I think we better get started before we all get in trouble. First of all thank you all for working late Thursday afternoon, we're usually completed legislative business but some important matters came on the calendar today looses over shabowing that in the references what we did yesterday in North Carolina. Interesting that the gun man in that South Carolina that resulted in the death of nine people and that happened at the and your African-American, excuse me African Methodist Episcopal church, that gun man was again captured here in North Carolina in Chiabi by the Chiabi police a lot of meaning to that in that once again we've relied on our law enforcement to apprehend someone who has committed another violent crime with a gun and we have to take our hats off to our law enforcement who are again as we said before are the experts and we should listen to them as they talk about what we need to do. Couple of significant pieces of legislation this week and wanted to just doing update, House Bill 562 which was to remain fire arm laws that bill although we were able to make it a better bad bill still a bad bill that will be looked at in the senate and the principles in that bill of listening to law enforcement and ensuring the Sheriffs continue their role in gun safety was important important and we hope that continues to be the case in the Senate. The gun violence issue continues to remind us how important it is to pursue gun safety and we continue to stand on that as an important thing we can do for our communities. The difference is always, are we going to make our community safe? Or are we going to only allow individuals who carry a gun to feel safe. The point I made several times, I'll make it again because it's important, because you have a gun does not make you safe nor anyone around you safe, unless you take the responsibility to make sure you're trained to use it, you know how to use it safely, and that you can protect it from someone else taking it from you , and then making the rest of us victims, something most folks don't do. They just buy a gun and that's certainly irresponsible want to talk briefly about House Bill 836, Election Modifications, it came on today in a Conference Committee Substitute, came on without the regular procedure. Many of us were in a position where we felt we had to vote for the bill despite the procedure being violated that we usually have here in the House, and because of it, the fact that it had some incremental improvement, and very incremental, to restoring people to their full access to the ballot and right to vote many of us felt we had to go ahead and support that. We do know there's legislation pending, a lot of questions raised about why now have people decided to provide some relief, some small measure of relief to those who want to vote here in North Carolina? So we have to take the bitter with the sweet as regards that, and a that's why you saw such a large vote in favor of this bill despite the irregular procedures. The four items that were brought up as result of our caucus to Representative Lewis that are pledged to be worked on we will follow those up and work on those to ensure that this bill is strengthened, this conference report is strengthened, but again significant objection to how it came about today to some extent the reasoning why it may not be important just the fact that it was not during our regular order of business and we did not have an opportunity to inform the public as we would had wished. Going forward one thing about this bill is still we require a major effort to educate the public what the procedures are going to be for voting and also a major for the train of local boards of elections so that they can ensure people's right to vote is unimpaired. I will take questions now from anyone. Yes Ma'am. You voted a month ago to legislation pending, my question is about why the decision was
made, now can you be a little bit more direct about that. Are you talking about court cases? Voter ID? Well we do know that there're court cases pending, and again because this did not go through the regular procedure, those kind of questions and impacts were not explored by us again the marginal improvement that happens in this bill is certainly measurable, we can see it, we understand it, we know that this is much better or better than what was in place or what is in place now. We don't have a guarantee as to what the court suit outcome with thee, and when it will be implemented. We know this bill would be implemented immediately, and that's important for those forks who need You don't have to vote. You can only live to his promise if we do the training and we inform the public as was required anyway under the bill to have revoked but that we fully involved the public and trained the workers and fully staff so folks can vote. Sir am I understanding correctly, forgive me if this is a stupid question, but that you are basically saying that this relief as you put it is sort of an insurance policy against the court throwing out the voter ID for lack of relief. No it's marginal relief, but it's not a edge against the court throwing it out as a matter of fact I think the case is even had this marginal relief not being provided and so, I think the all portions of the voter ID that are not addressed in this bill will still be successful in the court, but the opportunity of saying when will the relief be granted and when will it have an effective date This small measure of relief put in place immediately, I think most would put the position where they had to say we want immediate relief, we don't want to take a risk of having another election go bad with people again unnecessarily prevented from voting. yes sir I don't think Senator Brown in the senate the democrat purpose was given a 30 minute recess to purpose and have staff member of the room and to explain the sort of big provision did the house give a credit card to skip the same benefit from leadership? Well first of all I wouldn't term it the benefit I think if we going to be full appropriately we all elected from districts with roughly same number of voting age population and so it should be virtually a right for all the members to have it happened up to review legislation before their voting they were interested in 88, 000 people so need half an hour to have what we stand, we discussed it we discussed it about 15 minutes before that, before was bound to calendar and then took approximately an hour and half in Caucus to discuss it along to happen with all other resources so we did go through it reviewing it, and I understand the technical changes that were in the bill. Any other? Okay, thank you very much.