COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL

Transcription

1 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL MONDAY, JUNE 3,1996 SESSION OF TH OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY No. 37 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES The House convened at 1:05 p.m., e.d.t. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE (JERRY A. STERN) PRESIDING PRAYER The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the prayer from today's special session will be printed in today's regular session Journal. REV. ROBERT E. PIERCE, SR., Chaplain of the House of Representatives and pastor of John Paul Scott AME Zion Church, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, offered the following prayer: Let us pray: Almighty God, we come humbly before You this afternoon thanking You for allowing us to be in the land of the living. We ask for Your guidance and direction this day as these Representatives go about the business of legislating the needs of the people of our Commonwealth. Give them the wisdom needed to work together in love with one another. Continue to bless us; bless the sick; comfort the bereaved. This we pray. Amen. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE DISPENSED WITH The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the Pledge of Allegiance will be dispensed with. JOURNAL APPROVAL POSTPONED The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the approval of the Journal of Wednesday, May 22, 1996, will be postponed until printed. The Chair hears no objection. JOURNAL APPROVED The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Journal for Monday, October 23, 1995, is in print and, without objection, will be approved. BILLS REMOVED FROM TABLE The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the majority leader. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, I move that the following bills be taken off the table: HB 587; HB 1181; HB 2572; HB 2579; HB 2595; SB 564; SB 1325; and SB Will the House agree to the motion? Motion was agreed to. BILLS RECOMMITTED The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the majority leader. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, I move that the following bills be recommitted to the Appropriations Committee: HB 587; HB 1181; HB 2572; HB 2579; FIB 2595; SB 564: SB 1325; and SB Will the Hollse agree to the motion? Motion was agreed to.

2 LINE MOUNTAIN HIGH SCHOOL WRESTLING TEAM PRESENTED The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes Representative Merle Phillips and Representative Bob Belfanti. Mr. BELFANTI. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure today to welcome to the hall of the House the State AA wrestling champions hailing from Line Mountain High School, who are seated in the rear across the wall. Would you please rise and be recognized. Thank you. I wouid iike to~aisiymention that fire are five additionai State wrestlers who are not here with us today because they happen to also be involved in the State baseball fmals, so they were unable to make it. But we do have the coach and a number of members of the wrestling team to the left of the Speaker's rostrum, and for the purpose of introducing them as well as referring to the citation prepared in their honor, I would like to yield the microphone to Representative Merle Phillips. Mr. PHILLIPS. Thank you. It is my honor also to welcome the Line Mountain Eagles to the House of Representatives, and it is with great pleasure that I present the citation, the team citation, to Coach Bryan Buddock, and at this time I will do that. I will not read the citation, but what it does is it recognizes them as being Class AA State wrestling champions. Also, we have one of the wrestlers with us today behind me. He is Mike Shingara. Mike Shingara's record - he is a junior at Line Mountain High School - his record is 105 wins and 3 losses. He was State runner-up as a freshman. He was a State champion as a sophomore. He was a State champion last year and went undefeated in both of those seasons, and at this time I would like to recognize him for his accomplishments and his achievements in the art of wrestling. Also on the platform with me is Matt ShafTer, another member of the Line Mountain Eagle wrestling team. Mike, congratulations. We want to thank you very much for recognizing this outstanding wrestling team from Northumberlad County. Thank you. LOWER DAUPHIN MIDDLE SCHOOL INVENTORS PRESENTED The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would like to recognize Representative Frank Tulli for a citation presentation at this time, and Representative Ron Marsico. Mr. MARSICO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Tulli and I have some citations to present to students at Lower Dauphin Middle School, and I am certainly pleased and privileged and proud to present a citation to my constituent, Laura Zaino. Before I do that, I would like to acknowledge their teacher, Kathleen Jones, from the Lower Dauphin Middle School, the science teacher. Would you please rise. Thank you. And also Laura's parents, Dr. and Mrs. Richard Zaino, from Hummelstown, East Hanover Township. Would you please stand up. Good to have you here. LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 Again, I would like to present and read the citation to give to Laura: WHEREAS, The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is always pleased to recognize its young citizens whose outstanding accomplishments are worthy of emulation by others; and WHEREAS, Laura Zaino, a student at Lower Dauphin Middle School, is being honored on June 1, 1996 for winning first place in the eighth cat.iegor= oaf the peniisjjy-iva1ia iiivefior's Association statewide competition, in which students from one hundred twenty-three schools from throughout Pennsylvania participated; and WHEREAS, Assigned the task of "inventing something that solves a problem" by her science teacher, Kathleen Jones, Laura won an award for inventing the plate warmer, a hot pad with the added touch of keeping food warm with a simple ingredient between the cloth; and WHEREAS, Truly deserving of praise and admiration, Laura has brought great credit to herself and her school, family and community. NOW THEREFORE, The House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania congratulates Laura Zaino upon this exemplary achievement; heartily commends her for her exceptional ability, skills and creativity; offers best wishes for continued success in all future endeavors;... Laura, congratulations to you. Now I yield to Representative Frank Tulli. Mr. TULLI. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my pleasure to give the second-place award winner this citation, and it goes to Nicholas Gilbert, and joining us today are Mr. and Mrs. Lester Gilbert on our left. If you would please welcome them. Their son Christopher, by the way, is serving as a guest page today, and we welcome Christopher to the hall also. Is he over there also? There he is. In the same competition of the Pennsylvania Inventor's Association, Nicholas Gilbert, a student at the Lower Dauphin Middle School, was assigned the task of "inventing something that solves a problem" by science teacher Kathleen Jones. Nicholas won the award for inventing the foot-operated drywall lifter on wheels. WHEREAS, Truly deserving of praise and admiration, Nicholas has brought great credit to himself and his family, school and community. NOW THEREFORE, The House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania congratulates Nicholas Gilbert upon this exemplary achievement; heartily commends him for his exceptional ability. skills and creativity; offers best wishes for continued success in all future endeavors;... and directs that a copy of this citation be delivered to him by the House of Representatives on this date. Nicholas, congratulations. '*

3 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1043 And our statewide third-place winner is Brandi Nowicki, and joining us today is Mr. Stanley Nowicki, the grandfather of Brandi. Brandi Nowicki, a student at the Lower Dauphin Middle School, is being honored for winning third place in the Pennsylvania Inventor's Association statewide competition. She was assigned the task of "inventing something that solves a problem" by her science teacher, Kathleen Jones. Brandi won an award for inventing the Scent-a-Vent, a vent dust collector with scent added to freshen the room. WHEREAS, Truly deserving of praise and admiration, Brandi has brought great credit to herself and her family, school and community. NOW THEREFORE, The House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania congratulates Brandi Nowicki upon this exemplary achievement; heartily commends her for her exceptional ability, skills and creativity; offers best wishes for continued success in all future endeavors;... and directs that a copy of this citation be delivered to her on this date in the hall of the House of Representatives. Brandi, congratulations. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. REPUBLICAN CAUCUS The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would like to recognize and state that the Republicans will caucus in the majority caucus room at 1:45. The Republicans will caucus at 1 :45 in the majority caucus room. DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair at this time recognizes the caucus chairman from Philadelphia, the Democratic caucus chairman, Representative Cohen. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there will be a meeting of the House Democratic Caucus at about a quarter of 2; a quarter of 2. I would urge everybody to attend. There will be no more votes on the floor, I am told, here today, so the only upcoming business before we come back to the floor about 3 o'clock will be our Democratic caucus at a quarter of 2. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Mr. Cohen, there will be votes taken today. Mr. COHEN. There will be votes taken around 3 o'clock today. The SPEAKER pro tempore. After caucus; after caucus. Mr. COHEN. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING The SPEAKER pro tempore. The House recognizes Chairman George Hasay, the chairman of the Commerce and Economic Development Committee, to move that a meeting will be called in room 39, East Wing, immediately at the break. APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes committee chairman Joe Pitts of the Appropriations Committee for the purpose of an announcement. Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce a meeting of the House Appropriations Committee. Since we are coming back on the floor at 2:30, let us make it at 2:25 in the conference room in the Appropriations area. The House Appropriations Committee in regular session. BILL REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE, CONSIDERED FIRST TIME, AND TABLED HB 1551, PN 3633 (Amended) By Rep. MICOZZIE An Act providing for viatical settlements and for powers and duties of the Insurance Department. INSURANCE. RECESS The SPEAKER pro tempore. The House will stand in recess until 2:30. AFTER RECESS The time of recess having expired, the House was called to order. THE SPEAKER (MATTHEW J. RYAN) PRESIDING ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS OF SPONSORS The SPEAKER. The Chair acknowledges receipt of additions and deletions for sponsorships of bills, which the clerk will file. (Copy of list is on file with the Journal clerk.) HOUSE BILLS INTRODUCED AND REFERRED No By Representatives McCALL, RUBLEY, BAKER, COY, ARGALL, ROBERTS, GORDNER, LUCYK, L. I. COHEN, BELARDI, TIGUE, CALTAGIRONE, STABACK, LAUGHLIN, ITKIN, MUNDY, COWELL, BROWNE, PETRARCA, BELFANTI, GODSHALL, STURLA, HANNA, BATTISTO, TRAVAGLIO, CORPORA, ROONEY, HALUSKA, JAROLIN, MERRY, MELIO, BOSCOLA, SHANER, WALK0 and FLICK

4 1044 LEGISLATIVE J01 URNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 An Act amending the act of March 4, 1971 (P.L.6, NO.^), known as the Tax Reform Code of 1971, further providing for disposition of the cigarette tax. Referred to Committee on FINANCE, May 23, No By Representatives L. I. COHEN, MARKOSEK, MILLER, RUBLEY, MASLAND, MERRY, STISH, TRELLO, ITKIN, HENNESSEY, YOUNGBLOOD, BARD, MYERS, JOSEPHS, CURRY, COY, JAMES and STEELMAN An Act amending the act of April 14, 1972 (P.L.233, No.64), known as The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act, further providing for schedules of controlled substances. Referred to Committee on JUDICIARY, May 23, No By Representatives STABACK, BELARDI, NAILOR, GIGLIOTTI, LAUGHLIN, MELIO, ROBINSON, DeLUCA, SHANER, BELFANTI, COLAIZZO, CALTAGIRONE, VAN HORNE, McCALL, CARONE,, ROBERTS, BEBKO-JONES, ITKIN, TIGUE, BROWNE, JOSEPHS, BATTISTO, HERMAN, TRELLO, PLATTS, CURRY, ROONEY, SURRA, STURLA, DERMODY, SERAFINI, MERRY, JAMES, BOSCOLA and STEELMAN An Act amending the act of June 3, 1937 (P.L.1333, No.320), known as the Pennsylvania Election Code, further providing for date of application for absentee ballot and for canvassing of official absentee ballots. b Referred to Committee on STATE GOVERNMENT, May 23, No By Representatives L. I. COHEN, FARGO, BELARDI, ARMSTRONG, FICHTER, BOSCOLA, RUBLEY, STEIL, STABACK, O'BRIEN, BELFANTI, YOUNGBLOOD, STEELMAN, TRELLO, MILLER, D. W. SNYDER and BARD An Act providing for the fee for background checks of volunteer firefighters. Referred to Committee on VETERANS AFFAIRS AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, May 23, No By Representatives L. I. COHEN, SCHULEK, McGEEHAN and TRELLO An Act providing for a condominium fee tax credit to be applied against the residential real properly tax. No By Representatives GANNON, FAJT, ROONEY, JAROLIN, BELARDI, GEIST, GIGLIOTTI, MICOZZIE, DiGIROLAMO, SHANER, LAUGHLIN, BROWNE, TRELLO, ALLEN, HORSEY, KENNEY, COLAFELLA, L. I. COHEN, MERRY, CURRY, WOGAN, ADOLPH, JOSEPHS, DONATUCCI, MELIO, BARD, MILLER, McGEEHAN, BROWN, PISTELLA, E. Z. TAYLOR, RAMOS, OLASZ and VAN HORNE An Act establishing a loan program to install safety devices and improve safety at convenience stores; providing for additional duties of the Attorney General; establishing the Pennsylvania Mom and Pop Convenience Store Protection Fund; and making an appropriation. Referred to Committee on JUDICIARY, May 23, Referred to Committee on LOCAL GOVERNMENT, May 23, No By Representatives TANGRETTI, MARKOSEK, SHANER, ROBERTS, TIGUE, GIGLIOTTI, CLARK, WALKO, YOUNGBLOOD, CAWLEY, VAN HORNE, MELIO, PETRARCA, STABACK, STEELMAN, PISTELLA and RAYMOND An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, further providing for harassment and stalking. Referred to Committee on JUDICIARY, May 23, No By Representatives TANGRETTI, MARKOSEK, SHANER, ROBERTS, TIGUE, GIGLIOTTI, CLARK, WALKO, YOUNGBLOOD, CAWLEY, VAN HORNE, MELJO, PETRARCA, STEELMAN, PISTELLA and RAYMOND An Act amending Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, further providing for contempt of court. Referred to Committee on JUDICIARY, May 23,1996. No By Representatives JOSEPHS, LAUGHLIN, HALUSKA, STEELMAN, SANTONI, ROBINSON, YOUNGBLOOD, TRELLO, CALTAGIRONE and MERRY An Act amending the act of June 3, 1937 (P.L No.320), known as the Pennsylvania Election Code, providing for election by mail. Referred to Committee on STATE GOVERNMENT, May 23, I No By Representatives JOSEPHS, STURLA, ARGALL, ' LAUGHLIN, RAMOS, BOSCOLA, COWELL, HALUSKA, STEELMAN,. SANTONI. ROBINSON, YOUNGBLOOD, TRELLO, CALTAGIRONE and MERRY An Act amending the act of June 30, 1995 (P.L. 170, No.25), known as the Pennsylvania Voter Registration Act, providing for application with college and university student registration. Referred to Committee on STATE GOVERNMENT, May 23, 1996.

5 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1045 No By Representatives JOSEPHS, STURLA, MANDERINO, RAMOS, BOSCOLA, COWELL, STEELMAN, SANTONI, ROBINSON, YOUNGBLOOD, TRELLO, CALTAGIRONE and MERRY An Act amending the act of June 30, 1995 (P.L.170, No.25), known as the Pennsylvania Voter Registration Act, providing for application via the Internet. Referred to Committee on STATE GOVERNMENT, May 23, No By Representatives HASTE, ARMSTRONG, TIGUE, MERRY, SATHER, SAYLOR, TRELLO, SEMMEL, YOUNGBLOOD, PISTELLA, TRAVAGLIO, HENNESSEY, TRICH, CLARK, STABACK, HORSEY, MARSICO, MYERS, WILLIAMS and STEELMAN An Act amending the act of January 30, 1974 (P.L. 13,No.6), referred to as the Loan Interest and Protection Law, requiring notice of the filing of a mortgage foreclosure action to be sent to certain persons. Referred to Committee on COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, May 23, No By Representatives HASTE, ARMSTRONG, BAKER, TIGUE, MERRY, READSHAW, SAYLOR, TRELLO, SEMMEL, YOUNGBLOOD, PISTELLA, TRAVAGLIO, HENNESSEY, TRICH, CLARK, STABACK, HORSEY, MARSICO, MYERS, WILLIAMS and STEELMAN An Act amending the act of May 25, 1945 (P.L. 1050, No.394), known as the Local Tax Collection Law, requiring notice to be sent to certain taxpayers who fail to make timely payment of certain taxes. Referred to Committee on LOCAL GOVERNMENT, May 23, No By Representatives HASTE. ARMSTRONG, BAKER, TIGUE, MERRY, READSHAW, SAYLOR, TRF,LLO, SEMMEL, YOUNGBLOOD, PISTELLA, TRAVAGLIO, HENNESSEY, TRICH, CLARK, STABACK, HORSEY, MARSICO, MYERS and WILLIAMS CHADWICK, COLAFELLA, COLAIZZO, CORNELL, CORPORA, COWELL, COY, CURRY, DALEY, DeLUCA, DENT, FEESE, FLEAGLE, GEIST, GEORGE, GORDNER, HALUSKA, HANNA, HENNESSEY, HERMAN, HERSHEY, HESS, HORSEY, JOSEPHS, KAISER, KENNEY, LAUGHLIN, LLOYD, LUCYK, MAITLAND, MARKOSEK, McCALL, McGEEHAN, McGILL, MELIO, MICHLOVIC, MICOZZIE, MUNDY, NAILOR, O'BRIEN, PETRARCA, PISTELLA, RAMOS, READSHAW, ROBERTS, ROBINSON, ROEBUCK, ROONEY, RUBLEY, RUDY, SAINATO, SANTONI, SATHER, SAYLOR, SCHULER, SCRIMENTI, SEMMEL, S. H. SMITH, STABACK, STAIRS, STERN, STISH, SURRA, TANGRETTI, TRAVAGLIO, VAN HORNE, VEON, WALKO, M. N. WRIGHT, YOUNGBLOOD, ZIMMERMAN, GAMBLE, GRUPPO, KING, MERRY, HUTCHINSON, REBER, CIVERA, FAJT and PETRONE An Act amending Title 24 (Education) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, providing for payment of supplemental annuities from excess investment earnings; and creating a supplemental annuity reserve account. Referred to Committee on EDUCATION, May 23, No By Representatives MYERS, ROBINSON, BELARDI and RIEGER An Act amending the act of June 13, 1967 (P.L.3 1, No.21), known as the Public Welfare Code, further providing for eligibility. Referred to Committee on HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, May 23, No By Representative PITTS An Act to provide from the General Fund for the expenses of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Departments of the Commonwealth, the public debt and for the public schools for the fiscal year July 1, 1996, to June 30, 1997, for certain institutions and organizations, and for the payment of bills incurred and remaining unpaid at the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1996; * * * to provide for the appropriation of Federal funds to the Executive and Judicial Departments of the Commonwealth and for the establishment of restricted receipt accounts for the fiscal year July 1, 1996, to June 30, 1997, and for the payment of bills remaining unpaid at the close of the fiscal year ending June An Act amending the act of April 6, (P.L.69, No.20), known as The Landlord and Tenant Act of 195 1, further providing for the issuance I Referred to Committee on APPROPRIATIONS, May 23,1996. and service of a summons. Referred to Committee on CONSUMER AFFAIRS. May 23, I No By Representatives ARGALL, FICHTER, TRELLO, LYNCH, BROWN, TIGUE, HENNESSEY, BAKER, HARHART, SAYLOR, ITKIN and STEELMAN No By Representatives HARHART, ITKIN, RYAN, BARLEY, PERZEL, FARGO, D. W. SNYDER, SHANER, E. Z. TAYLOR, BROWNE. ALLEN, ARGALL, BATTISTO, BEBKO-JONES, BELARDI, BISHOP, BOSCOI,A, BUNT, CALTAGIRONE, CAPPABIANCA, CAWLEY, A Joint Resolutiori proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, further providing for tenure of justices, judges and justices of the peace. Referred to Committee on JUDICIARY, May 28,1996.

