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

WELCOME TO CAPITOL JOURNAL.

IT WAS A BUSY DAY IN THE ALABAMA LEGISLATURE AS 20 DIFFERENT COMMITTEES MET TO CONSIDER LEGISLATION.

WE COULDN'T BE IN ALL OF THEM, BUT WE'LL HIT THE HIGH POINTS STARTING WITH THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS EDUCATION COMMITTEE.

IT TOOK UP LEGISLATION AIMED TO ALLOW BIRMINGHAM SOUTHERN COLLEGE TO ACCESS THE $30 MILLION RESCUE LOAN FUND SET UP LAST YEAR BY THE LEGISLATURE.

LAWMAKERS HAD CONCERNS, THOUGH, AND OFFERED AMENDMENTS TO PUT CONDITIONS ON THESE FUNDS.

STATE REPRESENTATIVE CYNTHIA ALMOND'S AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE LOCAL JURISDICTIONS, IN THIS CASE THE CITY OF BIRMINGHAM AND JEFFERSON COUNTY, TO CONTRIBUTE A PORTION OF THEIR OWN RESOURCES.

>> BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT COUNTIES AND CITIES ARE STRUGGLING THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF ALABAMA, AND I'D HATE FOR US TO PUT AN UNFUNDED MANDATE ON A PARTICULAR ENTITY, BECAUSE MANY OF OUR OVER 100-YEAR-OLD INSTITUTIONS ARE LOCATED IN STRUGGLING POVERTY-STRICKEN AREAS.

SO HOW DO WE ACCOUNT FOR THAT?

>> MS. DRUMMOND, I WOULD SAY, THE POINT IS, IF IT'S IMPORTANT ENOUGH, THE WHOLE REASON I THINK WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THIS PROGRAM IS TO TRY TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF -- OF INSTITUTIONS TO OUR STATE, AND WHAT THEY CONTRIBUTE, AND SO IF IT'S IMPORTANT ENOUGH FOR THE STATE TO CONTRIBUTE, I THINK IT CERTAINLY SHOULD BE IMPORTANT ENOUGH FOR THE LOCAL COUNTY OR MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT TO CONTRIBUTE.

AND OF COURSE, THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING TO PROHIBIT PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS FROM DONATING MONEY TO THE MUNICIPALITY OR THE COUNTY.

>> SENATE BILL 31 ADVANCED AS AMENDED AND NOW GOES TO THE FULL HOUSE.

THE SENATE FINANCE AND TAXATION GENERAL FUND COMMITTEE MET TODAY AND HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON LEGISLATION THAT WOULD LIMIT LOCAL PROPERTY TAX INCREASES.

SENATE BILL 110 FROM SENATOR DAVID SESSIONS WOULD IMPOSE A CAP OF 3% FOR CLASS 2 PROPERTIES, AND 5% FOR CLASS 3 PROPERTIES.

SUPPORT FOR THE BILL CAME FROM THE ALABAMA CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION AND OTHER GROUPS WHO SAID IT WOULD HELP FAMILIES AVOID PUNISHING PROPERTY TAX INCREASES.

YET EDUCATION GROUPS SPOKE IN OPPOSITION, SAYING THE BILL UNFAIRLY LIMITS NEEDED REVENUE GROWTH FOR LOCAL SCHOOL SYSTEMS.

>> ON OUR FARM IN MACON COUNTY, WE SAW AN ASSESSMENT THAT RAISED IT TO ALMOST 10% OVER THE LAST YEAR.

THIS IS AN UNEXPECTED HIKE THAT'S DIFFICULT TO BUDGET FOR.

APPLYING A CAP ON PROPERTY TAXES FOR CLASS TWO AND THREE PROPERTIES IS A GREAT BENEFIT TO ALL BUSINESSES, INCLUDING THOSE IN THE CATTLE BUSINESS.

>> BECAUSE ONE THING YOU DO THAT HELPS PEOPLE, HURTS SCHOOLS, THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT FOR 2024 AND 2000 -- EXCUSE ME -- 2023 AND 2024 LEGISLATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2027, WOULD BE $822 MILLION WORTH OF CUTS.

$822 MILLION WORTH OF CUTS.

I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT MONEY IS GOING TO BE REPLACED FROM.

>> WE ARE CAPPING THE INCREASES.

WE ARE TRYING TO STEADY THE GROWTH, BECAUSE THERE WILL COME ANOTHER 2008, PEOPLE.

