BUT ESPECIALLY IN A YEAR LIKE WE HAVE JUST SEEN WITH THE PANDEMIC?

>> CongregationABSOLUTELY.

IT WAS A GREAT HONOR TO CARRY THAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

ONCE AGAIN OUR STATE EMPLOYEES DO A GREAT JOB HANDLING STATE SERVICES HERE IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA.

DURING REGULAR NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

BUT ESPECIALLY IN THE LAST PAST YEAR WHERE WE HAD EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES WITH COVID AND HOW THEY REALLY WERE "FRONTLINE" EMPLOYEES OR WORKERS IF YOU REALLY WANT TO CHARACTERIZE IT AS THAT.

AND JUST FOR THEIR HARD WORK AND DEDICATION I THOUGHT IT WAS FITTING THAT THE GOVERNOR EVEN REQUESTED THAT IN HER BUDGET.

AND DURING THIS ECONOMIC DOWNTURN, WE STILL, BECAUSE OF SOME GREAT DECISION THAT WAS MADE BY OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET CHAIRMAN IN THE PAST, IT HAS ALLOWED US TO BE ABLE TO STILL REWARD THOSE STATE EMPLOYEES BY GIVING THEM A PAY RAISE.

>> IT IS REMARKABLE THAT OUR GENERAL FUND IS AS HEALTHY AS IT IS, GIVEN THE ECONOMIC YEAR THAT HE HAVE JUST GONE THROUGH.

AND AS YOU ALLUDED TO, IT'S DUE IN LARGE PART TO SMART BUDGETING PRACTICES WHICH WE ENACTED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.

THINGS COULD BE A LOT WORSE FOR US THAN THEY ARE IN THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET.

>> YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT, DON.

LIKE I SAID, PREVIOUSLY, IT'S BECAUSE OF GREAT BUDGETING PRACTICES THAT WE HAVE PUT IN PLACE TO KIND OF MAKE SURE IF WE HAVE ANY DOWN TURNS AND ANY SHORTFALLS THAT WE CAN KIND OF HANDLE THOSE AND GOVERNMENT CAN CONTINUE TO RUN WITHOUT HAVING ANY REQUESTS BEHIND THAT.

>> IT STOOD OUT TO A LOT OF FOLKS THAT THE HOUSE PASSED A GENERAL FUND BUDGET THAT WAS THE LARGEST THAT IT'S EVER BEEN AND WE DID THAT IN THE MIDST OF A PANDEMIC.

THAT SEEMS STEROID.

>> ONCE AGAIN IT'S A TESTAMENT TO JUST KIND OF, I WOULD SAY, FRUGAL PLANNING IN A SENSE, JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE THOSE FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR RAINY DAYS AND FOR SITUATIONS SUCH AS THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

AND I THINK ONCE WE GET THROUGH THIS PAN P. PANDEMIC, THOSE PROCEDURES AND POLICIES THAT WE PUT IN PLACE WILL HELP MOVE US FORWARD IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT FUNDING FOR STATE GOVERNMENT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE, I WANT TO TURN TO GAMBLING NOW.

OF COURSE THE SENATE THIS WEEK DEFEATED CLOSELY WATCHED BILL THAT WOULD HAVE EXPANDED GAMBLING IN THE STATE TO INCLUDE NOT ONLY A LOTTERY BUT CASINOS AND SPORTS BETTING.

THIS LEGISLATION NEVER MADE IT TO THE HOUSE BUT I'M WONDERING HOW YOU WOULD HAVE FELT ABOUT IT IF IT HAD MADE IT TO THE HOUSE, PARTICULARLY CONSIDERING THAT YOUR DISTRICT INCLUDES SOME GAMBLING INTERESTS THAT YOU FEEL WERE LEFT OUT OF THE PROCESS?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

WELL, THE GAMBLING LEGISLATION, AS WE ALL KNOW, IT DIDN'T MAKE IT TO THE HOUSE, BUT I WAS -- I HAD MIXED EMOTIONS ABOUT IT.