6 ~~ LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE HOUSE RESOLUTIONS I LEAVES OF ABSENCE INTRODUCED AND REFERRED No. 384 By Representatives JOSEPHS, THOMAS, COY, MUNDY, LEDERER, GORDNER, DeWEESE, READSHAW, ROEBUCK, BOSCOLA, BELFANTI, CAPPABIANCA, TANGRETTI, MELIO, CLYMER, ROONEY, TRICH, STEELMAN, DeLUCA, CORRIGAN, ROBINSON, BAKER, TRELLO, VAN HORNE, ROBERTS, PETRARCA, LAUGHLIN, MANDERINO, E. Z. TAYLOR, TIGUE, HALUSKA, STABACK, LEVDANSKY, MARKOSEK, STURLA, MYERS, TRAVAGLIO, ITKIN, CURRY, HERSHEY, GIGLIOTTI, WALKO, BEBKO-JONES, LUCYK, FAJT, SHANER, HERMAN, SANTONI, RUBLEY, YOUNGBLOOD, RAMOS, PISTELLA, CORPORA and LESCOVITZ ~~ A Resolution commending employees of the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for their dedicated assistance to Commonwealth communities and residents during 14 major emergencies including the disasters of The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Barley, who requests leave for the lady from, Allegheny County, Mrs. FARMER, for the week. Without objection, leave will be granted. The Chair hears no objection. The Chair recognizes the minority whip, Mr. Itkin, who requests leave for the gentleman from Philadelphia County, Mr. ROEBUCK, for today's session. The Chair hears no objection., Leave is granted. BILLS REREPORTED FROM COMMITTEE HB 570, PN 3634 (Amended) By Rep. PITTS An Act amending the act of December 19, 1990 (P.L.1200, No.2021, known as the Solicitation of Funds for Charitable Purposes Act, further providing for reports by charitable organizations. APPROPRIATIONS. k Referred to Committee on RULES, May 23, HB 1972, PN By Rep. PITTS No. 386 By Representatives CAPPABIANCA and M. COHEN A Resolution memorializing the Congress of the United States to enact legislation increasing the minimum hourly wage to enable workers to provide a decent standard of living for themselves and their families. An Act amending Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, authorizing immunity for employers who disclose certain information regarding employees. APPROPRIATIONS. Referred to Committee on RULES, May 23, I HB 1985, PN 3635 (Amended) By Rep. PITTS VOTE CORRECTIONS The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Veon. Mr. VEON. Mr. Speaker, on May 7, 1996, and May 8, 1996, An Act amending the act of June 28,1947 (P.L. I 1 10, No.476), known as the Motor Vehicle Sales Finance Act, providing for notice to the local police department prior to the repossession of a motor vehicle. APPROPRIATIONS. my switch malfunctioned, and I would like to officially correct the record. I HB 2024, PN 3447 On final passage of HB 2362, my vote should have been in the negative, and on HI3 294, amendment A2581, my vote should have been in the negative. Please let the record reflect these corrections of the record. Thank you. The SPEAKER. The remarks of the gentleman will be spread upon the record. COMMUNICATIONS FROM GOVERNOR APPROVAL OF HOUSE BILLS The Speaker laid before the House communications in writing from the office of His Excellency, the Governor of the Commonwealth, advising that the following House bills had been approved and signed by the Governor: HB 814, HB 1431, HB 1868, HB 1869, HB 1940, HB 1944, HB 2042, HB 2063, and HB By Rep. PITTS An Act establishing grounds upon which innkeepers may deny accommodations, facilities or privileges of a lodging establishment to any person who is unable or unwilling to pay for accommodations and services, to any person who is disorderly, to any person who an innkeeper reasonably believes is seeking accommodations for any unlawful purpose, and to any person who an innkeeper reasonably believes is bringing upon the lodging establishment property which may be dangerous to other persons; allowing an innkeeper to limit the number of persons who shall occupy any particular guest room of a lodging establishment; providing '* for the posting of notice relative to this statute; and providing for penalties. 1 APPROPRIATIONS. HB 2522, PN 3559 By Rep. PITTS An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, prohibiting the provision of certain stimulants to.* minors; and providing penalties. APPROPRIATIONS.

7 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1047 *** HB 2580, PN 3558 By Rep. PITTS An Act amending the act of December 19, 1990 (P.L.1391, No.215), known as the Motivational Boot Camp Act, further providing for definitions. APPROPRIATIONS. HB 2590, PN 3605 By Rep. PITTS An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, permitting persons to construct, deliver, convert or repair vessels equipped with gambling devices; and imposing a penalty. APPROPRIATIONS. HB 2595, PN 3483 By Rep. PITTS An Act amending the act of February 19, 1980 (P.L.15, NO.^), known as the Real Estate Licensing and Registration Act, requiring notification of coal mine subsidence insurance to certain prospective purchasers. APPROPRIATIONS. HB 2619, PN 3537 By Rep. PITTS An Act amending the act of April 8,1937 (P.L.262, No.66), known as the Consumer Discount Company Act, further providing for use of licensee name, for dishonored checks, for larger loan limit, for annual fee and for delinquent payments. The House proceeded to third consideration of HB 496, PN 3583, entitled: An Act amending the act of April 9, 1929 (P.L. 177, No. 175), known as The Administrative Code of 1929, requiring the Department of Environmental Protection to give notice to municipalities of orders for abatement of nuisances; and to pay for certain inspectors; providing for municipal waste facilities and making repeals. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? BILL RECOMMITTED The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the majority leader. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, I move that HB 496 be recommitted to the Committee on Appropriations. Will the House agree to the motion? Motion was agreed to. BILL PASSED OVER TEMPORARILY The SPEAKER. Page 2. HB 1532 is over temporarily. APPROPRIATIONS. SB 1254, PN 1947 By Rep. PITTS BILL PASSED OVER An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, further providing for the offenses of possessing instruments of crime and corruption of minors. APPROPRIATIONS. SB 1323, PN 2007 By Rep. PITTS An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, further providing for regulations on dissemination of criminal history record information. APPROPRIATIONS. CALENDAR BILLS ON THIRD CONSIDERATION BILLS PASSED OVER The SPEAKER. The Chair turns to today's calendar. Page 1. HB and SB 1047 are over for today. The SPEAKER. SB 19 is over. The House proceeded to third consideration of SB 80, PN 2001, entitled: An Act amending the act of May 17, 1921 (P. L. 682, No. 284), entitled "The Insurance Company Law of 192 1," requiring insurance companies to notify the Department of Transportation upon the lapse or cancellation of liability insurance held by an official vehicle inspection station. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? RILL RECOMMITTED The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the majority leader. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, I move that SB 80 be recommitted to the Committee on Appropriations. Will the House agree to the motion? Motion was agreed to.

8 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 BILLS PASSED OVER TEMPORARILY The SPEAKER. SB 752 and SB 1171 are over temporarily. BILLS PASSED OVER The SPEAKER. Page 3. HB 1782 and HB 970 are over. SUPPLEMENTAL CALENDAR A ~ BILLS ON SECOND CONSIDERATION The following bills, having been called up, were considered for the second time and agreed to, and ordered transcribed for third consideration: HB 1985, PN 3635; HB 2619, PN 3537; HB 2595, PN 3483; HB 1972, PN 3211; HB 2522, PN 3559; HB 2580, PN 3558; HB 2590, PN 3605; SB 1254, PN 1947; SB 1323, PN 2007; HB 570, PN 3634; and HB 2024, PN \ BILL PASSED OVER TEMPORARILY The SPEAKER. HB is over temporarily. MASTER ROLL CALL The SPEAKER. The Chair is about to take today's master roll. Members will proceed to vote. The following roll call was recorded: \ The House proceeded to third consideration of HB 1187, PN 2808, entitled: An Act amending the act of April 9, 1929 (P.L. 177, No.175), known as The Administrative Code of 1929, providing for sales of State-owned vehicles to municipalities; and making editorial changes. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? BILL RECOMMITTED The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the majority leader. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, I move that HB 1187 be recommitted to the Committee on Appropriations. Will the House agree to the motion? Motion was agreed to. BILL PASSED OVER TEMPORARILY The SPEAKER. HB 1302 is over temporarily. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTIONS PASSED OVER The SPEAKER. The balance of the resolutions on today's calendar are over. The Chair hears no objection. It is the understanding of the Chair that the Democratic Caucus is still meeting for an additional 5 minutes, so the House will be at ease awaiting the arrival of that caucus. Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Battisto Bebko-Jones Belardi Belfanti Birmelin Bishop Blaum Boscola Boyes Brown Browne Bunt Butkovitz Buxton Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Carone Cawley Chadwick Civera Clark Cly mer Cohen, L. 1. Cohen, M. Colafella Colaiuo Conti Comell Corpora Corrigan Cowell Coy curry Daley DeLuca Dcmpsey Dent Dermody Egolf Evans Fairchild Faj t Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gamble Gannon Geist George Gigliotti Gladeck Godshall Gordner Gruitza Gruppo Habay Haluska Hanna Harhart Hasay Haste Hennessey Herman Hershey Hess Horsey Hutchinson Itkin Jadlowiec James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Kellcr Kenney King Kirkland Krebs Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless Lucyk Lynch Maitland Major Manderino Markosek Marsico Masland Mayernik McCall McGeehan McGill Melio Meny Michlovic Micouie Mihalich Miller Mundy Myers Nailor Nick01 Nyce O'Brien Olasz Oliver Perzel Pesci Petrarca Petrone Pettit Phillips Pistella Pins Platts Preston Ramos Raymond Readshaw Reber Reinard Rieger Roberts Robinson Rohrer Rooney Say lor Schroder Schuler Scrimenti Semmel Serafini Shaner Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Staback Stairs Steelman Steil Stem Stetler Stish Strittmatter Sturla Surra Tangretti Taylor, E. Z. Taylor, J. Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich True Tulli Vance Van Home Veon Vitali Walk0 Washington Waugh Williams Wogan Wozniak Wright, D. R. Wright, M. N. Yewcic Youngblood Zimmerman b 'I

9 DeWeese Lederer Rubley zug DiGirolamo Leh Rudy Donatucci Lescovitz Sainato Ryan, Druce Levdansky Santoni Speaker Durham Lloyd Sather Farmer Roebuck NOT VOTING4 GUESTS INTRODUCED The SPEAKER. The Chair is pleased to welcome to the hall of the House today Jay, Kristal, and Danielle Thompson from the city of Murrysville. Also, we are pleased to have with us Guenter Herold of Voglesburg, Germany, who is now residing in Murrysville. They are here today as the guests of Representative Jeff Habay. Would the guests please rise. They are to the left of the Speaker. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY SPEAKER The SPEAKER. The Chair would point out to the members that over the past several weeks we have been announcing the birth of new grandchildren. Some of the younger members have revolted at this and have on their own done something about it. We are pleased to recognize Representative Todd Platts, who during this interval of 2 weeks became the father of T.J. Platts, who was born on May 23, his first child. Todd. He was going to hand out cigars, but his wife, Leslie, would not approve of it. So he handed out a chocolate cigar, which I approve of. Now, along the line of celebrations, celebrating his 25th birthday is Representative Tony Colaizzo of the western part of Pennsylvania, distinguished legislator, Mr. Colaizzo. He aged over the past several years sitting next to Mr. George - Dr. George. BILLS ON THIRD CONSIDERATION The House proceeded to third consideration of HB 1532, PN 3585, entitled: An Act providing for certain health insurance policies to cover the cost of formulas necessary for the treatment of phenylketonuria and related disorders. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Bill was agreed to. The SPEAKER. This bill has been considered on three different days and agreed to and is now on final passage. The question is, shall the bill pass finally? LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE The Chair recognizes the gentleman fiom Philadelphia County, Mr.. Kenney. Mr. KENNEY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, HB 1532 before us today was unanimously passed out of the House Insurance Committee under the leadership of Chairman Micozzie and with the support of Democrat Chairman Colafella. This bill is in support of the 225 children throughout Pennsylvania suffering from phenylketonuria disease, and more commonly known as PKU disease. PKU disease, for the information of the members, is a genetic disorder that if left untreated causes severe mental retardation and chronic physical disabilities. We in this House understand the necessity of treating this disease and we mandate that it be tested in newborns within the first day or two of birth, but what I believe we must do further than just testing for it is also helping the children and their families be treated for this disease, and the treatment procedure or the protocol is a medically prescribed formula which this legislation says must be covered by health insurance policies issued in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I think it is a commonsense approach to helping children and their families with PKU disease and would ask for an affirmative vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Horsey. Mr. HORSEY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there is a report coming out today on the question of infant mortality, and that report says that infant mortality in the United States has gone down, and, Mr. Speaker, it is the direct relationship to what we are doing here today, Mr. Speaker, and I would urge an affirmative vote on HB Thank you. The SPEAKER. The Chair thanks the gentleman. On the question recurring, Shall the bill pass finally? The SPEAKER. Agreeable to the provisions of the Constitution, the yeas and nays will now be taken. Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Battisto Bebko-Jones Belardi Belfanti Birmelin Bishop Egolf Evans Fairchild Fajt Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gamble Gannon Geist George Lucyk Lynch Maitland Major Manderino Markosek Manico Masland Mayemik McCall McGeehan McGill Melio Blaum Gigliotti Mew Boscola Gladeck Michlovic Boyes Brown Browne Godshall Gordner Gruitza Micozzie Mihalich Miller Bunt ~ P P O Mundy Butkovitz Habay Myers Buxton Caltagirone Cappabiarica Haluska Hanna Harhart Nailor Nick01 Nyce Cam Hasay O'Brien I Carone Haste Olasz ~homas Saylor Schroder Schuler Scrimenti Semmel Serafini Shaner Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Staback Stairs Steelman Steil Stem Stetler Stish Stritbnatter Sturla Surra Tangretti Taylor, E. Z. Taylor, J.