THERE WILL COME ANOTHER DOWNTURN.

AND WHAT ARE THESE SYSTEMS GOING TO DO WHEN THEY'RE DRUNK ON ALL THIS INCREASE, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY'RE GOING TO START SLASHING?

>> NO ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE BILL, BUT THE COMMITTEE COULD ACT WHEN IT RECONVENES IN APRIL.

THE HOUSE EDUCATION POLICY COMMITTEE MET TODAY AND DISCUSSED A NUMBER OF CONTROVERSIAL BILLS, INCLUDING ONE AIMED AT EXPANDING ALABAMA'S BAN ON ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS TEACHING OR DISCUSSING SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR IDENTITY TO ALL GRADES THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL.

HOUSE BILL 130 IS SPONSORED BY STATE REPRESENTATIVE MACK BUTLER, WHO ARGUES THAT IT IS NEEDED TO STOP INDOCTRINATION.

OPPONENTS FIERCELY DISAGREED, SAYING THE BILL AMOUNTS TO BULLYING IN LEGISLATIVE FORM.

>> THIS IS BASICALLY AN EXTENSION OF THE BILL THAT WAS PASSED IN 2022, BANNING DISCUSSIONS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR GENDER IDENTITY, AND THE DISCUSSION -- AND INSTRUCTION ON IT.

THIS EXPANDS IT TO K-12.

>> IN THE SECOND PART OF THAT, IT SAYS REPRESENTING SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR GENDER IDENTITY IN A CLASSROOM.

SO I -- I FEEL LIKE THAT KIND OF DEFINES WHAT -- WHAT THAT WOULD BE.

THAT MAY VARY, BUT TO ME, THAT BRINGS THE DEFINITION OF WHAT -- WHAT THOSE THINGS WOULD BE, HOW THEY MAY BE REPRESENTED.

I DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, WE MAY HAVE 40 DIFFERENT WAYS THAT'S DONE.

>> I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT REPRESENTATIVE, BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M OLD ENOUGH, AND YOUNG FOLKS, THEY HAVE WHAT I THOUGHT MEANT ONE THING, AND IT MEANS ANOTHER TODAY.

AND THERE AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT HOW WILL YOU IDENTIFY THAT.

IS THERE SOME -- THAT'S A LOT TO PUT ON EDUCATORS.

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

THE SENATE EDUCATION POLICY COMMITTEE ALSO MET TODAY TO CONSIDER LEGISLATION AIMED AT ENSURING STUDENTS ENTERING FIRST GRADE ARE PREPARED.

HOUSE BILL 113 FROM STATE REPRESENTATIVE PEBBLIN WARREN WOULD REQUIRE CHILDREN TO EITHER ATTEND KINDERGARTEN OR DEMONSTRATE THE NECESSARY PROFICIENCY BEFORE ENTERING THE FIRST GRADE.

IT PASSED THE HOUSE AGAIN THIS YEAR OVERWHELMINGLY, BUT HAS ALWAYS RUN INTO TROUBLE IN THE SENATE.

THAT'S BECAUSE SENATOR ROGER SMITHERMAN HAS OPPOSED IT.

THE BILL WAS ADVANCED BY THE COMMITTEE, BUT SMITHERMAN VOWED TO CONTINUE HIS OPPOSITION ON THE SENATE FLOOR.

>> I'M IN SERIOUS OPPOSITION OF THIS BILL.

BECAUSE -- YOU KNOW, AND -- I'M, YOU KNOW, JUST BEING HONEST.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL ARE MY COLLEAGUES, AND YOU NEED TO KNOW, YOU KNOW, MY -- MY SERIOUS OPPOSITION WILL START THURSDAY AGAINST THIS BILL.

YOU KNOW, BECAUSE UNTIL WE PUT THINGS IN PLACE, AND AT LEAST THE THOUGHT -- HAD THE FORESIGHT TO PUT A LITTLE SOMETHING IN PLACE WITH THE LITERACY WHEN WE HAD COVID-19 BY DELAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, AND YET STILL WE'RE GOING TO SEE THE EFFECTS NOW OF COVID ONCE WE'RE DOING THIS TEST, THAT THESE KIDS ARE NOT READY EVEN IN ALL THIS WORK, BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GIVE THEM THE NECESSARY HELP THAT THEY NEED BECAUSE OF COVID AND THE OTHER -- OTHER REASONS THAT UNFORTUNATELY HAPPEN.