ONE OF THE CONCERNS, POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY IT COULD CLOSE BUSINESSES IN MY AREA, BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN IN EXISTENCE OVER 20 YEARS, WHICH WOULD ACTUALLY KIND OF HURT THE AREA THAT I REPRESENT, LOWNDES COUNTY.

WE'RE NOT PRIVY TO KIND OF PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT INDUSTRY WE WANT TO LOCATE IN POOR COMMUNITY LIKE LOWNDES COUNTY.

SO WE KIND OF HAVE TO GO WITH WHO IS WILLING TO KIND OF INVEST AND PUT MONEY INTO THE -- YOU KNOW, WE DID IT THROUGH CASINOS ALMOST 20 YEARS AGO.

AND I THINK IF WE WOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A DISSERVICE TO THE PEOPLE THAT I REPRESENT AND KIND OF UNFAIR.

I DID GET A CHANCE TO PUT AN AMENDMENT ON THE BILL IN THE SENATE THAT WOULD INCLUDES LOWNDES, AND I THINK THAT WAS GREAT.

HAD THAT CAME TO THE HOUSE IN THAT POSITION, I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED IT.

TYPICALLY I'M ALL FOR LETTING THE PEOPLE DECIDE.

I PERSONALLY DON'T CARE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ABOUT GAMBLING, BUT I THINK IT'S A RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO DECIDE HERE IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE GAMBLING.

AND THE PEOPLE OF LOWNDES COUNTY PASSED A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

ACTUALLY WE PASSED TWO CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS TO ALLOW ELECTRONIC BINGO SO I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN UNFAIR HAD WE NOT BEEN INCLUDED.

>> SINCE THE GAMBLING EXPANSION'S DEFEAT THIS WEEK SEVERAL NEW LOTTERY ONLY BILLS HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED.

HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT JUST A STRICT UP AND DOWN LOTTERY.

>> HERE AGAIN, A STRICT UP AND DOWN LOTTERY, I THINK IF IT'S THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, IT SHOULD BE PUT TO A VOTE TO THE PEOPLE.

ME PERSONALLY I THINK WE NEED A MORE COMPREHENSIVE GAMING BILL TO ACTUAL MAKE SURE WE KIND OF DO THE ALL OF OUR I'S AND CROSS ALL T'S TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SHOTGUN MOVING FORWARD.

THAT IF SOMEONE WANTS TO COME INTO THE STATE AND INVEST OR WE HAVE A STRICT GUIDELINE IN TERMS OF HOW THAT IS GOING TO PLAY OUT AND HOW WE SHOULD FOLLOW THOSE GUIDELINES.

>> LOWNDES COUNTY BEING LEFT OUT IN THE FIRST PLACE THOUGH WERE THE CASINOS, THE PROPOSED CASINOS WERE.

I KNOW IT WAS FRUSTRATING TIME FOR YOU AND OTHER LAWMAKERS WHO REPRESENT THAT PARTY OF THE STATE.

WHITE HALL IN LOWNDES COUNTY ALREADY HAS TWO EXISTING FACILITIES; RIGHT?

BUT THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT ADDED ON LATE IN THE GAME BEFORE THE SENATE DEFEATED IT THAT ENCOURAGED YOU ENOUGH THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE VOTED FOR IT?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

EVEN THOUGH WITH THAT AMENDMENT IT ONLY ALLOWED FOR ONE FACILITY.

LIKE YOU SAID WE DO HAVE TWO FACILITIES SO I STILL FEEL LIKE IT'S KIND OF PICKING WINNERS AND LOSERS BUT HERE IN THE LEGISLATURE, YOU KIND OF HAVE TO PICK YOUR WINS WHETHER THEY'RE SMALL OR LARGE.

YOU KIND OF HAVE TO BE THANKFUL FOR THOSE WINS THAT YOU DO HAVE.

>> REPRESENTATIVE LET'S SPEND THE LAST FEW MINUTES TALKING ABOUT A BILL YOU HAVE IN THE CURRENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION.

YOU WANT TO ALLOW BERRA MUTUAL ON DOG AND HORSE RACING EVENTS.