10 1050 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 Cawley Hennessey Oliver Tigue Chadwick Herman Perzel Travaglio Civera Henhey Pesci Trello Clark Hess Petrarca Trich Clymer Horsey Petrone True Cohen, L. I. Hutchinson Pettit Tulli Cohen, M. Itkin Phillips Vance Colafella Jadlowiec Pistella Van Home Colaizzo James Pitts Veon Conti Comell Corpora Corrigan Ccwe!l COY cum Daley DeLuca Dempsey Dent Dermody DeWeese DiGirolamo Donatucci Druce Durham Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Keller Kenny King Kirkland Krebs Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless Lederer Leh Lescovitz Levdansky Lloyd Platts Preston Ramos Raymond Rezdshz~ Reber Reinard Rieger Roberts Robinson Rohrer Rooney Rubley Rudy Sainato Santoni Sather NOT VOTING4 Vitali Walko Washington W augh Wi!!i&EE Wogan Womiak Wright, D. R. Wright, M. N. Yewcic Youngblood Zimmerman Zug RY an, Speaker Will the House agree to the amendment? The SPEAKER. On the question of the adoption of the amendment, the Chair recognizes the lady, Mrs. Vance. Mrs. VANCE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment really clarifies that the tort protection that is applicable to volunteers is not extended to clinics or other facilities. We are not changing the law in any respect, but this is merely a clarification of present law. The SPEAKER. The~Chair thanks-the-lady. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the amendment? The following roll call was recorded: Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Battisto Egolf Evans Fairchild Faj t Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick ~&nble Gannon Geist George Gigliotti Gladeck Godshall Lucyk Lynch Maitland Major Manderino Markosek Marsico Masland Mayemik Mccall McGeehan McGill Melio Merry Michlovic Micozzie Saylor Schroder Schuler Scrimenti Semmel Serafini Shaner Sheehan Smith, B. smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Staback Stairs Steelman Steil Stem Bebko-Jones -~ - Belardi Belfanti Fmer Roebuck Birmelin Bishop Blaum Boscola The majority required by the Constitution having voted in the Boyes affirmative, the question was determined in the affirmative and the Brown Gordner Mihalich Stetler bill ~assed fin all^. I Browne Gruitza Miller Stish Ordered, That the clerk present the same to the Senate for concurrence. The House proceeded to third consideration of HB 251 1, PN 3539, entitled: An Act providing for volunteer health services; limiting liability of a volunteer license holder; and requiring reports. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Mrs. VANCE offered the following amendment No. A3052: Amend Sec. 7, page 4, line 22, by inserting after "(A)." The protections provided by this section shall not apply to institutional health care providers, such as hospitals or approved clinics, subject to vicarious liability for the conduct of a volunteer license holder. The liability of such institutional defendants shall be governed by the standard of care established by common law. Amend Sec. 10, page 5, line 16, by inserting a period after "EMPLOYEES" Amend Sec. 10, page 5, lines 16 through 18, by striking out ", NOR SHALL ANY VOLUNTEER SERVICES BE" in line 16 and all of lines 17 and 18 Bunt Gruppo Mundy Strittmatter Butkovitz Habay Myers Sturla Buxton Haluska Nailor Surra I Caltagirone Hanna Nickol Tangretti Cappabianca Harhart Nyce Taylor, E. Z. Hasay O'Brien Taylor, J. Carone Haste Olasz Thomas Hennessey Oliver Tigue I Chadwick Herman Perzel Travaglio Civera Hershev Pesci Trello Clark Hess Petrarca Trich Clymer Horsey Petrone True Cohen, L. I. Hutchinson Pettit Tulli Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Conti Cornell Corpora Corrigan Cowell COY curry Daley De1,uca Dempsey Dent Dermody DeWeese DiGirolamo Itkin jadlowiec James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Keller Kenney King Kirkland Krebs Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless Lederer Leh Phillips Pistella Pitts Platts Preston Rarnos Raymond Readshaw Reber Reinard Rieger Roberts Robinson Rohrer Rooney Rubley Rudy Vance Van Home Veon X Vitali Walko Washington Waugh Williams Wogan Wozniak Wright, D. R. Wright, M. N. Yewcic Youngblood % Zimmerman zug '%

11 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE Donatucci Lescovitz Sainato RY an, I COY King Reber Wogan Druce Levdansky Santoni Speaker Durham Lloyd Sather Farmer Roebuck NOT VOTING4 curry Daley DeLuca Dempsey Dent Dermody DeWeese DiGirolamo Donatucci Druce Durham irkl land Krebs Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless Lederer Leh Lescovitz Levdansky Lloyd Reinard Rieger Roberts Robinson Rohrer Rooney Rubley Rudy Sainato Santoni Sather ~oiniak Wright, D. R. Wright, M. N. Yewcic Youngblood Zimmerman zug RY an, Speaker The majority having voted in the affmative, the question was determined in the affumative and the amendment was agreed to. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration as amended? Bill as amended was agreed to. The SPEAKER. This bill has been considered on three different days and agreed to and is now on final passage. The question is, shall the bill pass finally? Agreeable to the provisions of the Constitution, the yeas and nays will now be taken. Fanner Roebuck NOT VOTING4 The majority required by the Constitution having voted in the affiative, the question was determined in the affiative and the bill passed finally. Ordered, That the clerk present the same to the Senate for concurrence. Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Battisto Bebko-Jones Belardi Belfanti Birmelin Bishop Blaum Boscola Boyes Brown Browne Bunt Butkovitz Buxton Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Carone Cawley Chadwick Civera Clark Clymer Cohen, L. I. Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Conti Comell Corpora Corrigan Cowell Egol f Evans Fairchild Fajt Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gamble Gannon Geist George Gigliotti Gladeck Godshall Gordner Gruitza ~ P P O Habay Haluska Hanna Harhart Hasay Haste Hennessey Herman Hershey Hess Horsey Hutchinson Itkin Jadlowiec James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Keller Kenney Lucyk Lynch Maitland Major Manderino Markosek Marsico Masland Mayernik McCall McGeehan McGill Melio Mew Michlovic Micozzie Mihalich Miller Mundy Myers Nailor Nickol Nyce O'Brien Olasz Oliver Perzel Pesci Petrarca Petrone Pettit Phillips Pistella Pitts Platts Preston Ramos Raymond Readshaw Saylor Schroder Schuler Scrimenti Semmel Serafini Shaner Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Staback Stairs Steelman Steil Stem Stetler Stish Strittmatter Sturla Surra Tangreni Taylor, E. Z. Taylor, J. Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich True Tulli Vance Van Home Veon Vitali Walko Washington Waugh Willian~s The House proceeded to third consideration of HB 1302, PN 3584, entitled: An Act amending Title 71 (State Government) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, further defining "enforcement officer" for purposes of State employees' retirement; and further providing for termination of annuities. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Bill was agreed to. The SPEAKER. This bill has been considered on three different days and agreed to and is now on final passage. The question is, shall the bill pass finally? The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Nickol. Mr. NICKOL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. HB 1302 will allow wildlife conservation officers and waterway conservation officers to retire at age 50 with full pension benefits. This benefit will become available to officers beginning July 1, The benefits have not been paid for in advance. The two commissions will therefore incur an unfunded liability, a debt, of approximately $3,285,000, which will be paid for over the next 20 years. Payments will total more than $8 112 million. On top of this debt, the two commissions will see their normal retirement costs permanently increased to pay for the benefit. Payments would start at approximately $265,000 in the first year and continue into the future. Some of the cost of these benefits will admittedly be offset by the lower salaries paid new hires, but studies of other early retirement incentives show they are costly, nevertheless.

12 1052 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 No doubt these benefits will be welcomed by the 302 officers presently employed by the commissions. But please remember, it is not the Commonwealth that will be paying the substantial cost of these benefits. The money will come from an increase in contributions paid by both the Game Commission and the Fish and Boat Gomisshn, She in hum thse commissio~s are fu~dedby the sports men and women of Pennsylvania, they will foot the bill. I understand the Game Commission is having budget difficulties and there is talk of fee hikes. HI will most likely precipitate a number of immediate retirements and actually reduce operating costs over the next year or two, but the debt remains to be paid off over the next 20 years. Short-term gain, long-term pain. The bill will help the Game Commission balance their budget without a fee hike this year and next. I can understand why they support it. HB 1302 may postpone the need for a fee hike, but it will ultimately cause fees to be even higher in the end. Mr. Speaker, members seldom look at who will pay the bill for pension sweeteners. I just wanted to put things in perspective so no one can say they did not know the full ramifications of their vote. Vote "yes" or "no" but realize that this is not some freebie pension sweetener; someone will pay for it in the end. Personally, I have not found much support for early retirement benefits from the sports men and women I have talked to in my district, and I do not see anyone proposing the officers help pay for the increased benefits. Therefore, I will be voting "no." Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The Chair thanks the gentleman. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Phillips. Mr. PHILLIPS. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. HB 1302, to clarify, would amend the State Employees' Retirement Code to add to the current definition of "enforcement officer." It would add full-time Pennsylvania Game Commission employees who are graduates of the Game Commission Training School, who serve or who have served as wildlife conservation officers; two, waterways conservation officers and other commissioned law enforcement personnel employed by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission who exercise the same law enforcement powers as waterways conservation officers. The new definition would not include deputy waterways conservation officers. The question that we have before us today is the question of fairness. Here we have a group of law enforcement officers who are with the Game Commission and who are with the Fish Commission, who have the duties of enforcing the law. Now, under the Retirement Code and the definition of "enforcement officer," let me name to you a few who are covered by this retirement plan, that we would like to see the Fish and Game Commission employees be covered with those who are enforcement officers. Included in the current State Employees' Retirement Code definition of "enforcement officer" are Liquor Control Board enforcement officers and investigators; Office of Attorney General special agents. narcotics agents, asset forfeiture agents, medicaid fraud agents, and senior investigators of the hazardous prosecution unit; Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole agents; Department of Corrections correctional officers; Department of Public Welfare psychiatric security aides; Delaware River Port Authority policemen; and the Pennsylvania State Police officers. All of these are covered under the plan which I am suggesting in this particular bill, HB Again, I want to say it is a matter of fairness. These individuals who are law enforcement, who put their lives on the line each and every day, why should they be any different than anybody else. I therefore ask for support for HB Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SSPMKEP.. Ths Chair tha141.s the ger.t!eman. Mr. Nyce is recognized. Mr. NYCE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise to comment on HB 1302 not specifically because of the size of its fiscal impact on the Commonwealth, because as you have heard from other speakers, this does not directly impact the taxpayers but it does impact the people who buy hunting and fishing licenses in Pennsylvania. What I am, concerned about is this trend that we see, asking people to constantly retire earlier and earlier and earlier, which is in direct conflict with the fact that people live longer and longer and longer. If in fact we have a problem with people because of the dangerous occupations in which they serve, I would suggest that the administrators of those departments take a look at finding training or administrative functions for people who are no longer either capable physically or who are beyond the stress-load capability of dealing with on-street issues or in-field issues, rather than taking the most qualified, highly paid employees that we have, while they are still contributing to their pension plan, and asking them to retire. And I ask the members to consider one major impact here. These people do not retire. Someone at 50 years old is not going to go home and sit on the rocking chair. We saw it with the Mellow bill. We retired people early, but they did not create a new job because they went out and took jobs from the economy. They are real. estate agents; they are insurance salesmen; they are working in the retail trades. They are in fact not only giving up the position they had and relieving us of the income in our revenue stream, under the Pennsylvania Income Tax Code, but then they go out and are replaced in their immediate job by a replacement worker and take another job from the economy. I would suggest that the fiscal impact of this kind of thinking is wrongheaded. In fact, we ought to be looking for ways to get people to become more productive when they are the most experienced workers we have, in any department in government; it really does not make any difference. And more importantly, as you heard Representative Nick01 explain, the costs of these programs are being spread over 20 years, so the cost of people retiring today will be paid for by our grandchildren. This is not the way we ought to be addressing pension or retirement issues. Now, certainly it seems fair to provide the same opportunity for Game and Fish Commission employees that all other enforcement officers enjoy, but 1 suggest there are alternatives to putting people on, quotes, "retirement" who are really not going to retire. In fact, these are probably some of the most productive years most of these people have, and they ought to be contributing back to the public sector those benefits that they have earned and the experience that they have gained over the years. I would ask the members to reflect on that before they vote. I cannot support a program that is going to continually reduce retirement age and put the weight of the payment of the pensions of these people on the burden of our children and then k b k

13 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE grandchildren, so I would encourage the members to examine this I We talk about fairness, and I think Mr. Nyce brought up earlier closely before they vote. that if we want to be fair, let us look at who we allow to retire Thank you, Mr. Speaker. early and change it. We seem to be going once again in the wrong The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Delaware, Mr. Vitali. direction. As people are living longer and longer, we in Mr. VITALI. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. government seem to be allowing them to retire earlier and earlier. I also rise in opposition to HB 1302 for the reasons stated and And this idea that you are somehow going to save money by one additional point. paying someone increased benefits over a 15-year period rather I think there are some cases where increasing someone's than a 5-year period at most is nonsense. We have seen that with benefit package is a good idea; in particular, when you are trying the early retirement bills we have passed. to attract more people to a profession. However, in this situation, Someone brought up that this will not cost the General Fund, I have spoken with Game Commission employees, and far from and that is correct. However, as Mr. Nick01 pointed out, it does being a shortage in this particular occupation, there are many more cost the sports men and women of this Commonwealth who pay people who want to be Game Commission employees than can be. the license fees, because they will see an increase. It is interesting You have a situation where, for whatever benefits the job offers, that the Game Commission has sent a letter out supporting this. At many more people want to become one of these people than are. the same time last year, they were saying they needed increased It is not a case where we should be thinking about increasing the revenue from a license increase. benefit package. That just does not make good economic sense. One other sidenote that you should look at in the bill, and it is So I would urge a "no" vote for HB on the last page of the bill, page 4, and it is interesting that this The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Staback. amendment was put in for the Game and Fish people, so that after Mr. STABACK. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. they retire, they can come back and work on a per diem basis. Why Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of HB In my opinion, I do we need that amendment? Are they going to retire and come view the bill, as did my colleague, Mr. Phillips, as simply one of back and say, well, we still need their expertise, so we will pay fairness. them so much per day, per diem? Under current law, the special retirement coverage that allows Someone pointed out - it may have been Mr. Nyce earlier, and public safety employees this benefit includes law enforcement I think he is absolutely correct - people do not retire at age 50; officers who have the power to enforce Title 18 of the they move from one job to another. And people in public service Crimes Code. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, the who work for government agencies and bureaucracies, when they Fish and Game personnel impacted by this bill are the only law leave, they take with them, most of the time, medical benefits. enforcement officers who possess Title 18 police powers and are They walk to another employer and say, look; hire me; you do not not granted this coverage. This is grossly unfair. It is only fair, have to pay the benefits, or I can go back on a per diem. They end Mr. Speaker, that they indeed be added. up taking someone else's job. In addition, there is no financial impact on the General Fund. Please help us defeat HB This is not the right thing to do. Both commissions have indicated the ability to properly hnd the We should be limiting anyone who retires at age 50 rather than program without the need for increasing hunting or fishing license increasing the numbers. So I ask you to vote against this bill. fees. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again, Mr. Speaker, this is a bill with a sense of fairness about it, and I would ask for an affirmative vote. Thank you. On the question recurring, The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Godshall. Shall the bill pass finally? Mr. GODSHALL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. Agreeable to the provisions of the I also rise in support of Mr. Phillips on this bill. All this does Constitution, the yeas and nays will now be taken. is put law enforcement officers from the Game Commission and Fish Commission on an even par with other law enforcement officers in this State. I get around to as many sportsmen's clubs and as many Allen Fleagle Markosek Sather Argall Geist Marsico Saylor sportsmen's events as anybody in this House. I have not heard one Baker George Mayemik Schroder complaint, a single complaint on this legislation, from any of the Bard Godshall McCall Serafini major sportsmen's groups. I have not had a complaint on this Belardi Gordner McGill Shaner legislation from any of the minor sportsmen's groups, and in fact, Belfanti Gruitza Mew Smith, B. BIaum Hennessey Mihalich Snyder, D. W. I have not had a single complaint from any individual sportsman Bunt Hershey Miller Staback or fisherman or hunter in this State on this legislation. In fact, if Buxton Hess Mundy Stem anything, there has been support of the legislation because, again, Chadwick Itkin O'Brien Surra of the fairness issue. Cohen, M. Kenney Pesci Taylor, J. Colaizzo Kirkland Petrarca Tulli I am going to support Mr. Phillips, and I would ask that you Cornell Laughlin Phillips Van Home also support your Fish and Game conservation officers in their Corrigan Leh Pitts Veon effort for parity. Thank you. COY Lescovitz Readshaw Wogan The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Tigue. Dempsey Levdansky Reber Wozniak DeWeese Lloyd Rieger Wright, D. R. Mr. TIGUE. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Donatucci Lucyk Roberts Yewcic Mr. Speaker, I stand to oppose HB Feese Maitland Rooney Zimmennan I Fichter Major Rudy