>> THE SENATE COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE MET TODAY FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON LEGISLATION SEEKING TO TRANSFORM THE STATE'S OCCUPATIONAL BOARDS AND COMMISSION'S MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.

SENATE BILL 224 FROM SENATOR CHRIS ELLIOTT WOULD REQUIRE MORE THAN THREE DOZEN OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING BOARDS TO BE MANAGED BY A NEW STATE AGENCY, RATHER THAN BY PRIVATE CONTRACTORS.

ELLIOTT HAS ARGUED THAT MANAGEMENT OF THESE BOARDS HAS BECOME A FOR-PROFIT COTTAGE INDUSTRY THAT DOESN'T SERVE THE INTERESTS OF WORKERS.

>> THE STUDY GROUP DETERMINED THAT MAKING CHANGES TO THE ORGANIZATION OF THESE BOARDS SHOULD BE A PRIORITY.

WE LOOKED AT 66 DIFFERENT GROUPS.

THE STUDY GROUP ALSO REVIEWED OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING AND REGULATORY BOARDS FOR ANALYZING EACH BOARD'S PURPOSE, STRUCTURE, FUNDING, BUDGET, AS WELL AS SUNSET REPORTS PROVIDED BY THE EXAMINER'S OFFICE.

THE REVIEW FOUND NUMEROUS OPPORTUNITIES TO INCREASE EFFICIENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

>> WHEN PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST THE GENERAL PUBLIC GO TO GET THEIR LICENSE, THAT EMBLEM AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE REPRESENTING THAT PARTICULAR PROFESSION, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT BE, RIGHT?

IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S ELECTRICIANS, PLUMBERS, PIPEFITTERS, COSMETOLOGY, DOESN'T MATTER.

THEY HAVE TO GET THE LICENSES.

AND IN THE END, THOSE PEOPLE, THOSE BOARDS, AGENCY COMMISSIONS, AREN'T REPRESENTING TO THE QUALITY OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA THAT THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE THINKS, THEN WE HAVE AN ISSUE THERE.

NOW HAVING SAID THAT.

IT OPENED MY EYES, GOING THROUGH AND SEEING ALL OF THE DIFFERENT FINGERING, HOW THE MONEY WAS BEING TRANSFERRED.

I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING ON SOME OF THESE BOARDS, NOT ALL OF THEM AT ALL, AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THEM.

BUT I DO THINK THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME HEADWAY WITH THIS TYPE OF BILL TO CLEAN THIS UP.

BECAUSE IT IS GETTING LARGER THAN WE -- THAN I EVER THOUGHT IT WAS.

>> I THINK THAT YOUR INTENTIONS ARE HONORABLE HERE, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT'S GOING TO BE IMPACTED, BECAUSE AFTER ALL, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WITH THE -- THEIR HANDS ON THE PULSE OF ALL THE BUSINESSES THAT'S OUT THERE THAT HAS ANY KIND OF LICENSING REQUIREMENTS.

AND THEY ARE THE ONES THAT'S GOING TO BE TAKING THIS INFORMATION BACK FROM WHAT THEY PERCEIVE, AND SOMETIMES PERCEPTION IS REALITY.

>> IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE WHAT THE BILL IS DOING IS CONSOLIDATING THE ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS OF THE BOARDS.

AND SO MANY OF THE FOLKS HERE ARE BOARD MEMBERS.

OKAY?

AND THIS DOES NOT CHANGE THE BOARD.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE REGULATIONS PROMULGATED BY THE BOARD.

IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE MAKEUP, THE APPOINTING AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD, OR ANYTHING TO DO WITH A BOARD MEMBER.

>> NO ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THAT BILL EITHER.

IT WILL LIKELY HOLD UNTIL THE COMMITTEE RECONVENES IN APRIL.

TODAY, PRESIDENTS FROM THE STATE'S HISTORICALLY BLACK UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES GATHERED IN MONTGOMERY FOR A SERIES OF MEETINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW TO BEST PROMOTE THE UNIQUE VALUE OF THEIR INSTITUTIONS TO THE LEGISLATURE.

THEY ARE MAKING SURE THE GOVERNOR AND ALL LAWMAKERS ARE AWARE OF THE HBCU STORY AND WHAT THEY HAVE TO OFFER.

>> SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY, YOU KNOW, AS ALABAMA, THE THE STATE OF ALABAMA GOES, WE HAVE THE LARGEST NUMBER OF HBCU'S IN THE COUNTRY.

SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING TOGETHER ALL OF OUR HBCU PRESIDENTS, PUBLIC, PRIVATE, FOUR-YEAR, TWO-YEAR INSTITUTIONS TO REALLY TALK ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE STATE FROM A LEGISLATIVE STANDPOINT AND A POLICY AND LEGAL STANDPOINT.

BUT ALSO TO TALK ABOUT WAYS THAT, AS THESE INSTITUTIONS, THEY CAN COLLABORATE.

HBCU CARES IS AN CONSORTIUM OF ALL THE HBCU'S IN THE STATE AND AND WE WORK WITH THOSE HBCU'S TO COLLABORATE ON GRANTS, LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES, PROGRAM INITIATIVES FOR THEIR STUDENTS.

>> TODAY WAS BUY ALABAMA'S BEST DAY AT THE CAPITOL.

GOVERNOR KAY IVEY JOINED THE ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND INDUSTRIES AND THE ALABAMA GROCERS ASSOCIATION TO PROMOTE ALABAMA-MADE PRODUCTS AS PART OF THE "BUY ALABAMA'S BEST" CAMPAIGN.

>> OUR GROCERY INDUSTRY IS INTEGRAL FOR SUPPORTING THE HEALTH OF ALABAMIANS, BRINGING ALABAMA FAMILIES TOGETHER AT MEALTIME, OR HELPING OUR COMMUNITIES THRIVE.

WITH AN ECONOMIC IMPACT SURPASSING $12 BILLION, WITH A B, DOLLARS, THIS CAPITAL TRICKLES RIGHT BACK DOWN TO SUPPORT OUR SISTER INDUSTRIES.

IT'S FAITH-FORWARD, Y'ALL.

SUPPORTING MADE IN ALABAMA MEANS SUPPORTING THE ALABAMA ECONOMY AND ALABAMA JOBS.

>> TODAY WE GATHER TO PROMOTE THE "BUY ALABAMA'S BEST" PROGRAM.

THIS INITIATIVE AIMS TO INCREASE AWARENESS OF ALABAMA FOOD PRODUCTS, INCREASE SALES OF THOSE PRODUCTS, AS WELL AS RAISE MONEY FOR DESIGNATED CHARITIES.

THE GROCERY INDUSTRY AND SUPPORTING LOCAL PRODUCTS ARE VITALLY IMPORTANT TO OUR ECONOMY.

WITH OVER HALF A MILLION INDIVIDUALS EMPLOYED IN THE GROCERY INDUSTRY IN ALABAMA, IT GENERATES AN ANNUAL ECONOMIC IMPACT EXCEEDING $12 BILLION A YEAR.

>> THAT WAS A VERY POPULAR TENT TODAY.

LET ME TELL YOU.

I THINK NEXT YEAR WE SHOULD DO A TASTING HERE IN THE STUDIO OF ALL THOSE GREAT FOODS.

COMING UP AFTER THE BREAK, I'LL SIT DOWN WITH STATE REPRESENTATIVE MATT SIMPSON TO ADDRESS CRITICISM OF HIS ETHICS LEGISLATION.

AFTER THAT, STATE REPRESENTATIVE GINNY SHAVER JOINS ME TO DISCUSS HER BILL PROVIDING PAID PARENTAL LEAVE FOR STATE EMPLOYEES.

STAY WITH US.

>> YOU CAN WATCH PAST EPISODES OF CAPITOL JOURNAL ONLINE ANY TIME AT ALABAMA PUBLIC TELEVISION'S WEBSITE, APTV.ORG.

CLICK ON THE ONLINE VIDEO TAB ON THE MAIN PAGE.

YOU CAN ALSO CONNECT WITH CAPITOL JOURNAL AND LINK TO PAST EPISODES ON CAPITOL JOURNAL'S FACEBOOK PAGE.

>> WELCOME BACK TO CAPITOL JOURNAL.

JOINING ME NEXT IS STATE REPRESENTATIVE MATT SIMPSON.

REPRESENTATIVE, THANKS FOR COMING ON THE SHOW.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO BE BACK.

>> I RAN NEW OFF THE FLOOR YESTERDAY, AND I SAID I WANTED TO HAVE YOU ON.

YOU'VE GOT THIS ETHICS REFORM PACKAGE, THIS BILL, AND YOU'VE RECEIVED A LOT OF CRITICISM FROM -- ESPECIALLY AL.COM, MIRE, AND YOU HAVE AN EDITORIAL CARTOON CRITICIZING THE BILL.

I WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND.

WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF IT AND HOW DO YOU RESPOND?

>> I EXPECT CRITICISM.

ANY TIME YOU TOUCH ETHICS LAWS, IT'S LOW-HANGING FRUIT.

"OH, THEY'RE ALL CORRUPT."

IT'S EASY FOR JOURNALISTS TO WRITE THAT WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE BILL.

HE WROTE ON ABOUT THE FRIENDSHIP EXCEPTION BETWEEN LOBBYISTS AND LEGISLATORS.

THAT'S THE CURRENT LAW AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.

THIS BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CHANGING THAT LAW AT ALL.

THAT IS THE CURRENT LAW AS IT SITS TODAY.

>> THE LONGSTANDING RELATIONSHIP.

>> THERE'S ALREADY A FRIENDSHIP EXCEPTION.

>> SO IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THAT AT ALL.

>> NO.

IT CHANGING THE BURDEN OF PROOF, BUT WE'VE GOT SO MANY DIFFERENT THINGS THROUGH THIS PROCESS OF, IF SOMEBODY IS USING THEIR OFFICE FOR PERSONAL GAIN, THAT'S A CRIME.

AND THAT'S PROSECUTED BY THE PROSECUTORS.

KYLE KEEPS SAYING THAT WE'VE TAKEN ETHICS LAWS AND CRIMES AWAY FROM ETHICS LAWS AND THAT'S NOT RIGHT.

WE'VE SEPARATED THEM TO WHERE IF YOU VIOLATE THESE LAWS, IF YOU TAKE A BRIBE OR YOU USE YOUR OFFICE FOR PERSONAL GAIN, THOSE ARE BEING PROSECUTED BY PROSECUTORS NOW, IN FRONT OF JURIES.

THOSE ARE CRIMES AND FELONIES THE ETHICS COMMISSION WOULD BE THE CIVIL REMEDY.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE RESOLUTIONS.

IF YOU DO SOMETHING AS FAR AS, HEY, THIS IS A FINE OR THIS IS SOME TYPE OF SANCTION THROUGH THAT PERSPECTIVE, THAT GOES THROUGH THE ETHICS COMMISSION.

BUT WE'RE NOT ALLOWING PEOPLE TO COMMIT VIOLATIONS AND NOT BE PROSECUTED.

WE'RE NOT ALLOWING PEOPLE TO JUST RUN WILD, WHICH IS THIS -- WHICH THEORY THAT AL.COM HAS, AND I DON'T THINK THEY'VE READ THE BILL.

BECAUSE WE'VE ENHANCED THE CRIME FOR PUNISHMENT, WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR USE OF OFFICE FOR PERSONAL GAIN TO MAKE SURE THAT IF YOU DO ANYTHING TO BENEFIT ANYBODY USING YOUR OFFICE, THEN THAT'S A PERSONAL GAIN THAT YOU CAN BE PROSECUTED FOR, AND YOU WOULD GO TO JAIL.

SO IT'S -- YOU KNOW, THE LINE WE CLEARLY DREW WAS, IF YOU CAN GO TO PRISON, THIS IS THE AVENUE YOU GO THROUGH UNDER SECTION 13A, WHICH IS THE CRIMINAL CODE.

BUT IF YOU ARE GETTING SANCTIONED OR FINED, THEN IT GOES THROUGH THE ETHICS COMMISSION AS A CIVIL REMEDY.

>> SO KIND OF SEPARATING IT OUT.

BECAUSE THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MINOR ETHICS VIOLATIONS AND BAD STUFF, YOU KNOW, PRISON TIME KIND OF THING.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT A DISTRICT ATTORNEY, OR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SHOULD BE IN CHARGE OF -- INVESTIGATING AND PROSECUTING THAT.

BUT THE ETHICS COMMISSION DOES MINOR, MORE CIVIL STUFF.

>> EXACTLY.

WHAT WE HAD, AND THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS THAT'S HAPPENED IN THE PAST, THE ETHICS COMMISSION WOULD HAVE A QUASI-CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.

THEY CAN SAY "WE COULD REFER THIS CASE TO THE AG OR THE DA AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT 2 TO 22 YEARS IN PRISON, OR PAY THE CIVIL REMEDY NOW AND HAVE THE RESOLUTION, AND JUST PAY THE FINE."

PEOPLE WILL SAY, I'M GOING TO.