>> THIS CAME ABOUT BECAUSE WHITE HALL AND LOWNDES COUNTY HAS BEEN LEFT OUT OF THE GAMING ISSUE SIMPLY BECAUSE, A AS BENCHMARK, IT'S BECAUSE OF IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT WE DID PASS, IT DIDN'T ALLOW FOR PARAMUTUAL IN DOG RAISING RACING.

SO WE WANTED TO LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD TO DISPEL THAT EXCUSE IN TERMS OF WELL, YOU GUYS DON'T HAVE PARAMUTUAL IN DOG RACING.

BUT NOW WE CAN SAY WE MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS JUST AS ANY OTHER FACILITY IN THE STATE, AND YOU THINK WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN ANY GAMING LEGISLATION MOVING FORWARD, BEING THAT WE'RE ONE OF THE EXISTING FACILITIES THAT WAS IN EXISTENCE BEFORE THE PRE-RAID OF THE PREVIOUS GOVERNOR.

>> THE BILL HAS NOT STARTED MOVING YET.

HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT ITS CHANCES?

>> IT ACTUALLY HAS.

WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING TODAY.

AND I GOT SOME GOOD FEEDBACK, FROM THE BILL, FROM THE COMMITTEE.

I THINK CHAIRWOMAN NORDAM FOR HEARING THE BILL AND IT WILL ON COMMITTEE NEXT WEEK FOR A VOTE SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN CONTINUE OUR DIALOGUE AND DISCUSSION ABOUT THE BILL TO TRY TO MOVE IT FORWARD, ESPECIALLY NOW, CONSIDERING SENATOR DEL MARSH'S BILL HAS FAILED.

EVEN IF SENATOR MARCH MARSH'S BILL HADN'T FAILED THIS WOULD HAVE WIPED OUT ANY OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ON THE BOOK ANYWAY SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET THIS KIND OF MOVING FORWARD WE HAVE A LONG ROAD AHEAD OF US BUT HOPEFULLY WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE TALKS ABOUT IT AND SAY CAN WE MOVE ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

>> KELVIN LAWRENCE OF HAYNEVILLE.

ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO HAVE YOU ON THE SHOW.

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.

>> THANK YOU.

>> AND "CAPITOL JOURNAL" WILL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> NEXT UP, SENATOR WILL BAR-FOOT IS WITH US.

WELCOME BACK FOR THE SHOW.

>> I APPRECIATE BEING WITH YOU.

>> YOU HAVE A CLOSELY WATCHED BILL DEALING WITH GIVING THE LEGISLATURE AUTHORITY TO CALL ITSELF INTO SPECIAL SESSION.

IT GOT OUT OF COMMITTEE LAST WEEK AND I KNOW YOU'RE HOPEFUL IT MIGHT BE ON THE FLOOR AS EARLY AS NEXT WEEK.

NOW, THIS BILL HAS RECEIVED A FAIR AMOUNT OF ATTENTION.

IT'S RECEIVED SOME PUSH BACK FROM THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, AND YOU HAVE SAID ALL ALONG THIS IS NOTHING PERSONAL DEALING WITH GOV.

IVEY.

FIRST LET ME GIVE BECKY NORDRUN CREDIT.

SHE FILED THE HOUSE BILL AND THE PREVIOUS VERSION IN THE HOUSE, AND I ACTUALLY SAW REPRESENTATIVE BECKY ON YOUR SHOW AS A MATTER OF FACT.

AND I THOUGHT WHAT A GREAT IDEA.

I WASN'T ABLE TO WATCH THE WHOLE INTERVIEW BUT I REALIZED WHEN YOU LOOK AROUND THE NATION, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE, NUMBER ONE, 36 STATES WHO ALREADY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE TO CALL THEMSELVES BACK INTO SESSION.

SO IT'S NOT A NEW CONCEPT.

OKAY.

THAT'S NUMBER ONE.

NUMBER TWO, IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT THE BILL ALLOWS FOR, IT ALLOWS FOR THE SPEAKER AND THE PRO TEM, BY JOINT RESOLUTION SO THEY BOTH HAVE TO BE TOGETHER ON IT, TO CALL EACH BRANCH OR EACH HOUSE BODY BACK IN TO SESSION AND THEN ONCE WE GET HERE, TO THE CAPITOL, TO THE STATEHOUSE, IT WOULD REQUIRE 2/3 VOTE BY BOTH HOUSES TO REMAIN HERE.