14 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 NAYS- 122 U R a.. n p - =.. - offensew : - - e b. Adolph Armstrong Barley Battisto Bebko-Jones Birmelin Bishop Boscola Boyes Brown Browne Butkovitz Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Carone Cawley Civera Clark Clymer Cohen, L. I. Colafella Conti Corpora Cowell curry Daley DeLuca Dent Dermody DiGirolamo Farmer Druce Durham Egolf Evans Fairchild Fajt Fargo Flick Gamble Gannon Gigliotti Gladeck ~ P P O Habay Haluska Hanna Harhart Hasay Haste Herman Horsey Hutchinson Jadlowiec James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Keller King Krebs Kukovich Roebuck LaGrotta Lawless Lederer Lynch Manderino Masland McGeehan Melio Michlovic Micovie Myers Nailor Nick01 Nyce Olasz Oliver Pelzel Petrone Pettit Pistella Platts Preston Ramos Raymond Reinard Robinson Rohrer Rubley Sainato Santoni Schuler NOT VOTING4 Scrimenti Semmel Sheehan Smith, S. H. Stairs Steelman Steil Stetler Stish Strithnatter Sturla Tangretti Taylor, E. Z. Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich True Vance Vitali Walko Washington Waugh Williams Wright, M. N. Youngblood zug Ryan, Speaker Less than the majority required by the Constitution having voted in the affirmative, the question was determined in the negative and the bill fell. The House proceeded to third consideration of SB 1171, PN 1368, entitled: An Act amending Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, further providing for other offenses. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Mr. WOZNIAK offered the following amendment No. A1 949: Amend Title, page 1, line 2, by inserting after "Statutes," increasing the statute of limitations for rape; and Amend Sec. 1, page 1, line 7, by inserting after "amended" and the section is amended by adding a subsection Amend Sec. 1, (Sec. 5552), page 1, by inserting between lines 9 and 10..to -w t C2! Any c v the *- Daragranhcl)andanyY!ian (1) if the sollcltatlononmdkm. ' the&- Amend Sec. 1 (Sec. 5552), page 1, line 18, by inserting brackets before "Section" and after "rape)." Amend Sec. 2, page 3, line 13, by striking out all of said line and inserting Section 2. This act shall apply to any rape committed on or after the effective date of this act. Section 3. This act shall take effect immediately. k Will the House agree to the amendment? The SPEAKER. On the question of the adoption of the amendment, the Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Wozniak. Mr. WOZNIAK. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment is actually relatively simple. What it does is extend the statute of limitations on rape from 5 years to 10 years. A little background on the amendment as to why. In my hometown of Johnstown, we had a serial rapist that was preying on older, elderly widow ladies. The serial rapist was finally caught, and then it turns out, after he was found guilty or he is going through the procedures now, through DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) sampling and eyewitness accounts, they find out that over a pattern of years - it goes back probably more than 15 - that he committed these heinous crimes over and over and over again. In talking with some of the technical people, through DNA sampling and other technological advances that they have, no longer do we have to rely on people's memories and those types of things. And what I would like to do is extend this because this is not just a rape, this is a very violent crime, and I put this up next to murder, as a matter of fact, because these people are brutally beaten and they preyed on the weakest of our society, and I would appreciate an affirmative vote. Thank you. Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Birmelin, from Wayne County. Mr. BIRMELIN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my understanding that this is an agreed-to amendment, and 1 would ask the members to support it. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the amendment? The following roll call was recorded: Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Battisto Egolf Evans Fairchild Fajt Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle YEA S-20 1 Lucyk Lynch Maitland Major Manderino Markosek Marsico Masland Saylor Schroder Schuler Scrimenti Semmel Serafini Shaner Sheehan %

15 Bebko-Jones Belardi Belfanti Birmelin Bishop Blaum Boscola Boyes Brown Browne Bunt Butkovitz Buxton Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Carone Cawley Chadwick Civera Clark Clymer Cohen, L. I. Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Conti Cornell Corpora Corrigan Cowell COY cuny Daley DeLuca Dempsey Dent Dermody DeWeese DiGirolamo Donatucci Druce Durham Farmer Flick Gamble Gannon Geist George Gigliotti Gladeck Godshall Gordner Gruitza Gruppo Habay Haluska Hanna Harhart Hasay Haste Hennessey Herman Hershey Hess Horsey Hutchinson Itkin Jadlowiec James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Keller Kenne y King Kirkland Krebs Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless Lederer Leh Lescovitz Levdansky Lloyd Roebuck LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE i I Mayemik McCall McGeehan McGill Melio Merry Michlovic Micozzie Mihalich Miller Mundy Myers Nailor Nickol Nyce O'Brien Olasz Oliver Perzel Pesci Petrarca Petrone Pettit Phillips Pistella Pitts Plans Preston Ramos Raymond Readshaw Reber Reinard Rieger Roberts Robinson Rohrer Rooney Rubley Rudy Sainato Santoni Sather NOT VOTING-0 Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Staback Stairs Steelman Steil Stem Stetler Stish Strittmatter Sturla Surra Tangretti Taylor, E. 2. Taylor, J. Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich True Tulli Vance Van Home Veon Vitali Walko Washington Waugh Williams Wogan Wozniak Wright, D. R. Wright, M. N. Yewcic Youngblood Zimmerman Zug Ryan, Speaker The majority having voted in the affmative, the question was determined in the affirmative and the amendment was agreed to. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration as amended? Mr. CLARK offered the following amendment No. A2071 Amend Title, page 1, line 2, by inserting after "Statutes," providing for reappointment of district justice; and Amend Bill, page 1, lines 6 and 7, by striking out all of said lines and inserting Section 1. Title 42 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes is amended by adding a section to read:.... any provlslons aflhis title to the cmlmy+a Section 2. Section 5552(b) of Title 42 is amended to read: Amend Sec. 2, page 3, line 13, by striking out "2" and inserting 3 Will the House agree to the amendment? The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Clark. Mr. CLARK. Mr. Speaker, this amendment would merely provide that a district justice who resigns from office may not be reappointed to his or her unexpired term. I think the amendment is rather self-explanatory, and I would ask for an affmative vote. Thank you. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Birmelin. Mr. BIRMELIN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a good amendment, and we encourage the members to vote for it. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the amendment? The following roll call was recorded: Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Batt isto Bebko-Jones Belardi Belfanti Birmelin Bishop Blaum Boscola Boyes Brown Browne Bunt Butkovitz Buxlon Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Carone Cawley Chadwick Civera Clark Clymer Cohen, L. I. Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Conti Cornell Corpora Egolf Evans Fairchild Fajt Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gamble Gannon Geist George Gigliotti Gladeck Godshall Gordner Gruitza G ~ P P ~ Habay Haluska Hanna Harhart Hasay Haste Hennessey Herman Hershey Hess Horsey Hutchinson Itkin Jadlowiec James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Lucyk Lynch Maitland Major Manderino Markosek Marsico Masland Mayernik McCall McGeehan McGill Melio Merry Michlovic Micozzie Mihalich Miller Mundy Myers Nailor Nickol Nyce O'Brien Olasz Oliver Perzel Pesci Petrarca Petrone Pettit Phillips Pistella Pins Platts Preston Ramos Saylor Schroder Schuler Scrimenti Semmel Serafini Shaner Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W Staback Stairs Steelman Steil Stem Stetler Stish Strittmatter Sturla Surra Tangretti Taylor, E. 2. Taylor, J. Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich True Tulli Vance Van Home Veon Vitali Walko Washington

16 LEGISLATIVE J01 URNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 Comgan Cowell COY curry Daley DeLuca Dempsey Dent Dermody DeWeese DiGirolamo Donatucci Druce Du?h&! Keller Kenney King Kirkland Krebs Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless Lederer Leh Lescovitz Levdansky L!oyd Raymond Readshaw Reber Reinard Rieger Roberts Robinson Rohrer Rooney Rubley Rudy Sainato Santoni S&er Waugh Williams Wogan Wozniak Wright, D. R. Wright, M. N. Yewcic Youngblood Zimmerman zug RY an, Speaker --.. d m or v e r d l c t v... 'nofeuilt - - d e s r u b m i e r J L ved by- 4,1971 (P 1,h.w- \ Farmer Roebuck NOT VOTING4 The majority having voted in the affmative, the question was determined in the affmative and the amendment was agreed to. - statement "Puhlicafficial." On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration as AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN amended? The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. LLOYD offered the following amendment No. A2226: Mr. Lloyd. I Mr. LLOYD. Mr. Speaker, we have an agreement. I am going Amend Title, page 1, line 3, by removing the period after "offenses" to withdraw the two amendments which were circulated, and the and inserting majority leader has agreed to a suspension of the rules at the end ; and providing for liability for reimbursement of of the other votes. costs for outside counsel. The SPEAKER. You are withdrawing 2266? Amend Bill, page 3, by inserting between lines 12 and 13 Mr. LLOYD. That is correct. Section 2. Title 42 is amended by adding a section to read: counsel. The SPEAKER. Then 2266 is withdrawn. - The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Lloyd, for the F ~ ~ - t l l purpose k of i making such a motion. I will recognize you at a later time. Any.,.. in accordance wlfh 4, 1978 ( P - p Amend Sec. 2, page 3, line 13, by striking out "2" and inserting 3 Will the House agree to the amendment? to d efendthets of th- On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration as amended? Mr. VEON offered the following amendment No. A2986: (r\ rnnvirtinn in Federal cnllrt -When a n~~hlic nfticial is convicted d b r -... recovercphlic m- - w-w officialtomakereimbursementofduhlicmonevinalumny Y - W -1-w forthewhkhhc3- -ofw - - C o m m o n w e a l t h - t h e r p m Amend Title, page 1, line 3, by removing the period after "offenses" and inserting ; providing for mlnimum wages; and making a repeal. Amend Bill, page 3, by inserting between lines 12 and 13 Section 2. Title 42 is amended by adding a chapter to read: CHAPTER 69 MINIMUM WAGES Sec Declaration of policy Short title of chapter Definitions Miliimum wages Exemptions Minimum Wage Advisory Board. b

17 6907. Investigations Duty of employer Enforcement; rules and regulations Unconstitutionality Penalties Civil actions Declaration of policy. Employees are employed in some occupations in this Commonwealth for wages unreasonably low and not fairly commensurate with the value of the services rendered. Such a condition is contrary to public interest and public policy commands its regulation. Employees employed in such occupations are not as a class on a level of equality in bargaining with their employers in regard to minimum fair wage standards, and "freedom of contract" as applied to their relations with their employers is illusory. Judged by any reasonable standard, wages in such occupations are often found to bear no relation to the fair value of the services rendered. In the absence of effective minimum fair wage rates for employees, the depression of wages by some employers constitutes a serious form of unfair competition against other employers, reduces the purchasing power of the workers and threatens the stability of the economy. The evils of unreasonable and unfair wages as they affect some employees employed in this Commonwealth are such as to render imperative the exercise of the police power of the Commonwealth for the protection of industry and of the employees employed therein and of the public interest of the community at large Short title of chapter. This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the Minimum Wage Act Definitions. The following words and phrases when used in this act shall have the meanings given to them in this section unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: "Board." The Minimum Wage Advisory Board created by this chapter. "Department." The Department of Labor and Industry of the Commonwealth. "Employ." Includes to permit to work. "Employee." Includes any individual employed by an employer. "Employer." Includes any individual, partnership, association, corporation, business trust or any person or group of persons acting, directly or indirectly, in the interest of an employer in relation to any employee. "Gratuities." Voluntary monetary contributions received by an employee from a guest, patron or customer for services rendered. "Occupation." Any industry, trade, business, service or employment or class or group thereof in which individuals are gainfully employed. "Secretary." The Secretary of Labor and Industry of the Commonwealth. "Wage." Paid to any employee includes the reasonable cost, as determined by the Secretary of Labor and Industry, to the elnployer for furnishing such employee with board, lodging or other facilities, if such board, lodging or other facilities are customarily furnished by such employer to his employees. The cost of board, lodging or other facilities shall not be included as a part of the wage paid to any employee to the extent it is excluded therefrom under the terms of a bona fide collective bargaining agreement applicable to the particular employee and the Secretary of Labor and Industry is authorized to determine the fair value of such board, lodging or other facilities for defined classes of employees and in defined areas, based on average cost to the employer or to groups of employers similarly situated, or average value to groups of employees, or other appropriate measures of fair value. These evaluations, where applicable and pertinent, shall be used in lieu of actual measure of cost in determining the wage paid to any employee. In determining the hourly wage of a tipped employee, the amount paid such employee by his LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE employer shall be deemed to be increased on account of tips by an amount determined by the employer, but not by an amount in excess of 45% of the applicable minimum wage rate upon the effective date of this chapter. The amount of the increase on account of tips determined by the employer may not exceed the value of tips actually received by the employee. The previous sentence shall not apply with respect to any tipped employee unless: (1) The employee has been informed by the employer of the provisions of this definition. (2) All tips received by such employee have been retained by the employee and shall not be surrendered to the employer to be used as wages to satisfy the requirement to pay the current hourly minimum rate in effect; where the gratuity is added to the charge made by the establishment, either by the management, or by the customer, the gratuity shall become the property of the employee; except that this definition shall not be construed to prohibit the pooling of tips among employees who customarily and regularly receive tips. "Wages." Compensation due to any employee by reason of his employment, payable in legal tender of the United States or checks on banks convertible into cash on demand at full face value, subject to such deductions, charges or allowances as may be permitted by regulations of the Secretary of Labor and Industry under section 6909 (relating to enforcement; rules and regulations) Minimum wages. (a) Rates.-Except as may otherwise be provided under this chapter, every employer shall pay to each employee wages for all hours worked at a rate of not less than: (1) $4.75 an hour beginning December 1, (2) $5.25 an hour beginning April 1, (3) $5.75 an hour beginning April 1, (4) Beginning April 1, 1999, and every April 1 thereafter, the minimum wage shall be increased to the poverty level for a family of three, as set forth by the Department of Health and Human Services, divided by 2080, rounded up to the nearest 1# increment. Thirty days prior to April 1, the secretary shall publish in the Pennsylvania Bulletin notice of the new wage rate. (b) Federal law.-if the minimum wage set forth in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (52 Stat. 1060, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is increased above the level required by this section, the minimum wage shall match the levels of the Fair Labor Standards Act of (c) Regulation.-The secretary, to the extent necessary to prevent curtailment of employment opportunities, shall by regulations provide for the employment of learners and students, under special certificates at wages lower than the minimum wage applicable Gder this section, and subject to such limitations as to number, proportion and length of service as the secretary shall prescribe. The minimum wage prescribed under this subsection shall not be less than 85% of the otherwise applicable wage rate in effect under this section. A special certificate issued under this subsection shall provide that six or fewer students for whom it is issued shall, except during vacation periods, be employed on a part-time basis and not in excess of 20 hours in any workweek at a subminimum rate. In the case of an employer who intends to employ seven or more students, at a subminimum rate, the secretary may issue a special certificate only if the employer certifies to the secretary that employment of such students will not create a substantial probability of reducing the full-time employment opportunities for other workers. (d) Overtime.-Employees shall be paid for overtime not less than one and one-half times the employee's regular rate as prescribed in regulations promulgated by the secretary. Students employed in seasonal occupations as defined and delimited by regulations promulgated by the secretary may, by such regulations, be excluded from the overtime provisions of this chapter. The secretary shall promulgate regulations with respect to overtime subject to the limitations that no pay for overtime in