I DON'T WANT TO GO TO PRISON OR FACE A JURY TRIAL.

THAT DIDN'T SIT WELL.

THAT OPPORTUNITY DIDN'T SIT WELL WITH ME.

WE'VE TAKEN THAT AWAY.

THE PROSECUTORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS.

>> I WAS AROUND FOR ETHICS REFORM IN 2020.

IT WAS A BIG DEAL.

A LOT OF THAT GOT CRITICIZED TOO, BY THE WAY.

AND THERE'S CLEARLY BEEN SOME, YOU KNOW ...

I DON'T KNOW.

RESIDUAL FALLOUT FROM THAT.

PEOPLE HAVE DISCOVERED, YOU YOURSELF, OVER THE YEARS, THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S PROBLEMATIC IN CERTAIN WAYS.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THE MOST IS THE AMBIGUITY OF THE ETHICS COMMISSION.

WHERE DOES THEIR JURISDICTION BEGIN AND END, INCLUDING THE DIRECTOR AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

ARE YOU COMFORTABLE, ESPECIALLY GIVEN FEEDBACK AND AMENDMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT YOUR BILL WILL ADDRESS THAT AMBIGUITY, AND OFFER SOME CLARITY IN TERMS OF WHERE THE JURISDICTION ENDS AND BEGINS?

>> 100%.

SO WE HAVE IT REQUIRED TO WHERE, AGAIN, IF IT'S CRIMINAL, IT GOES TO THE DA'S.

IF IT'S CIVIL, IT GOES TO THE ETHICS COMMISSION.

WE DO HAVE IT SO WHERE THE DA'S, IF THEY START INVESTIGATION THINKING IT MAY BE CRIMINAL, AND LESS THAN A THOUSAND DOLLARS, THEY CAN SEND IT TO THE ETHICS COMMISSION TO BE HANDLED CIVILLY.

BUT THAT WOULD BE A DECISION MADE BY THE DA OR THE AG, PROSECUTOR OF THE CASE.

IF THE ETHIC COMMISSIONS STARTS INVESTIGATING WHAT THEY THINK IS CIVIL AND THEY FIND MORE, THEN THEY HAVE TO REFER IT BACK TO THE DA'S.

WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE, WHERE THE AG HAS TO SIGN OFF ON ADMINISTRATIVE RESOLUTIONS.

THAT'S THE CURRENT LAW NOW.

WE'RE PUTTING IT BACK IN THE CODE.

WE'RE REALLY MAKING SURE THAT THE LINES ARE VERY CLEAR FOR WHO CAN DO WHAT, WHERE THE LINES ARE GOING, IF AT SOME POINT IT GETS, YOU KNOW, AS YOU FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE AND FOLLOW THE INVESTIGATION, AND SOMETHING CHANGES FROM EITHER CRIMINAL TO CIVIL OR CIVIL TO CRIMINAL, WE'VE ALLOWED THAT CHANGE TO GO BACK.

BUT THOSE DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE BY THE PROSECUTORS, NOT BY THE ETHICS COMMISSION.

>> AND THIS IS A LOT TO TRY TO COVER IN THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME WE HAVE.

TELL ME WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS.

I BELIEVE THE BILL WAS THROUGH COMMITTEE.

>> YES, THE BILL CAME OUT OF COMMITTEE, AND IT'S STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS TO GO THROUGH.

THIS WEEK, MONDAY WET A MEETING WITH THE -- WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND SEVERAL DA'S.

HAD PRODUCTIVE MEETINGS.

WE HAVE AMENDMENTS THAT THE DA'S REQUESTED.

THE FLOOR SUBSTITUTE SHOULD BE RELEASED ON THURSDAY.

THAT WILL BE OUT TO THE PUBLIC, OUT TO ALL THE MEMBERS, EVERYBODY HAS A CHANCE TO SEE IT.

WE GO HOME FOR SPRING BREAK.

WE HAVE A WEEK AND A HALF BEFORE WE COME BACK SO EVERYBODY HAS A CHANCE TO DIGEST, LOOK AT IT, VET, IT, AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE IT SOON WHEN WE COME BACK.

>> SO YOU'RE ENCOURAGING EVERYBODY TO READ THE LEGISLATION.

>> SO MANY PEOPLE ARE SAYING, WHAT DOES THIS SAY DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT.

READ THE BILL.

DON'T TAKE THE SLANT THAT PEOPLE HAVE, THAT HAVE AGENDAS, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE AGENDAS, AND I FOUND THAT OUT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

THIS HAS BEEN AN EYE-OPENING PROCESS.