SO THERE ARE SOME SAFEGUARDS AS FAR AS A RUN RUN AWAY LEGISLATURE, ALWAYS CALLING ITSELF INTO SPECIAL SESSION.

AND THEN AS IT RELATES TO, WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON IN THE PAST YEAR.

FORTUNATELY WE HAVE HAD A GOVERNOR WHO HAS TAKEN MATTERS SERIOUSLY.

PHILANTHROPIC AROUND THE U.S.

THOUGH YOU HAVE LOTS OF DIFFERENT GOVERNORS WHO HAVE TAKEN A MUCH DIFFERENT APPROACH.

SO WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS, WHETHER IT'S FIVE YEARS, 10 YEARS, 50 YEARS FROM NOW, HOPEFULLY WE WON'T BE FACING SOMETHING LIKE THIS AGAIN BUT WE CAN BE PROACTIVE THAT IF IT EVER HAPPENS AGAIN THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHO IS GOING TO BE THE GOVERNOR IN THE FUTURE AND THIS WAY WE CAN ADDRESS ANY ISSUES THAT MAY NOT BE ADDRESSED AT THE EXECUTIVE LEVEL.

>> YOU SAY NOT KNOWING WHO MIGHT BE THE GOVERNOR IN THE FUTURE, YOU KNOW IT WON'T BE GOV.

IVEY AND YOU HAVE PUT A LOT OF STOCK IN THE WAY SHE'S HANDLED THINGS AND WOULD HOPE FUTURE GOVERNS WOULD DO THE SAME BUT YOU DON'T KNOW.

>> SURE.

THAT'S EXACTLY; RIGHT.

BUT WHEN YOU SEE THINGS -- IT'S BETTER TO BE PROACTIVE ON CERTAIN ISSUES, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AROUND.NATION AND YOU CAN IDENTIFY DIFFERENT GOVERNS AROUND THE NATION WHO HAVEN'T HANDLED THE PAST 12 MONTHS IN A VERY GOOD MANNER.

>> YOU MENTIONED THAT YOUR BILL PASSED COMMITTEE LAST WEEK AND BROUGHT UP BECKY NORDEGREN WHO HAD A SIMILAR BILL IN THE HOUSE.

HER BILL FAILED IN A HOUSE COMMITTEE.

WHAT DO WE MAKE OF THIS?

>> I DON'T KNOW.

I WASN'T IN THAT.

I WASN'T DOWN THERE IN THE COMMITTEE AND I'M NOT SURE WHY IT FAILED.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE QUESTIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, HASN'T BEEN ANSWERED AT THAT POINT.

I DON'T KNOW.

I KNOW THAT THE CAUCUS REPUBLICAN SENATE CAUCUS IS VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT AND VERY SUPPORTIVE OF IT.

AND IT PASSED OUT UNANIMOUSLY I BELIEVE.

SO HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT IT ON THE CALENDAR.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT NO DISRESPECT TO GOVERNOR IVEY.

THE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED ABOUT OCCUR TALLADEGA THE GOVERNOR'S AUTHORITY BEING A HOT TOPIC IN THIS SESSION.

THERE'S YOU BILL.

THERE'S THE BILL THAT WAS ON THE SENATE FLOOR TODAY^ WHICH WOULD CURTAIL THE GOVERNOR'S ABILITY TO EXTEND AN EMERGENCY ORDER LIKE SHE DID DURING THE PANDEMIC.

THAT BILL WAS NOT VOTED ON TODAY IN THE SENATE.

BUT IS IT PART OF A LARGER CONVERSATION WE'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW IN THE LEGISLATURE?

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT.

WHAT I DO KNOW IS IT THAT THE SENATE BILL THAT YOU REFERRED TO TODAY, I BELIEVE IT'S SENATE BILL 97, SENATOR WHATLEY'S BILL ON THE FLOOR, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT IT AND THAT WAS CARRIED OVER AND WE WILL CONTINUE THAT DEBATE AND DISCUSSION ON THE FLOOR, POSSIBLY AS EARLY AS NEXT -- THIS COMING TUESDAY.