18 addition to the regular rate shall be required except for hours in excess of 40 hours in a workweek. (e) Impairment.-An employee whose earning capacity is impaired by physical or mental deficiency or injury may be paid less than the applicable minimum wage if either a license specifying a wage rate commensurate with the employee's productive capacity has been obtained by the employer from the secretary or a Federal certificate is obtained under section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of A license obtained from the secretary shall be granted only upon joint application of employer and employee. $ Exemptions. (a) Double exemptions.-employment in the following classifications shall be exempt from both the minimum wage and overtime provisions of this chapter: (1) Labor on a farm. (2) Domestic services in or about the private home of the employer. (3) Delivery of newspapers to the consumer. (4) In connection with the publication of any weekly, semiweekly or daily newspaper with a circulation of less than 4,000, the major part of which circulation is within the county where published or counties contiguous thereto. (5) In a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capaci$; iiichdiirg my eiiiployee employed-in-the capacity of academic administrative personnel or teachers in elementary or secondary schools, or in the capacity of outside salesman, as such terms are defined and delimited from time to time by regulations of the secretary, except that an employee of a retail or service establishment shall not be excluded from the definition of employee employed in a bona fide executive or administrative capacity because of the number of hours in his workweek which he devotes to activities not directly or closely related to the performance of executive administrative activities, if less than 40% of his hours worked in the workweek are devoted to such activities. (6) In the activities of an educational, charitable, religious or nonprofit organization where the employer-employee relationship does not in fact exist or where the services are rendered to such organization gratuitously. (7) In seasonal employment, if the employee is under 18 years of age, or if a student under 24 years of age, by a nonprofit health or welfare agency engaged in activities dealing with handicapped or exceptional children or by a nonprofit day or resident seasonal recreational camp for campers under the age of 18 years, which operates for a period of less than three months in any one year. (8) In employment by an establishment which is a public amusement or recreational establishment, organized camp or religious or nonprofit educational conference center, if: (i) it does not operate for more than seven months in any calendar year; or (ii) during the preceding calendar year, its average receipts for any six months of such year were not more than % of its average receipts for the other six months of such year. (9) Golf caddy. (10) In employment as a switchboard operator employed by an independently owned public telephone company which has not more than 750 stations. (11) Employees not subject to civil service laws who hold elective office or are on the versonal staff of such an officeholder. are immediate advisers to him, or are appointed by him to serve on a policy-making level. (b) Overtime exemptions.-employment in the followirig classifications shall be exempt from the overtime provisions of this chapter: LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 (1) Seaman. (2) Any salesman, partsman or mechanic primarily engaged in selling and servicing automobiles, trailers, trucks, farm implements or aircraft if employed by a nonmanufacturing establishment primarily engaged in the business of selling such t vehicles to ultimate purchasers. (3) Any driver employed by an employer engaged in the business of operating taxicabs. (4) Any employee employed as an announcer, news editor, or chief engineer by a radio or television station, the major studio of which is located: (i) in a city or town of 100,000 population or less, according to the latest available decennial census figures as compiled by the Bureau of the Census, except where such city or town is part of a standard metropolitan statistical area, as defined and designated by the Bureau of the Budget, which has a total population in excess of 100,000; or (ii) in a city or town of 25,000 population or less, which is part of such an area but is at least 40 airline miles from the principal city in such area. (5) Any employee engaged in the processing of maple sap into sugar (other than refined sugar) or syrup. (6) Employmeiii by iiii esiabiisiiiiie-ili which is a motion picture theater. (7) Any employee of a motor carrier with respect to whom the Federal Secretary of Transportation has power to establish qualifications and maximum hours of service under 49 U.S.C. $ 3 102(b)(l) and (2) (relating to requirements for qualifications, hours of service, safety and equipment standards). $6906. Minimum Wage Advisory Board. (a) Board created.-there is hereby created in the Department of Labor and Industry a Minimum Wage Advisory Board consisting of nine members to be appointed by the secretary to assist him in canying out his duties under this chapter, and for the purpose of conducting public hearings at the request of the secretary in order to recommend rules and regulations for the occupations covered within this chapter. (b) Membership.-Of the nine members, three shall be representatives of an established recognized association of labor organizations, three shall be representatives of an established recognized association of employers and three shall be members from the general public. The secretary or his designated representative shall be chairman of the board. (c) Compensation.-Each member of the board shall receive compensation of $30 per day plus necessary expenses for each day actually spent in the performance of his duties. No employee of the Commonwealth shall receive any additional compensation or expenses on account of his services under this chapter. (d) Notice.-At least ten days' public notice shall be given in the manner prescribed by the board prior to any public hearing of the board. Fike members of the board shall constitute a quorum. (e) Powers.-The board shall have the power and duty to: (1) Consult with the secretary concerning any matter arising under the administration of this chapter and advise and assist him in carrying out the duties prescribed for him by section 6908 (relating to duty of employer). (7) Conduct public hearings at the request of the secretary in order to develop rules and regulations in accordance with section 6909 (relating to enforcement; rules and regulations), in which hearings due process of law shall be observed and any person may appear and be heard or file statements in support of his position. (3) Submit its report, including recommendations for the promulgation of rules and regulations, to the secretary, who shall within 30 days thereafter accept such report or refer it to the board for further consideration and consultation. If the report is referred 'I '

19 to the board for further consideration, the secretary shall, in consultation with the board, modify, amend, or otherwise act upon such report within 60 days thereafter. Rules and regulations developed and promulgated hereunder shall be published and any person aggrieved thereby shall have a right of review. $ Investigations. The secretary or his representative shall have authority to investigate and ascertain the wages of persons employed in any occupation in this Commonwealth; enter and inspect the place of business or employment of any employer in any occupation in this Commonwealth at any reasonable time, for the purpose of examining and inspecting any records of any such employer that in any way relate to wages, hours, or other conditions of employment of any such employees; copy any or all of such records as he or his authorized representative may deem necessary or appropriate; require from such employer full and accurate statements in writing, at such times as the secretary may deem necessary, of the wages paid to all employees in his employment; and interrogate such persons for the purpose of ascertaining whether the provisions of this chapter and the regulations issued have been and are being complied with Duty of employer. Every employer shall keep a true and accurate record of the hours worked by each employee and the wages paid to each, and shall furnish to the secretary or his duly authorized representative, upon demand, a sworn statement of the same. Such records shall be open to inspection by any duly authorized representative of the secretary at any reasonable time and shall be preserved for a period of three years. Every employer subject to this chapter shall keep a summary of this chapter and any regulations issued hereunder applicable to him posted in a conspicuous place where employees normally pass and can read it. Employers shall, upon request, be furnished copies of such summaries without charge. Employers shall permit any duly authorized representative of the secretary to interrogate any employee in the place of employment and during work hours with respect to the wages paid and the hours worked by such employee or other employees. $ Enforcement; rules and regulations. The secretary, Attorney General and district attorneys shall enforce this chapter. The secretary shall make and, from time to time, revise regulations, with the assistance of the board when requested by him, which shall be deemed appropriate to carry out the purposes of this chapter and to safeguard the minimum wage rates hereby established. Such regulations may include, but are not limited to, regulations defining and governing bona fide executive, administrative or professional employees and outside salesmen, learners and apprentices, their number, proportion, length of learning period and other working conditions; handicapped workers; part-time pay; overtime standards; bonuses; allowances for board, lodging, apparel or other facilities or services customarily furnished by employers to employees; allowances for gratuities; or allowances for such other special conditions or circumstances which may be incidental to a particular employer-employee relationship. If any provision of this chapter, or the application hereof to any person or circumstances, is held invalid, the remainder of this chapter and the application of such provisions to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected hereby Penalties. (a) Discharge or discrimination.-any employer and his agent, or the officer or agent of any corporation, who discharges or in any other manner discriminates against any employee because such employee has testified or is about to testify before the secretary or his representative in any investigation or proceeding under or related to this chapter, or because such employer believes that said employee may so testify shall, upon conviction hereof in a summary proceeding, be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $1,000, and in default of the LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE I payment of such fine and costs shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than ten days nor more than 90 days. (b) Underpayment.-Any employer or the officer or agent of any corporation who pays or agrees to pay any employee less than the rates applicable to such employee under this chapter shall, upon conviction thereof in a summary proceeding, be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $75 nor more than $300 or to undergo imprisonment of not less than ten nor more than 60 days, or both. Each week in which such employee is paid less than the rate applicable to him under this chapter and for each employee who is paid less than the prescribed rate, a separate offense shall be deemed to occur. Any agreement between the employer and the employee to work for less than the applicable wage rate shall be no defense to action by the Commonwealth under this chapter. (c) Other violations.-any employer or the officer or agent of any corporation who violates any other provision of this chapter or of any regulation issued hereunder shall, upon conviction hereof in a summary proceeding, be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than $100 nor more than $500, and each day of such failure to comply with this chapter or regulation shall constitute a separate offense Civil actions. If any employee is paid by his or her employer less than the minimum wages provided by section 6904 (relating to minimum wages) or by any regulation issued thereunder, such worker may recover in a civil action the full amount of such minimum wage less any amount actually paid to the worker by the employer, together with costs and such reasonable attorney fees as may be allowed by the court, and any agreement between the employer and the worker to work for less than such minimum wage shall be no defense to such action. At the request of any employee paid less than the minimum wage to which such employee was entitled under this chapter and regulations issued hereunder, the secretary may take an assignment of such wage claim in trust for the assigning worker and may bring any legal action necessary to collect such claim, and the employer shall be required to pay the cost and such reasonable attorney fees as may be allowed by the court. Section 3. The act of January 17, 1968 (P.L.11, NOS), known as The Minimum Wage Act of 1968, is repealed. Amend Sec. 2, page 3, line 13, by striking out "2" and inserting 4 Will the House agree to the amendment? Mr. VEON. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. Will the gentleman yield until the conference immediately in front of you breaks up. Conferences on the side aisle, please break up. GUESTS INTRODUCED The SPEAKER. While the leaders confer, the Chair will take this moment to welcome to the hall of the House the daughter of Representative Howard Fargo and the granddaughter - his daughter, Linda Imler, and his granddaughter, Emily - from Marion, Ohio. They are here to the left of the Speaker. Would they kindly rise. CONSIDERATION OF SB 1171 CONTINUED The SPEAKER. the Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. VeOn.

20 ~ ~ -~ ~~~ ~- - ~ ~- ~~ LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 Mr. VEON. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think, as those members would recognize who have had an opportunity to look at this amendment, it is identical to the amendment that passed this House several weeks ago, an amendment that was offered by the gentleman, Mr. Stish, to a Tit!e 42 &xse bill to raise 4.k mhi~um wage k the State ef Pennsylvania in three stages over 3 successive years. Mr. Speaker, this amendment, as I have stated, is identical to that amendment and would increase the minimum wage beginning April 1- Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker? The SPEAKER. Will the gentleman yield. PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY The SPEAKER. Mr. Perzel, for what purpose do you rise? Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, point of parliamentary inquiry. I was just wondering if - as the gentleman said, it has already been put in another bill and sent to the Senate - is it appropriate to put it into another bill to send it to the Senate? The SPEAKER. Yes. It is permitted under our rules. Mr. PERZEL. Then, Mr. Speaker, at this time we would like to ask that SB 1171, along with all its amendments, be sent back to the Judiciary Committee. The SPEAKER. Mr. Perzel, it is inappropriate for you to make a motion at this time until the gentleman, Mr. Veon, has yielded the floor. I will recognize you as soon as Mr. Veon has completed his remarks. Mr. VEON. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will make this brief. I am aware that the gentleman, Mr. Perzel, has a motion to make, and I just want to say again that all the members in the chamber recognize and realize that the amendment that we passed here several weeks ago, sponsored by the gentleman, Mr. Stish, was an amendment to a House bill. Mr. Speaker, this is our opportunity to amend a Senate bill, the exact same title as the bill that we amended a few short weeks ago. This bill, SB , as most of the members in the chamber also recognize, is a bill that is destined for the Governor's desk. This is our opportunity to make sure that on his desk at that same time we in fact have language in that bill that will increase the minimum wage in the State of Pennsylvania. Now, i do not want to beiabor the points because I think that many members made the points, both pro and con, when we debated this very issue a few short weeks ago. So, Mr. Speaker, in my opinion, this is our opportunity, and our real opportunity, to put on the Governor's desk language that will increase the minimum wage in the State of Pennsylvania, and I would ask for an affirmative vote. ~~~~~~ BILL RECOMMITTED ~ -~ ~~ The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Perzel. Mr. PERZEL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like at this time, Mr. Speaker, to make a motion that SB , along with all amendments, go back to the Committee on Judiciary for further study, Mr. Speaker. ~ ~~ The SPEAKER. The question before the House is the motion of the gentleman, Mr. Perzel, to recommit SB 1171 to the Committee on Judiciary, together with amendments. Wil! tke-hsuse agree te&ematicn~? The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. DeWeese. Mr. DeWEESE. Mr. Speaker, I would strenuously oppose the motion of the gentleman from Philadelphia, Mr. Perzel. I think that although this is a procedural motion, anybody that embraces the point of view offered by the gentleman, Mr. Perzel, is essentially voting against raising of the minimum wage. So I would ask that on this procedural vote we would vote with Pennsylvania's workers, vote with raising the minimum wage, and vote against the motion to recommit. The SPEAKER. the gentleman, Mr. Perzel. Mr. PERZEL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the gentleman knows, several weeks ago we passed this amendment that Mr. Stish put before the House of Representatives. We have been looking at this issue, Mr. Speaker. In my heart and in my mind, I believe that this is something that should be done on a Federal level in order to keep Pennsylvania competitive with its neighboring States. But given the fact that it has already passed this House, Mr. Speaker, overwhelmingly, with members from both sides of the aisle voting for it, I do not see another need for us to do it again, Mr. Speaker. It does not make any sense. Now, at this time again I would like to recommend that the members vote to send this back to committee. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Blaum. Mr. BLAUM. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the reason why we should vote on this again is because we want to raise the minimum wage in Pennsylvania, plain and simple. I think the people of Pennsylvania who watch today's debate can obtain a civics lesson on how government works and understand that even though the gentleman, Mr. Cohen, and the gentleman, Mr. Stish, had amendments prepared to the House bill, that that is not going to pass and that this is our opportunity here in the House of Representatives not to recommit this "oil hit io vote the Veon amendment and raise the minimum wage. But at the same time let us not send this bill, which extends the statute of limitations for money laundering, which also increases the statute of limitations by way of the Woniak amendment for ' serious sexual offenses, let us not send this back to Judiciary where it will die, because Representative Veon really does want to raise the minimum wage in Pennsylvania, not just attach it to a House bill, send it over to the Senate never to be heard from again, but to attach it to this bill sponsored by Senator Fisher and to demand that the Senate of Pm~sylvmi~ote on whether or not to hike the minimum wage in Pennsylvania, vote on whether or not to increase the statute of limitations for serious sexual offenses, and vote on whether or not to increase the statute of limitations for ' money laundering. Mr. Speaker, I ask that the members vote "no" on recommitting this bill and that the people of Pennsylvania today, by way of this motion, understand that there are those who really want to increase

21 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1061 the minimum wage in Pennsylvania and there are those who only pretend that they want to increase the minimum wage in Pennsylvania. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Fanner Roebuck EXCUSED-2 On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the motion? The following roll call was recorded: Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Birmelin Boyes Brown Browne Bunt Carone Fairchild Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gannon Geist Gladeck Godshall G~UPPO Habay Harhart Lynch Maitland Major Marsico Masland Mayemik McGill Meny Micozzie Miller Nailor Nickol Nyce Schroder Schuler Semmel Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Stairs Steil Stem Stish Strittmatter Taylor, E. Z. Chadwick Hasay 0'~rien ailo or, J. Civera Haste Perzel True Clark Hennessey Pettit Tulli Clymer Herman Phillips Vance Cohen, L. I. Conti Comell Dempsey Dent DiGirolamo Druce Durham Egolf Hershey Hess Hutchinson Jadlowiec Kenney King Krebs Lawless Leh Pins Plans Raymond Reber Reinard Rohrer Rubley Sather Saylor Waugh Wogan Wright, M. N. Zimmerman zug Ryan, Speaker The majority having voted in the affirmative, the question was determined in the affirmative and the motion was agreed to. *** The House proceeded to third consideration of SB 752, PN 789, entitled: A Joint Resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, further providing for trial by jury and waiver of this right. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Cohen. Mr. Cohen, I have you marked down for having five amendments. Is that correct? Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing three of those amendments I will be introducing, 2706, and The SPEAKER. The clerk will read the first amendment of Mr. Cohen's. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Mr. COHEN offered the following amendment No. A2681: Battisto Bebko-Jones Belardi Belfanti Bishop Blaum Boscola Butkovitz Buxton Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Cawley Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Corpora Corrigan Cowell COY cuny Daley DeLuca Dermody DeWeese Donatucci Evans Fajt Gamble George Gigliotti Gordner Gruitza Haluska Hanna Horsey ltkin James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Keller Kirkland Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lederer Lescovitz Levdansky Lloyd Lucyk Manderino Markosek McCall McGeehan Melio Michlovic Mihalich Mundy Myers Olasz Oliver Pesci Petrarca Petrone Pistella Preston Ramos Readshaw Rieger Roberts Robinson Rooney Rudy Sainato NOT VOTING4 Santoni Scrimenti Serafini Shaner Staback Steelman Stetler Sturla Surra Tangretti Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich Van Home Veon Vitali Walko Washington Williams Wozniak Wright, D. R. Yewcic Youngblood Amend Sec. 1 (Sec. 6), page 1, line 13, by striking out "criminal" and inserting w Will the House agree to the amendment? The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this bill deals with the right not to have a jury trial. Right now under Pennsylvania law, a citizen of Pennsylvania who is accused of a crime has a limited right not to have a jury trial. That right not to have a jury trial occurs when the defendant seeks not to have a jury trial and the judge agrees not to have a jury trial. What are circumstances in which a person might want not to have a jury trial? There are various such circumstances. One deals with the complexity of a case. There are various levels of assault. There are various levels of fraud. There are various complex matters where the facts of the case and the law of the case can be very complicated and a defendant might believe that a jury will get bogged down in the complexities and not be able to render a fair verdict. A second area in which a person might not want to have a jury trial is when he and his counsel believe that a jury would be inflamed against him.