ALL I'M ASKING FOR PEOPLE IS TO JUST READ THE BILL.

>> SPEAKING OF THAT, BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS AGENDAS WHEN IT COMES TO POLITICS.

DO YOU THINK PART OF IT -- YOU'RE UPSETTING THE APPLE CART, THE STATUS QUO.

DOES IT SOMETIMES COME FROM YOU'RE MOVING MY CHEESE?

YOU'RE MESSING UP MY THING, SO WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO POLITICIZE IT.

>> THE BEST WAY I CAN SAY IT IS, THE LAWS ARE SO CONFUSING AND CONVOLUTED RIGHT NOW, THAT NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THEY CAN DO AND CAN'T DO.

AND IN THE LAND OF THE BLIND, THE ONE-EYED MAN IS KING.

IF THE ETHICS COMMISSION KNOWS WHAT THEY CAN DO AND THEY'RE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT KNOW, THEY'RE NOT -- THEY'RE UPSET WE ALLOW OTHER PEOPLE TO HAVE INVOLVEMENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS GOING TO BE.

I THINK HE WANTS THE BILL TO GO FURTHER THAN IT DOES.

AND I KNOW THE ETHIC COMMISSION THINGS IT GOES TOO FAR.

BUT IF THE COMMISSION THINKS WE DIDN'T GO FAR AND THE AG THINGS IT'S NOT FAR ENOUGH, WE'RE IN A SWEET SPOT.

>> GOLDILOCKS.

WE'RE OUT OF TIME, BUT THANK YOU FOR COMING ON THE SHOW.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> YOU CAN WATCH PAST EPISODES OF CAPITOL JOURNAL ONLINE AT VIDEO.APTV.ORG.

CAPITOL JOURNAL EPISODES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE ON APTV'S FREE MOBILE APP.

YOU CAN ALSO CONNECT WITH CAPITOL JOURNAL AND LINK TO PAST EPISODES ON CAPITOL JOURNAL'S FACEBOOK PAGE.

AND YOU CAN LISTEN TO PAST EPISODES OF CAPITOL JOURNAL WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING OR ON THE GO WITH CAPITOL JOURNAL PODCASTS.

>> WELCOME BACK TO CAPITOL JOURNAL.

JOINING ME NEXT IS STATE REPRESENTATIVE GINNY SHAVER.

THANKS FOR COMING ON THE SHOW >> THANK YOU, TODD.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A BILL THAT'S MADE IT THROUGH COMMITTEE, PROBABLY GOING TO BE ON THE FLOOR TOMORROW, HAS TO DO WITH PAID PARENTAL LEAVE FOR STAYED EMPLOYEES.

WALK ME THROUGH THE BILL.

>> WELL, WE'RE ALL ABOUT WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO WORK, AND THE STATE IS A VERY LARGE EMPLOYER, AND WE HAVE TROUBLE RECRUITING AND RETAINING EMPLOYEES JUST LIKE ANY OTHER BUSINESS.

AND THE GOVERNOR COMMISSIONED A STUDY GROUP, CHAIRED BY COMMISSIONER -- TREASURER BOOZER, TO LOOK AT WHAT THE STATE CAN DO TO IMPROVE RECRUITMENT AND RETAINING EMPLOYEES, AND THIS WAS THE STUDY GROUP'S #1 RECOMMENDATION, TO OFFER PAID PARENTAL LEAVE FOR STATE EMPLOYEES.

TO ATTRACT YOUNGER PEOPLE TO SERVE AT THE STATE.

>> WE WERE TALKING EARLIER, AND I WAS KIND OF SURPRISED THAT THIS WASN'T ALREADY A THING.

I MEAN, I GUESS IF YOU ARE A STATE EMPLOYEE NOW, AND YOU, YOU KNOW, HAVE A CHILD OR ADOPT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN USE YOUR ACCRUED LEAVE TIME, RIGHT?

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> BUT YOU -- THERE'S NOT -- IT'S UNPAID.

THIS WOULD BE PAID PARENTAL LEAVE.

>> YOU HAVE ACCRUED LEAVE THAT'S PAID, BUT FURTHER THAN THAT, SOMEONE COULD TAKE THE FAMILY MEDICAL LEAVE ACT.

BUT NO ONE SHOULD HAVE TO RISK THEIR FINANCIAL SECURITY TO PROVIDE AND TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAMILY WHEN THEY HAVE OR ADOPT A BABY.