SO LOOK FORWARD TO THAT.

AGAIN THOUGH, WITH A SPECIAL SESSION BILL THAT I FILED, I DON'T -- IT DOESN'T ELIMINATE.GOVERNOR'S AUTHORITY CONSTITUTION LID TO BRING US BACK INTO A SPECIAL SESSION.

HE IS CERTAINLY STILL HAS THAT OR ANY FUTURE GOVERNOR HAS THAT.

SO I DON'T SEE IT LIMITING THE GOVERNOR'S AUTHORITY.

>> SHE COULD STILL DO THAT IN AND OF ITSELF BUT THE LEGISLATURE, IF IT DEEMED IT NECESSARY COULD ALSO DO IT?

>> CongregationCORRECT.

THAT IS CORRECT.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT GAMBLING NOW.

YOU WERE A NO VOTE THIS WEEK WHEN THE SENATE REJECTED THE BILL GAMBLING EXPANSION BILL.

TELL US ABOUT YOUR CONCERNS.

>> SURE.

FIRST OF ALL, AS YOU KNOW, TO PASS A GAMBLING BILL, WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BASICALLY TWO DIFFERENT BILLS.

THERE'S THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, BECAUSE THERE'S CURRENTLY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF 1901 A PROHIBITION AGAINST GAMING OR GAMES OF CHANCE.

SO THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WAS WHAT WAS ON THE FLOOR.

THERE WAS AN ENABLING LEGISLATION OR THE GENERAL LAW PROVISIONS THAT WERE IN A SEPARATE BILL.

>> THAT'S WHERE THE DEVIL WAS IN THE DETAILS RIGHT?

>> I THINK.

SO BUT HERE IS MY PROBLEM.

I DIDN'T VOTE KNOW ON THE MERITS OF THE BILL OR THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT OR THE GENERAL LAW.

IT'S THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, WHATEVER A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT LIST DIFFERENT THINGS AS IN PRESCRIBED BY GENERAL LAW, PRESCRIBED BY GENERAL LAW, THAT WE ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THAT GENERAL LAW IS.

AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WE HAD NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS OR DEBATE THAT GENERAL LAW, WHICH WAS REFERENCED IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

NOW, IT'S AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE; RIGHT?

I.

MEAN WHETHER YOU'RE FOR IT OR AGAINST IT.

AND I WILL SEE THIS.

IF IT GOES TO THE PEOPLE ULTIMATELY FOR A VOTE, WHETHER IT BE LATER THIS SESSION, MAYBE IN ESSENTIAL, OR MAYBE NEXT YEAR, THEN IT'S DONE; RIGHT.

AND IN MY OPINION, I COULD NOT VOTE FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AUTHORIZING THAT TYPE OF GAMING WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT GENERAL LAW WAS REFERENCED.

>> YOU WOULD HAVE PREFERRED THAT THE ENABLING LEGISLATION BE DECIDED FIRST?

>> WHEN PERCENT.

YOU KNOW OFTEN -- 10000 PERCENT.

OFTEN TIMES WE CRITICIZE FOLKS IN WASHINGTON FOR VOTING ON THINGS BEFORE THEY KNOW WHAT IS IN THERE AND YOU HAVE HEARD THAT OVER THE PAST EIGHT, 12 YEARS MAYBE, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, I WOULD HAVE FOUND MYSELF IN THAT POSITION, BY VOTING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, WHICH REFERENCED GENERAL LAW THAT WE HAD NOT DEBATED AND DECIDED AND VOTED ON.

>> WELL, AGAIN, SINCE THE GAMBLING EXPANSION BILL FAILED, SEVERAL NEW LOTTERY BILLS, LOTTERY ONLY BILLS HAVE ALREADY BEEN INTRODUCED.

SO THE GAMBLING ISSUE AS IT PERTAINS TO A LOTTERY MAY NOT BE DEAD YET?

>> YOU WOULD AGREE WITH ME.

I THINK THERE'S AT LEAST TWO THAT HAVE BEEN FILED IN THE SENATE.

I'M NOT SURE IN THERE'S ANY PENDING IN THE HOUSE AT THIS POINT.