22 If Mark Fuhrman, say, were arrested for writing a bad check in Los Angeles, his lawyer would likely urge him not to have a jury trial, because obviously Mark Fuhrman is not very popular in Los Angeles. Reverend Moon, the publisher of the Washington Times, now one of the leading conservative newspapers, was not very popular in the 1980's when the recruitment methods of his church - the Unification Church - were widely under attack and he unsuccessfully sought in Federal court not to have a jury trial in his case for income tax evasion. Other people throughout history for these and other reasons have sought not to have a jury trial. Now, that is the current Pennsylvania law which I have discussed because it is important to know where we are now to understand this amendment. What this amendment does is seek to limit the effect of this constitutional amendment and say that you have a right not to have a jury trial if you are charged with a misdemeanor but you do not have the right not to have a jury trial if you are charged with a felony. The District Attorneys Association argues that it is important that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have a right to have a jury trial and that there be no right not to have a jury trial. This splits the difference and repeals the right not to have a jury trial in the most important cases but allows it in the lesser important cases. I think this would save money and would preserve some rights of some people. I would therefore urge support of this amendment. The SPEAKER. On the question of the adoption of the Cohen amendment, the Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Clark. Mr. CLARK. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would urge the members of the House to oppose the Cohen amendment. What this bill does is in effect it gives the Commonwealth the same right to a jury trial as does a defendant. It gives the victims of crime and it also gives the citizens of the Commonwealth a right to a jury trial the same as a defendant. This bill does not diminish a defendant's right to a jury trial. He has that now by Constitution and he will still have that right to a jury trial and maintain that right. What Mr. Cohen's amendment would do is it would place that right only to apply to felony trials. What he seeks to do is to mitigate those types of trials or those rights to types of trials for drug use, which do not rise to the grade of a felony, or certain DUI (driving under the influence) offenses, which do not rise to the degree of a felony. And I think that the right to a jury trial is fundamental to the defendant. We would like that to be hdamental to the Commonwealth and to the victims of crime and to the citizens of the Commonwealth and that that should apply in all criminal cases, not just in felony. So I would urge the members of the House to vote "no" on the Cohen amendment. Thank you. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the amendment? LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE Battisto Belardi Belfanti Bishop Caltagirone Cam Cohen, M. Colaiuo Cowell curry DeLuca Dermody DeWeese Donatucci George Gruitza Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Bebko-Jones Birmelin Blaum Boscola Boyes Brown Browne Bunt Butkovitz Buxton Cappabianca Carone Cawley Chadwick Civera Clark Clymer Cohen, L. I. Colafella Conti Cornell Corpora Corrigan COY Daley Dempsey Dent DiGirolamo Evans Farmer Haluska Horsey ltkin Jarolin Josephs Kirkland Kukovich LaGro tta Laughlin Lawless Levdansky Lucyk Manderino Mayernik McCall Druce Durham Egolf Fairchild Faj t Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gamble Gannon Geist Gigliotti Gladeck Godshall Gordner GTUPPO Habay Hanna Harhart Hasay Haste Hennessey Herman Hershey Hess Hutchinson Jadlowiec James Kaiser Keller Kenney King Krebs Petrone Roebuck Melio Michlovic Mihalich Olasz Oliver Pesci Petrarca Pistella Preston Ramos Rieger Roberts Robinson Rooney Sainato Lederer Leh Lescovitz Lloyd Lynch Maitland Major Markosek Marsico Masland McGeehan McGill Mew Micozzie Miller Mundy Myers Nailor Nickol NY ce O'Brien Perzel Pettit Phillips Pitts Platts Raymond Readshaw Reber Reinard Rohrer Rubley Rudy Sather Saylor NOT VOTING-2 EXCUSED-2 Santoni Serafini Shaner Staback Steelman Stetler Tangretti Travaglio Trello Trich Van Home Veon Vitali Walko Wozniak JUNE 3 Schroder Schuler Scrimenti Semmel Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Stairs Steil Stem Stish Strittmatter Sturla Surra Taylor, E. Z. Taylor, J. Thomas Tigue True Tulli Vance Washington Waugh Williams Wogan Wright, D. R. Wright, M. N. Yewcic Youngblood Zimmerman zug RY an, Speaker The following roll call was recorded: Less than the majority having voted in the affirmative, the question was determined in the negative and the amendment was not agreed to.

23 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1063 On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Mr. COHEN offered the following amendment No. A2706: Amend Title, page 1, line 1, by striking out "an amendment" and inserting amendments Amend Title, page 1, line 3, by inserting after "right" ; and requiring jurors to be paid a minimum wage Amend Sec. 1, page 1, lines 6 through 8, by striking out all of said lines and inserting Section 1. The following amendments to the Constitution of Pennsylvania are proposed in accordance with Article XI: (1) That section 6 of Article I be amended to read: Amend Bill, page 1, lines 16 and 17; page 2, lines 1 through 21, by striking out all of said lines on said pages and inserting (2) That Article V be amended by adding a section to read: Section 2. (a) Upon the first passage by the General Assembly of these proposed constitutional amendments, the Secretary of the ~ommon&ealth shall proceed immediately to comply with the advertising requirements of section 1 of Article XI of the Constitution of Pennsylvania and shall transmit the required advertisements to two newspapers in every county in which such newspapers are published in sufficient time after passage of these proposed constitutional amendments. (b) Upon the second passage by the General Assembly of these proposed constitutional amendments, the Secretary of the Commonwealth shall proceed immediately to comply with the advertising requirements of section 1 of Article XI of the Constitution of Pennsylvania and shall transmit the required advertisements to two newspapers in every county in which such newspapers are published in sufficient time after passage of these proposed constitutional amendments. The Secretary of the Commonwealth shall submit these proposed constitutional amendments to the qualified electors of this Commonwealth at the first primary, general or municipal election occurring at least three months after the proposed constitutional amendments are passed by the General Assembly which meets the requirements of and is in conformance with section 1 of Article XI of the Constitution of Pennsylvania. Will the House agree to the amendment? The SPEAKER. the Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Cohen. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is a different kind of minimum-wage amendment. This amendment does not deal with raising the minimum wage at all. The minimum wage is not at all changed by this amendment. It does. however, seek to extend the minimum wage to jurors. Right now in Federal courts a juror gets $40 a day, and you divide $40 by $4.25 and that comes out to about 8 hours of work. So a Federal juror gets about the minimum wage. A State juror gets about $9 a day. This is a real problem in terms of getting jurors. People are making a tremendous fmancial sacrifice in order to serve on a jury. As a result of the tremendous financial sacrifice people make in order to serve on a jury, large numbers of people spend large numbers of time seeking to evade jury service. Basically, the cost, in most cases, to serve on ajury, you get paid less than the cost of lunch and the cost of transportation in order to get to the jury. So people not only do not make any money but they actually get paid less than the expenses for service. This amendment, if it passed, would reduce the disincentive to serve on a jury. Obviously, the vast majority of people earn far more than the minimum wage in our society. For the vast majority of people who are working, they still are going to lose money by serving on a jury. However, the number of people who lose money will go down. People who are retired, people who are working part time may not lose money, and those people who are working will lose less money. This will make jury service more acceptable to people; this will expand the pool of people willing to serve on juries. This should lower administrative costs because there will be far fewer people seeking to avoid jury service. This should increase voter registration, because one of the major reasons people are afraid to register today and afraid to vote is because they do not want to get called to serve on a jury. This amendment does not affect the State Treasury. It would affect local government treasuries by increasing the cost of juries, but it should save some administrative costs because far fewer people I think will be evading jury service. I urge support of this amendment. This amendment would make the jury pool far more reflective of society than it is today. The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Clark. Mr. CLARK. Mr. Speaker, the maker of the amendment, Mr. Cohen, may have come upon a good idea. However, he has never taken this idea and introduced it into a bill, provided it in front of the Judiciary Committee for their consideration, or had the Judiciary Committee hold hearings or consider this bill. As with many bills on the House floor, this amendment does not relate to the subject matter and has been thrown in to basically stall and defeat this bill. The second objection to this is the fact that, who is going to pay this minimum wage to the jurors? I assume that it is going to be county government, and I assume that county government will again rightfully indicate that the State legislature has passed on an unhnded mandate down the lines to county government. For those two reasons I would urge the members of the House to oppose this amendment and wait until it comes before the full House in another form, hopefully a bill which has been introduced and considered by the Judiciary Committee. Thank you very much. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Dempsey. Mr. DEMPSEY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire if there is a fiscal note for this amendment, please. The SPEAKER. Mr. Dempsey, there is a fiscal note. I have a copy of one. Mr. DEMPSEY. I guess I would- I am concerned that there is a fiscal note. If I remember rightly, the payment for a juror after the third day is $25. with 80 percent of that being picked up by the Commonwealth. That means that if it goes to minimum wage, on the third day 80 percent of that would have to be picked up by the Commonwealth. It is an old prothonotary talking; I am just- Unless that has changed. The SPEAKER. Perhaps we have a volunteer who is a new prothonotary that could answer that. I cannot. The lady, Ms. Boscola, as a new prothonotary will answer that.

24 Ms. BOSCOLA. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually, coming from court administration just a couple years ago, I know that it has not changed. You are reimbursed, it is 80 percent after 3 days. Mr. DEMPSEY. Mr. Speaker? The SPEAKER. %lr. Dempsey. Mr. DEMPSEY. I believe under the present setup for the State co-oping jurors' pay that there would be an impact to the State. The SPEAKER Mr. Cohen, come to the rostrum. (Conference held at Speaker's podium.) The SPEAKER. The House will come to order. Mr. Dempsey? Mr. DEMPSEY. Yes, Mr. Speaker? The SPEAKER. Your expertise and that of the lady is early. The executive director of Appropriations very properly pointed out to Mr. Cohen, myself, Mr. Clark, and Mr. Pitts that when we are doing constitutional amendments, the cost that we are concerned with from a fiscal note standpoint is the de minimis cost of advertising the constitutional amendment and not the cost of any enabling legislation that would follow, provided that amendment was adopted. And I think where you went off and I was off, because I was up here arguing your side of it, was that the counties do in fact pay for juries, the State does pick it up after the third day, and at minimum rates there would be a fiscal impact. But that is really not what is before us now; it is the constitutional amendment, and the fiscal note would be an acceptable fiscal note. Mr. DEMPSEY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. With that, the chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Cohen. I think that is where we were. Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, the question before us is, how much do we value jury service? We want people to serve on juries, yet we give them as little as a dollar an hour. If they are working around the clock, they get less than a dollar an hour. We are showing by the very low compensation we pay, a ~o~ii~&hil cefi~kk~bl~ ~ SLS k hht of XI eleztior; judge, that we do not really value jury service. We pay an election judge at least $60 a day. In the smallest counties of the State it is $60, in other counties it is higher, but we pay election judges a minimum of $60 a day. We pay jurors a maximum of $9 a day. We are showing by that pay scale that we really do not value jury service. The result of this kind of pay scale is that people feel like they are suckers if they attend a jury, and an enormous amount of effort goes into avoiding jury service that ought not to occur. A vote for this amendment is a vote to strengthen the jury system, to show that we really believe in a strong jury system. I urge support of this amendment. The SPEAKER. the Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Clark. Mr. CLARK. Again, Mr. Speaker, I would urge the members of the House to oppose this amendment. We all value our jurors and their time, and being on jury duty is a part of being a citizen of our Commonwealth and contributing to the orderly process of justice within that Commonwealth. Mr. Cohen does have a good idea. We should look at the amount of pay that jurors get; however, that should be done by LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 Mr. Cohen introducing a bill in the House of Representatives, having it referred to a committee, and having hearings on that bill, just like this bill that he is trying to attach that amendment to has proceeded through the legislature. We have had hearings on the bill through the Subcommittee on Courts. They were well ' attended. We have had committee meetings on that bill. It was well attended and well argued, and there was a great deal of process to have this bill come before the House of Representatives, and I would like that deliberation and due diligence to be performed on Mr. Cohen's amendment and his ideas likewise. For that reason I am urging the members to oppose Mr. Cohen's amendment and to proceed with the passage of this bill. Thank you. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the amendment? The following roll call was recorded: Battisto Bebko-Jones Belardi Belfanti Bishop Blaum Boscola Butkovitz Buxton Caltagirone cappabianca Cam Cawley Cohen, L. I. Cohen, M. Colafella Colaiuo Corpora Corrigan Co.uc!! curry Daley DeLuca Dermody DeWeese Donatucci Evans George Gigliotti Haluska Herman Horsey Itkin James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Kirkland Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless I ermvitv.dw...,"..- Levdansky Lucyk Manderino Markosek Mayernik McCall Melio Michlovic Mihalich Mundy Myers Olasz Oliver Pesci Petrarca Petrone Phillips Pistella Preston Rarnos Reber Rieger Roberts Robinson Rooney Sainato Santoni Scrimenti Serafini Shaner Staback Steelman Stetler Sturla Surra Tangretti Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich Veon Walko Washington Wi!!i&!~ Wozniak Youngblood Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Birmelin Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gamble Gannon Geist Gladeck Lloyd Lynch Maitland Major Marsico Masland McGeehan McGill Schuler Sernmel Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Stairs Steil '* Boyes Godshall Mew Stem Brown Gordner Micozzie Stish Browne Gruitza Miller Strittrnatter Bunt ~ P P O Nailor Taylor, E. 2. Habay Nickol Carone Taylor, J. Chadwick Hanna Nyce True Civera Harhart O'Brien Tulli Clark Hasay Perzel Vance, Clymer Haste Pettit Van Home Conti Hennessey Pitt s Vitali Cornell Hershey Platts Waugh COY Hess Raymond Wogan Dempsey Hutchinson Readshaw Wright, D. R.