THAT'S WHAT THIS ADDRESSES.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S DUAL THINGS.

IT'S ABOUT RECRUITING AND RETAINING QUALITY WORKERS, AND, YOU KNOW, I COULD SEE SOMEBODY MAKING A DECISION, IF THEY'RE STARTING A FAMILY, MAYBE I NEED TO GET ANOTHER JOB THAT DOES OFFER THIS KIND OF STUFF.

SO RETAINING THAT WORKFORCE.

AND ALSO PRO-FAMILY PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

YOU PROPOSED, YOU KNOW, PRO-FAMILY LEGISLATION IN THE PAST.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

THIS IS VERY PRO-FAMILY.

>> PART OF YOUR PLATFORM.

IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE FLOOR TOMORROW, SO THAT MEANS IT MUST BE GETTING SOME SUPPORT.

WHAT'S BEEN THE FEEDBACK FROM YOUR COLLEAGUES?

THIS WOULD COME AT THE EXPENSE TO THE STATE.

RIGHT?

>> WELL, NOT EXACTLY.

THE FISCAL NOTE SHOWS THAT THERE'S A POTENTIAL LOSS IN SAVINGS.

SO IF A -- IF AN EMPLOYEE WHO HAD A BABY AND EXHAUSTED THEIR LEAVE AND WENT TO FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE, THEY WOULD BE OFF WORK WITHOUT PAY.

SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE STATE WOULD BE PAYING THEM IF THEY WERE WORKING WOULD BE A POTENTIAL SAVINGS THAT WOULD BE LOST.

BUT THERE'S NO UP-FRONT COST UNLESS THAT EMPLOYEE IS PHYSICALLY NECESSARY TO BE AT A JOB AND SOMEONE HAS TO BE HIRED TO TAKE THEIR PLACE, OR IF ANOTHER EMPLOYEE HAS TO BE PAID OVERTIME.

THERE'S NOT AN UP FRONT DOLLAR COST.

>> WHAT'S BEEN THE FEEDBACK FROM YOUR COLLEAGUES WHEN YOU PROPOSED THIS BILL?

>> MOSTLY ALL POSITIVE.

I'VE HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BUT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO TALK THROUGH AND GET THEM ANSWERS.

BUT IT MAKES SENSE.

WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OFFERS THIS, AND A LOT OF PRIVATE EMPLOYERS NOW, ALPHA, BOEING, REGIONS, UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA, PROTECTIVE LIFE, BBVA, BAKER DONALDSON, THERE'S A LOT OF PRIVATE EMPLOYERS.

AND EVERY SURROUNDING STATE IN THE SOUTHERN REGION EXCEPT FOR MISSISSIPPI.

SO WE DON'T WANT TO BE LAST.

WE WANT TO GET THIS PASSED AND LET MISSISSIPPI BE LAST TO DO THIS.

BUT GEORGIA, FLORIDA, TENNESSEE, SOUTH CAROLINA, NORTH CAROLINA, ARKANSAS, MISSOURI, THE CITY OF BIRMINGHAM ALL PROVIDE PAID PARENTAL LEAVE.

>> OKAY.

WELL, WE'RE GOING TO BE WATCHING ON THE FLOOR.

AND THEN ASSUMING PASSAGE, WATCH IT IN THE SENATE.

BUT ONE OF THOSE THINGS I'M KIND OF SURPRISED IT'S NOT POLICY ALREADY.

SO WE'LL BE WATCHING YOUR BILL GOING FORWARD.

>> THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME ON TO EXPLAIN IT.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

GLAD YOU COULD BE HERE.

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK.

>> WATCH PAST EPISODES OF CAPITOL JOURNAL ONLINE, ANY TIME, AT ALABAMA PUBLIC TELEVISIONS WEBSITE, APTV.ORG.

CLICK ON THE ONLINE VIDEO TAB ON THE MAIN PAGE.

YOU CAN CONNECT TO CAPITOL JOURNAL AND LINK TO PAST EPISODES ON CAPITOL JOURNAL'S FACEBOOK PAGE.

>> THAT'S OUR SHOW FOR TONIGHT.

THANKS FOR WATCHING.

WE'LL BE BACK TOMORROW NIGHT AT THE SAME TIME WITH MORE COVERAGE OF THE LEGISLATURE RIGHT HERE ON ALABAMA PUBLIC TELEVISION.

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

WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT TIME.