THAT IS AGAIN -- THEY'RE IMPORTANT BILLS AND TO THE EXTENT THEY REFERENCE GENERAL LAW I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE LOOK AT THAT ENABLING LEGISLATION WITH THEM AS WELL.

MAIN NOT TO THE SAME EXTENT, BUT CERTAINLY I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WHEN YOU'RE VOTING ON A PIECE OF LEGISLATION THANK YOU VERY MUCH THE WHOLE PACKAGE, THE COMPLETE PACKAGE.

>> WHAT RECURRING THEME I HAVE HEARD FROM YOUR COLLEAGUE, SENATOR, DURING THIS DISCUSSION, HAS BEEN, I'M ALL FOR ALLOWING THE FOLKS BACK HOME TO HAVE A VOTE ON THIS, THIS BEING A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

VOTERS WOULD HAVE THE ULTIMATE SAY.

AND A LOT OF YOUR COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID MY CONSTITUENTS ARE CLAMORING TO VOTE ON THIS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

>> I THINK POLLS CERTAINLY INDICATE THAT, THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE.

AND I GET IT.

AND I THINK ULTIMATELY, THE CITIZENS WILL PROBABLY HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY.

WHAT THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT OR ENABLING BILL LOOK LIKE I HAVE NO IDEA.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL BE THIS SESSION OR MAYBE A POTENTIAL SPECIAL SESSION.

BUT I THINK ULTIMATELY THEY WILL GET THAT OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON THAT.

AGAIN, MY CONCERN IS THAT, ONCE YOU PUT SOMETHING IN A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, IT'S THERE, AND IT'S NOT EASY TO CHANGE.

AND THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT HAS TO BE CORRECT.

>> DID THE FACT THAT ALL OF OUR SURROUNDING STATES HAVE LOTTERIES, DOES THAT ADD ANY PRESSURE FOR YOU?

IT'S BEEN A PREDOMINANT THEME IN THIS DISCUSSION.

>> NO.

WHEN YOU SAY PRESSURE -- YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE ARE 35 SENATORS AND 10 05 HOUSE MEMBERS AND I THINK WE HAVE 140 DIFFERENT OPINIONS.

BUT I THINK ALSO REGARDLESS OF WHICH SIDE OF THE ISSUE YOU LINE UP ON ON THIS BILL OR ANY OTHER BILL, YOU'VE GOT TO DO WHAT DO YOU THINK IS RIGHT.

AND THAT COULD BE A VOTE FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IF THE ENABLING LEGISLATION HAS BEEN DEBATED AND PASSED.

BUT WE WILL SEE.

>> SENATOR BILL BAR-FOOT OF PIKE ROAD.

ALWAYS A PLEASURE.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> YOU BET.

>> AND "CAPITOL JOURNAL" WILL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> AND THAT'S "CAPITOL JOURNAL" FOR TONIGHT.

COMING UP TOMORROW NIGHT AT 730 ON "CAPITOL JOURNAL: WEEK IN REVIEW" WE WILL HAVE A WRAP-UP OF THE LEGISLATIVE WEEK.

WE WILL BE JOINED BY CORRECTIONS COMMISSIONER JEFF DUNN AND PARDONS AND PAROLES DIRECTOR PAM WARD WHO WILL DISCUSS A NEW COLLABORATION ON SOLVING OUR PRISON PROBLEMS.

WE'LL ALSO BE JOINED BY STATE HEALTH OFFICER DR. SCOTT HARRIS, WHO'LL MARK THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF THE PANDEMIC IN ALABAMA.

HOBSON CITY MAYOR ALBERTA MCCRORY WILL TALK WITH US ABOUT AN EFFORT TO REDUCE VACCINE HESITANCY AMONG AFRICAN AMERICANS.

AND DAVID AND JESS FULLER, A FATHER AND DAUGHTER FROM GADSDEN, WILL JOIN US TO DISCUSS THEIR OPPOSITION TO THE BILL THAT WOULD BAN CERTAIN TRANSGENDER MEDICAL TREATMENTS FOR MINORS.

FOR ALL OF US AT CAPITOL JOURNAL, THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

I'M DON DAILEY.