25 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1065 Dent Jadlowiec Reinard Wright, M. N. DiGirolamo Keller Rohrer Yewcic Druce Kenney Rubley Zimmerman Durham King Rudy zug Egolf Krebs Sather Fairchild Lederer Saylor RY an, Faj t Leh Schroder Speaker Fargo Farmer Roebuck NOT VOTING4 EXCUSED-;! Less than the majority having voted in the affirmative, the question was determined in the negative and the amendment was not agreed to. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Mr. COHEN offered the following amendment No. A2707: Amend Title, page 1, line 1, by striking out "an amendment" and inserting amendments Amend page line 3, the period after ''right" and inserting ; and permitting jurors to take notes during civil and criminal trials. Amend Set. 1, page 1, lines 6 through 8, by striking out all of said lines and inserting - Section 1. The following amendments to the Constitution of Pennsylvania are proposed in accordance with Article XI: (1) That section 6 of Article I be amended to read: -- Amend ill, page 1, lines 16 and 17; page 2, lines 1 through 21, by striking out all of said lines on said pages and inserting (2) That Article V be amended by adding a section to read:.... hors-m Section 2. (a) Upon the first passage by the General Assembly of these proposed constitutional amendments, the Secretary of the Commonwealth shall proceed immediately to comply with the advertising requirements of section 1 of Article XI of the Constitution of Pennsylvania and shall transmit the required advertisements to two newspapers in every county in which such newspapers are published in sufficient time after passage of these proposed constitutional amendments. (b) Upon the second passage by the General Assembly of these proposed constitutional amendments, the Secretary of the Commonwealth shall proceed immediately to comply with the advertising requirements of section 1 of Article XI of the Constitution of Pennsylvania and shall transmit the required advertisements to two newspapers in cvery county in which such newspapers are published in sufficient time after passage of these proposed constitutional amendments. The Secretary of the Commonwealth shall submit these proposed constitutional amendments to the qualified electors of this Commonwealth at the first primary, general or municipal election occurring at least three months after the proposed constitutional amendments are passed by the General Assembly which meets the requirements of and is in conformance with section 1 of Article XI of the Constitution of Pennsylvania. Will the House agree to the amendment? The SPEAKER. On the question of the adoption of the amendment, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Philadelphia. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this amendment says in its entirety, "Jurors may take notes during any civil or criminal trial subject to rules adopted by the Supreme Court." Currently, jurors are not allowed except in extraordinary circumstances to take notes. I believe they are allowed to take notes during the actual deliberations, but they are not allowed to take notes as witnesses speak. This tends to slow down jury trials, because people are not certain who said what; there is no written record; they have to ask the judge for the transcript. That takes a lot of time. There is an awful lot of debate among the jurors as to who said what. Different people have different recollections. If every juror or a lot of the jurors were taking notes, the number of disputes about what the facts were would be far less and the jurors would be able to concentrate much more on debating the facts instead of trying to refresh their memories as to what the facts were. Recently in the magazine that comes out every month for Pennsylvania lawyers, a judge in Lehigh County strongly suggested that this was a failure of the current system. He said that trials would go better if jurors were allowed to take notes. They would be allowed to compare them. The fact that you have 12 people on the jury greatly would serve to reduce the chance that somebody would record the wrong thing. It lead to a much more accurate recollection by members of the jury as to what was said, and this would tremendously increase the efficiency and the fairness of trials. Many States throughout this country allow jurors to take notes. Pennsylvania's system is antiquated in not allowing jurors to take notes. I would think this would improve the jury system, and I would urge your support of it. The SPEAKER. the Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Clark. Mr. CLARK. Again, Mr. Speaker, I would urge the members of the House to vote against this latest Cohen amendment. Although this also may be a good idea, it certainly is an idea that the Judiciary Committee should have before it and should consider and possibly have public hearings on it, have it go through the process, discuss the pros and cons ofjurors taking notes during civil or criminal trials. Having not considered this through the committee process, the only thing that comes my mind is that I jurors are taking that they can write their books and n~emoirs of their service on the jury trial after a criminal case. Thank you very much. The SPEAKER. On the question of the adoption of the cohen amendment, the gentleman, M ~. cohen, for the second time. Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, again the question here is, do we trust the jurors? Do we value their judgment? If we do not value their judgment and we just want to set up an obstacle course for them, then we ban them from taking notes and we allow them to I just listen to factual testimony which is not presented in any

26 1066 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 logical, coherent order by one person trying to get a point across but is presented in a very adversarial way by two opposing sides actively pressing a particular point of view. It is extremely difficult very often for people to follow what goes on in a jury system, and this seeks to deal with that major criticism of the jury system. This would improve the jury system. It would allow more accurate understanding of what goes on. It would allow jurors to debate internally what the law ought to be and what the facts are with some agreement by people who are taking notes as to what the facts have been, who has said what. Instead of just allowing the conflicting testimony to merge and people say, well, somebody said this and somebody said that and it is all kind of murky, you people can write down who said what, what points were raised in contradiction to whoever said whatever is at issue. If we were to ban note-taking, Mr. Speaker, in public schools throughout this Commonwealth, I think kids would learn a lot less. Some people in school situations take notes, others do not, but we are not going to ban kids taking notes. We should not be banning jurors from taking notes either. The jurors are dealing with basic human rights and the rights of all victims in Pennsylvania. They ought to be allowed to take notes. I urge your support of this amendment. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Vitali. Mr. VITALI. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the maker of the amendment stand for brief interrogation? The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Cohen, indicates he will stand for interrogation. You may begin. Mr. VITALI. Mr. Speaker, what prohibits jurors from taking notes now? Is it something in the Pennsylvania Constitution? Is it a rule of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court? Is it statutory language? What prevents the taking of notes right now? Mr. COHEN. I believe it is court rule, Mr. Speaker. Mr. VITALI. Okay. Mr. COHEN. But this constitutional amendment is basically amending a court rule all by itself. The only thing that deals with the mainsubstance of this bill is a court rule as well. Mr. VITALI. I mean, that, I guess, is my second question. If in fact a Pennsylvania rule of court in fact prohibits that, why are we amending the Constitution to deal with that? Is there not a better way, either by a normal statute or lobbying the court or what have you? Is there something I am missing? It seems like a pretty roundabout way to do this. Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, under law, under the section of the Pennsylvania Constitution setting up a unified judiciary system, it contains language which the courts have held to mean that we, by law, cannot change a court rule, that it is up to the courts to determine what the court rules are. So the only way we can change a court rule is by a constitutional amendment. Now, whether we ought to be changing the Constitution or whether we ought to be lobbying the court to change its rules, that is a reasonable question. But this whole constitutional amendment, the issue it deals with in terms of getting rid of the right not to have a jury trial, that is all Pennsylvania court rule as well. So if we are seeking to change one Pennsylvania court rule, we ought to be able to change another Pennsylvania court rule in the same amendment. Mr. VITALI. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Reber. Mr. REBER. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have to respectfully disagree with the motivations behind Representative Cohen for this particular amendment. My experience with juries and with jury trials has been very simply, I am worried that they are not even listening to me when I am speaking and that they are not understanding what is being said during the examination or the cross-examination. I would be very fearful that they would be sitting there taking notes as well as trying to listen at the same time. But more importantly, the best evidence of what was said, the best evidence of recollection, is the official transcript itself. During the course of a trial, it is certainly not uncommon for a request to ' be made to the court for certain read-backs from the testimony itself, the official court record. This certainly is superior to any doodling, to any note-taking of any sort that might be done by a juror. And I think, finally, there certainly is the prerogative of the court under current rule that if there is an extraordinary situation that would necessitate the taking of notes, that can in fact be granted, as I understand it, under current law. So with those particular provisos from practical experience before a jury, I would most respectfully urge a defeat of the Cohen amendment. Thank you. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the amendment? The following roll call was recorded: Bebko-Jones Druce Manderino Santoni Belardi Evans Markosek Scrimenti Belfanti Fairchild McCall Shaner Bishop Fajt Melio Smith, S. H. Buxton Gamble Mihalich Staback Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Cawley Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Cowell COY cum Daley DeLuca Dent Dennody DeWeese Donatucci George Gigliotti Haluska Herman Horsey Itkin James Jarolin Kaiser Kirkland LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless Lescovitz Levdansky Lucyk Myers Olasz Oliver Pesci Petrarca Phillips Pistella Preston Ramos Readshaw Rieger Roberts Robinson Rooney Rudy Sainato Steelman Sturla Surra Tangretti Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich Van Home Walko Washington Williams Wright, D. R. Youngblood Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Fl~ck Gannon Lynch Maitland Major Marsico Masland Mavernik Schuler Semmel Serafini Sheehan Smith, B. Snvder. D. W. Barley Geist ~c~eehan Stairs Battisto Gladeck McGill Steil

27 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1067 Birmelin Godshall Mew Stem Blaum Gordner Michlovic Stetler Boscola Gruitza Micozzie Stish Boyes GNPP~ Miller Brown Habay Mundy Browne Hanna Nailor Bunt Harhart Nickol Butkovitz Hasay Nyce Carone Haste 0' Brien Chadwick Hennessey Perzel Civera Hershey Petrone Clark Clymer Cohen, L. I. Conti Hess Hutchinson Jadlowiec Keller Pettit Pins Platts Raymond Comell Kenney Reber Corpora King Reinard Corrigan Krebs Rohrer Dempsey Kukovich Rubley DiGirolamo Lederer Sather Durham Leh Saylor Egolf Lloyd Schroder Josephs Farmer Roebuck NOT VOTING-1 Strittmatter Taylor, E. Z. Taylor, J. True Tulli vance Veon Vitali Waugh Wogan Wozniak Wright, M. N. Yewcic Zimmerman zug RY an, Speaker Less than the majority having voted in the affirmative, the question was determined in the negative and the amendment was not agreed to. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Mr. McGEEHAN offered the following amendment No. A2867: Amend Title, page 1, line 1, by striking out "an amendment" and inserting amendments Amend Title, page 1, line 3, by removing the period after "right" and inserting - ; and eliminating judicial retention. Amend Sec. 1, page 1, line 6, by striking out "amendment" and inserting amendments Amend Sec. 1, page 1, line 7, by striking out "is" and inserting are Amend Sec. 1, page 1, line 8, by striking out all of said line and inserting (1) That section 6 of Article I be amended to read: Amend Sec. 1, page 1, by inserting between lines 15 and 16 (2) That sections 13(c) and 15(b) of Article V be amended to read: Election of justices, judges and justices of the peace; vacancies. * * * (c) [The provisions of section 13(b) shall not apply either in the case of a vacancy to be filled by retention election as provided in section 15(b), or in the case of a vacancy created by failure of a justice or judge to file a declaration for retention electiori as provided in section 15(b).] In the case of a vacancy occurring at the expiration of an appointive term under section 13(b), the vacancy shall be filled by election as provided in section 13(a). * * * tj 15. Tenure of justices, judges and justices of the peace. * * * (b) A justice or judge elected under section 13(a)[,] nr appointed under section 13(d) [or retained under this section 15(b)] may file a declaration of candidacy for [retention] election mxeekhm with the officer of the Commonwealth who under law shall have supervision over elections on or before the first Monday of January of the year preceding the year in which his term of office expires. If no declaration is filed, a vacancy shall exist upon the expiration of the term of office of such justice or judge, to be filled by election under section 13(a) or by appointment under section 13(d) if applicable. [If a justice or judge files a declaration, his name shall be submitted to the electors without party designation, on a separate judicial ballot or in a separate column on voting machines, at the municipal election immediately preceding the expiration of the term of office of the justice or judge, to determine only the question whether he shall be retained in office. If a majority is against retention, a vacancy shall exist upon the expiration of his term of office, to be filled by appointment under section 13(b) or under section 13(d) if applicable. If a majority favors retention, the justice or judge shall serve for the regular term of office provided herein, unless sooner removed or retired. At the expiration of each term a justice or judge shall be eligible for retention as provided herein, subject only to the retirement provisions of this article.] Amend Sec. 2, page 1, line 17, by striking out "this" and inserting these Amend Sec. 2, page 1, line 17, by striking out "amendment" and inserting amendments Amend Sec. 2, page 2, line 6, by striking out "this" and inserting these Amend Sec. 2, page 2, line 6, by striking out "amendment" and inserting amendments Amend Sec. 2, page 2, line 7, by striking out "this" and inserting each Amend Sec. 2, page 2, line 14, by striking out "this" and inserting each Amend Sec. 2, page 2, line 15, by striking out "this" and inserting each Will the House agree to the amendment? The SPEAKER. the Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. McGeehan. Mr. McGEEHAN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that I care very deeply about and I think every member of this House should also, because it really deals with the issue of fairness and accountability. Should members of the judiciary be held to the same standard, the same quotient of accountability as members of this House are? Mr. Speaker, I have seen too often in this Commonwealth and particularly in the city of Philadelphia the arrogance and the contempt that judges hold public opinion and the feelings of the majority of citizens in my city and around this State. And, Mr. Speaker, there is good reason for that arrogance, because in my memory, I believe there was one judge in 50 years, in the last 50 years, who has been defeated on a yes-or-no retention vote. Mr. Speaker, I think that demonstrates the fatal flaw in the system. Despite judicial misconduct, despite, in my opinion, a judiciary

28 1068 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 that is out of step with the majority feelings of this House and of the people that we represent, something is radically wrong with the system. Mr. Speaker, we have attempted to address some of the problems that all of us have seen in our judiciary system and in the way we elect judges. We have continually in this special session and before this pushed through mandatory sentences, and we did it, Mr. Speaker, for one reason: because we could not trust the judges that were being retained election after election after election, those same judges that were never defeated, who knew they were never going to be defeated because history demonstrated it, who said to victims and to law-abiding citizens and to this legislature, we do not care what you do; we do not care what you think; we are untouchable, because we do not have to face the voters like the members of the House and the Senate and our local governments and our National Government. Mr. Speaker, they have been removed from the everyday workings, from the everyday feelings, from the everyday experiences of our fellow citizens, and that is why, Mr. Speaker, we need to throw out the retention system when we select the members of our bench. Mr. Speaker, we need to elect those judges. We need them to be held to the same standard as the people in this legislature who go before the people, who argue their cases, who in the ultimate sense elect the best qualified person. Mr. Speaker, the current system is broken. We have solved half of the problem, Mr. Speaker, by passing time after time after time, forcing mandatory sentences on judges. We have addressed half of the problem. We can go the whole way, Mr. Speaker, by solving the problem completely and by letting judges stand before the voters and justify the sentences that they mete out to criminal defendants in this Commonwealth. AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN Mr. McGEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I care very deeply about this amendment. However, I know how important this bill is. I know how important this bill is to the future; I know how important this bill is to the District Attorneys Association and to, really, crime victims in this society. When we can place the rights of criminal defendants before the rights of victims, there is something wrong. And I want to applaud the prime sponsor of this bill and the District Attorneys Association for bringing this bill forward and addressing another serious problem, another case where the scales of justice are weighted in the favor of criminal defendants and away from victims. For that reason, Mr. Speaker, and because of the importance of SB 752, I want to withdraw this amendment. The SPEAKER. The Chair thanks the gentleman. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration? Mr. CLARK offered the following amendment No. A2770: Amend Sec 1. (Sec. 6), page 1, lines 14 and 15, by striking out all of said lines and inserting k_(lo-bavcksame*ta trialhwhfitheed Will the House agree to the amendment? The SPEAKER. On the amendment, the gentleman, Mr. Clark. Mr. CLARK. Mr. Speaker, this is a technical amendment to this bill in that it does not change the meaning of the bill or the intent of the bill but rather the wording so that it is more clear and concise, so that when it is placed on the ballot for approval by the voters as an amendment to our Constitution, it will be easy to understand and easy to read, and it simply states that "the Commonwealth shall have the same right to trial by jury as does the accused." I would urge all the members in the House who support this bill to likewise support this technical amendment. Thank you. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Cohen. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman, Mr. Clark, consent to interrogation? The SPEAKER. He will. You may begin. Mr. Clark, interrogation. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, will you go over again how this amendment changes the existing proposal that we have before us in SB 752? Mr. CLARK. This does not change the intent of the bill or the purpose of the bill or the ultimate outcome of the bill. What it does is it provides in clearer, more concise language exactly that the Commonwealth would have the same right to trial by jury as does the accused. I think the original language indicated that the Commonwealth needed to consent to a waiver of a defendant's claim to waive his trial by jury, and this primarily places the Commonwealth on equal footing with the accused. Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, what puzzles me and I believe puzzles Mr. Lloyd is that if two parties have equal rights, how do you decide when they want to take opposite positions? For instance, a defendant says, I do not want a jury trial, and the Commonwealth says, I want you to have a jury trial. So there are two parties with equal rights, and on one side, the Commonwealth, which is the local district attorney's office, says, I want you to have a jury trial, and the defendant says, I do not want to have a jury trial, and they have equal rights. How do we prevail in that situation in which two different people have equal rights? Mr. CLARK. Well, simply, the rights we are talking about are constitutional rights to a jury trial. The accused would have a constitutional right to a jury trial; the Commonwealth would have a constitutional right to a jury trial. An accused could waive his constitutional right, the Commonwealth would still maintain that right, or the Commonwealth could likewise waive its constitutional right, and then there would be a nonjury trial. So the question is not of equal rights. If they both exercise their full extent of their constitutional rights, then there would be a jury trial, which they each have individually. Mr. COHEN. So you are saying there shall be a jury trial if either party wants it? Is that what your conclusion is? Mr. CLARK. ~f either party-- Mr. COHEN. If either the Commonwealth, the local district attorney - if either the local district attorney or the defendant wants it, there will be a jury trial? Mr. CLARK. That is correct. '

29 Mr. COHEN. And what is the matter with the existing language in terms of producing that result? Mr. CLARK. I am not sure that there is any difference. The result is the same under the way the bill is printed now or under the amendment. That is why I called this amendment technical in nature. The outcome is the same. The wording is more clear, I think, when you put it before the voters. That the Commonwealth has a right to a jury trial as does the accused, I think, is an easier concept and an easier read for the voters of Pennsylvania than getting into waiving a right of a jury trial only with the consent of the Commonwealth. So I think this language is easier, understandable, but it still reaches the same conclusion as in the original bill. Mr. COHEN. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have no further questions. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Lloyd, would like to interrogate you, Mr. Clark. Mr. LLOYD. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to comment on the amendment. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Lloyd. Mr. LLOYD. Mr. Speaker, I intended to ask that same question. I guess it comes down to the issue of what is clearer. Personally, I think it is easier to explain to voters what is in the bill now than it would be to explain what happens if we put into the amendment the language which says that the Commonwealth has the same right to trial by jury as the accused. I think it is easier to explain to people that if the accused wants to waive his right to a jury trial, he has to get the consent of the district attorney. That is simpler. My concern is whether, when you put in language talking about the same right to trial by jury, whether that brings with it anything else. I appreciate what the gentleman says, that he thinks it is a technical amendment. I am going to vote against it for the reason that I think it makes it more complicated, not less. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On the question recurring, Will the House agree to the amendment? The following roll call was recorded: LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE Cornell Hess Platts Wright, M. N. Dempsey Hutchinson Raymond Zimmerman Dent Jadlowiec Reinard zug DiGirolamo Kenney Rohrer Druce King Rubley RY an, Durham Krebs Sather Speaker Bebko-Jones Belardi Belfanti Bishop Blaum Butkovitz Buxton Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Carone Cohen, L. I. Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Corpora Corrigan Cowell COY cuny Daley DeLuca Dermody DeWeese Donatucci Farmer Evans Gamble George Gigliotti Gordner Gruitza Haluska Hanna Horsey Itkin James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Keller Kirkland Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lederer Lescovitz Levdansky Lloyd Lucyk Manderino Roebuck Markosek Mayernik McCall McGeehan Melio Michlovic Mihalich Myers Olasz Oliver Pesci Petrarca Petrone Pistella Preston Ramos Readshaw Reber Rieger Roberts Robinson Rooney Rudy Sainato Santoni NOT VOTING4 Scrimenti Serafini Shaner Staback Steelman Stetler Sturla Surra Tangretti Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich Van Home Veon Vitali Walko Washington Williams Woniak Wright, D. R. Yewcic Youngblood The majority having voted in the affirmative, the question was determined in the affirmative and the amendment was agreed to. Will the House agree to the bill on third consideration as amended? Bill as amended was agreed to. Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Battisto Birmelin Boscola Boyes Brown Browne Bunt Cawley Chadwick Civera Clark Clymer Conti Egolf Fairchild Faj t Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gannon Geist Gladeck Godshall Gruppo Habay Harhart Hasay Haste Hennessey Herman Hershey Lawless Leh Lynch Maitland Major Marsico Masland McGill Mew Micozzie Miller Mundy Nailor Nickol Nyce O'Brien Perzel Pettit Phillips Pins Saylor Schroder Schuler Semmel Sheehan Smith. B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Stairs Steil Stem Stish Strittnlatter Taylor, E. Z. Taylor, J. True Tulli Vance Waugh Wogan The SPEAKER. This bill has been considered on three different days and agreed to and is now on final passage. The question is, shall the bill pass finally? The gentleman, Mr. Cohen. Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I would urge the defeat of this bill. This bill takes away a right of citizens - a right not to be tried by a jury. I do not think the result of the O.J. Simpson case was that everybody was really excited about the jury system. I think there was widespread criticism of the jury system. I think there is widespread criticism of many jury verdicts. A defendant may have a legitimate reason not to have a jury trial. This bill seeks to overrule a Supreme Court decision invalidating, on procedural grounds, a Pennsylvania law passed in That State Supreme Court decision passed in We have

30 1070 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 had 14 years of living with the unquestioned right of a citizen not to have a jury trial if the judge will agree with him. Before this bill came up, have you heard from large numbers of your constituents complaining about the terrible system we have - it is just terrible that people have a right not to have a jury trial? Is this a real issue of great importance? Do we just have to take away this right? The difference between the United States and other countries is that American citizens have rights, and I think we have to be very, very careful about taking rights away. This bill takes away one right. Other bills we have passed, largely dealing with benefits in this session, have taken away other rights. I would urge that we show some resistance to the idea that Pennsylvania citizens should have their rights taken away very easily, without any opposition from us. I would urge the defeat of this bill. I would urge that we support the concept that Pennsylvanians have rights in criminal proceedings, including the right not to have a jury trial when a judge agrees that that is a relevant and fair consideration in a case. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Vitali. Mr. VITALI. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to SB 752. I agree with the comments of Representative Cohen. I would just like to amplify them a little bit. I think that the accused does have certain rights and sometimes we forget that, and I think the goal of the criminal justice system is to do justice and I think sometimes we forget that. I just want to outline two scenarios where I think that justice would be served by allowing the accused, who, after all, is presumed innocent, to go nonjury. For example, you might have a fight; someone dies. The accused is charged with various degrees of homicide. You have murder% the first degree, murder in the second degree, murder in the third degree, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter. The penalties for each of these specific charges vary widely from death to a very short time of incarceration. Yet, all turns on the language, the subtle differences in language between each of these types of homicide. Juries, when they have to pick from this menu, do not really know what they are telling the judge to do. They do not really know whether they are requiring 20 years in jail or just a few months. They do not understand that distinction, and sometimes it is just a crapshoot. Sometimes it is better for the judge to be in a position to pick out the subtleties, and sometimes justice, because of the facts of the case, makes it better for the accused to want to have the judge as opposed to the jury work through the subtle differences in a situation such as that. The other second and related point is - and this is why many prosecutors want to take this right away - is some sets of facts simply inflame juries. Some defendants, although they have committed no crime or have committed a lesser degree of crime, because they have a particularly heinous demeanor about them or fall into certain categories that call them into disrepute, sometimes that makes it difficult for a jury to render a fair and impartial decision and sometimes it is better for a judge to look beyond that and to look strictly to the law which we have passed and they should apply. So I think that this is a very basic right we are dealing with, and I think that we should maintain this time-honored position of letting the accused choose whether he goes with a judge or with a jury. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The Chair thanks the gentleman. The gentleman, Mr. Clark. Mr. CLARK. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are not taking away any rights of a defendant. A defendant now has a right to a jury trial. If this constitutional amendment is passed, if the Commonwealth asks for a jury trial, the defendant will get a jury trial, which is just what the Constitution provides him. Now, according to some speakers, this is a benefit to the defendant. He can choose on which forum he wants to present his case. Well, what about the people of the Commonwealth? What about the victims? What about the witnesses of these crimes? What about the people who are going to be called in to testify at these crimes? Do they not deserve a right to have their case, to have their situation, to have this crime reviewed in front of a jury of peers and members from the community? We are not taking away a defendant's right to a jury trial. He has that right and will always have that right. What we are doing is taking away his right to have a judge decide his case instead of members from the community who make up a jury. I think that that is a step that the legislature should take, because victims have rights, witnesses have rights, and defendants should not forum-shop between jury trials or judges, depending on where they think that they can get the most lenient treatment or that they can get the best deal in this situation. This concept is not new in Pennsylvania. Prior to today's argument, a defendant could waive a jury trial so long as the judge approved and the prosecution consented, and that was the law in Pennsylvania since 1935, up until the Supreme Court decided that this was a procedural right and that they would promulgate the rules regarding rights to jury trials. In 1968 the Supreme Court changed those rights. They said that the waiver of a jury trial was a procedural right and not a substantive one. The Commonwealth, the legislature, the people of the Commonwealth, the victims of crime, have always had and have always wanted their day in court in front of a jury, and with the passage of this bill, we will move one step closer to providing them with that right through a constitutional amendment. I would urge everyone on the House floor to vote in favor of this bill. Thank you very much. The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Thomas. The gentleman, Mr. Dermody, on final passage? Mr. DERMODY. On final passage, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman is recognized. Mr. DERMODY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, once again we are dealing with a solution in search of a problem. I have never had any calls about this being a tremendous problem or concern to people in this Commonwealth. In the State of Pennsylvania, a defendant, the accused, has a right to a jury trial. Now, I have heard that one of the reasons we need this is because there is a problem with judge-shopping in Philadelphia. Well, if Philadelphia has a problem with judge-shopping, then let us have them administratively take care of their problem. I can speak for Allegheny County and most of the counties in this Commonwealth: there is no problem. Your case is assigned to a judge. On the day of trial, if you want a jury trial, you get your

31 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1071 jury trial, and if you want a judge trial, you get your judge trial. There is no forum-shopping. And if we are talking about problems for victims and witnesses, most oftentimes a judge trial saves victims the trauma of having to go testify. It saves the Commonwealth's taxpayers thousands of dollars for not having to go through a jury trial. There is not a problem in this State with forum-shopping. There is no problem with the accused having a right to waive their right to a jury trial and have a trial by judge. We are creating it here today. The Constitution should stay the same. The accused has a right to a jury trial, and that is the way it should remain. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Thomas. Mr. THOMAS. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I had waived off an opportunity to speak before, but I am almost compelled to say something. I come from Philadelphia County. I was born and raised in Philadelphia County. I enjoy living in Philadelphia County. And when I compare the population of Philadelphia County as compared to other counties, we contribute more to the Commonwealth coffers, we contribute more to electoral and other decisions in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania than any other county, and I resent the implication that you have an opportunity to forum-shop in Philadelphia County greater than any other opportunity that exists in Allegheny County, Lackawanna County, or any other county. Forum-shopping is not something- There is no proscription on forum-shopping. It is an open opportunity, and people utilize it in all counties, and so I do not want folks to leave here believing that Philadelphia County is the only place where people do forum-shopping. Thank you. The SPEAKER. The Chair thanks the gentleman. On the question recurring, Shall the bill pass finally? The SPEAKER. Agreeable to the provisions of the Constitution, the yeas and nays will now be taken. Conti Hutchinson Pi!% Waugh Cornell Jadlowiec Platts Wogan Corpora Kaiser Raymond Wozniak Corrigan Keller Readshaw Wright, D. R. COY Kenney Reinard Wright, M. N. Dent King Rohrer Zimmerman DiGirolamo Krebs Rubley zug Druce Laughlin Rudy Durham Lawless Santoni Ryan, Egolf Lederer Sather Speaker Bebko-Jones Bishop Butkovitz Buxton Cappabianca Cam Cohen, L. I. Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Cowell cuny Daley DeLuca Dempsey Dermody DeWeese Farmer Donatucci Evans George Gigliotti Gruitza Horsey Itkin James Jarolin Josephs Kirkland Kukovich LaGrotta Levdansky Lloyd Manderino Markosek Roebuck Melio Michlovic Mihalich Myers Olasz Oliver Pesci Phillips Pistella Preston Ramos Reber Rieger Roberts Robinson Rooney Sainato NOT VOTING4 Scrimenti Serafini Steelman Surra Tangretti Thomas Travagl io Trello Trich Veon Vitali Walk0 Washington Williams Yewcic Youngblood The majority required by the Constitution having voted in the affmative, the question was determined in the affmative and the bill passed finally. Ordered, That the clerk return the same to the Senate with the information that the House has passed the same with amendment in which the concurrence of the Senate is requested. Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Battisto Belardi Belfanti Birmelin Blaum Boscola Boyes Brown Browne Bunt Caltagirone Carone Cawley Chadwick Civera Clark Clymer Fairchild Fajt Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gamble Gannon Geist Gladeck Godshall Gordner G ~ P P ~ Habay Haluska Hanna Harhart Hasay Haste Hennessey Herman Hershey Hess Leh Lescovitz Lucyk Lynch Maitland Major Marsico Masland Mayemik McCall McGeehan McGill M~"Y Micozzie Miller Mundy Nailor Nickol Nyce 0' Brien Perzel Petrarca Petrone Pettit Saylor Schroder Schuler Semmel Shaner Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Staback Stairs Steil Stem Stetler Stish Strittmatter Sturla raylor, E. Z. Taylor, J. Tigue True Tulli Vance Van Home GUEST INTRODUCED The SPEAKER The Chair is pleased to welcome to the hall of the House, seated to the left of the Speaker, Rook Jones of Allentown, here today as the guest of Representative Charlie Dent. Would the gentleman please rise. HB 1302 RECONSIDERED The SPEAKER. The Chair has a motion before it from the gentleman, Mr. Phillips, who moves the vote by which HB 1302, PN 3584, was defeated on the 3d day of June 1996 be reconsidered. Will the House agree to the motion? The following roll call was recorded:

32 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE JUNE 3 BILL TABLED Adolph Allen Argall Armstrong Baker Bard Barley Battisto Bebko-Jones Belardi Be1 fanti Birmelin Bishop Blaum Boscola Boyes Brown Br~wne Bunt Butkovitz Buxton Caltagirone Cappabianca Cam Carone Cawley Chadwick Civera Clark Clymer Cohen, L. I. Cohen, M. Colafella Colaizzo Conti Comell Corpora Cortigan Cowell COY curry Daley DeLuca Dempsey Dent Dermody DeWeese DiGirolamo Donatucci Druce Durham Farmer Egolf Evans Fairchild Faj t Fargo Feese Fichter Fleagle Flick Gamble Gannon Geist George Gigliotti Gladeck Godshall Gordner Ciruitza GNPPO Habay Haluska Hanna Harhart Hasay Haste Hennessey Herman Hershey Hess Horsey Hutchinson ltkin Jadlowiec James Jarolin Josephs Kaiser Keller Kenney King Kirkland Krebs Kukovich LaGrotta Laughlin Lawless Lederer Leh Lescovitz Levdansky Lloyd ~ ~~ Roebuck Lucyk Lynch Maitland Major Manderino Markosek Marsico Masland Mayemik McCall McGeehan McGill Melio Merry Michlovic Micozzie Mihalich Miller Mundy Myers Nailor Nickol Nyce O'Brien Olasz Oliver Perzel Pesci Petrarca Petrone Pettit Phillips Pistella Pitts Platts Preston Ramos Raymond Readshaw Reber Reinard Rieger Roberts Robinson Rohrer Rooney Rubley Rudy Sainato Santoni Sather NOT VOTING4 Saylor Schroder Schuler Scrimenti Semmel Serafini Shaner Sheehan Smith, B. Smith, S. H. Snyder, D. W. Staback Stain Steelman Steil Stem Stetler Stish Strittmatter Sturla Surra Tangretti Taylor, E. Z. Taylor, J. Thomas Tigue Travaglio Trello Trich True Tulli Vance Van Home Veon Vitali Walk0 Washington Waugh Williams Wogan Wozniak Wright, D. R. Wright, M. N. Yewcic Youngblood Zimmerman zug RY an, Speaker - -- The majority having voted in the affirmative, the question was determined in the affirmative and the motion was agreed to. On the question recurring, Shall the bill pass finally? I The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Perzel. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, I move that HB 1302 be placed " upon the table Will the House agree to the motion? Motion was agreed to. PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY ADDITIONS OF SPONSORS The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the Democratic floor leader, Mr. DeWeese. Mr. DeWEESE. Mr. Speaker, on HR 39 1, HR 39 1, there are many people on both sides of the aisle that would like to cosponsor that resolution. What, sir, would be the proper mechanism for all of us to at least gain access to sponsorship of HR 391, prime-sponsored by Speaker Ryan and cosponsored by myself, dealing with the Congressional Medal of Honor recipients that we will be honoring in Pennsylvania very soon? The SPEAKER. Mr. DeWeese, there are one of two things we can do. We can leave it at the desk, or we can add everyone as a sponsor and anyone who does not want to be a sponsor should advise the clerk and their name will not be listed. Which way shall we go? Add everyone? Mr. DeWEESE. If there is no objection, I would ask for the second one. The SPEAKER. Okay. It is nice to see us working together. HOUSE SCHEDULE Mr. DeWEESE. One last point of inquiry to the Chair or to the Republican floor leader. The next two days, to the best of his knowledge, we have been getting some different reports. If we could just get a scheduling update. The gentleman has shared it with many of us, but I would like him to share it for the other members, to the best of his kfio'*ledge A:- rula is a problematic week relative to scheduling and it will be that way throughout the month. The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the majority leader, Mr. Perzel. Mr. PERZEL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. Anyone interested in the next several weeks' activities should probably listen. Mr. PERZEL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the members have already received the schedule for tomorrow, but the Appropriations Committee tomorrow will be voting out the Governor's budget as is, and at that time on Wednesday, they can have amendments drafted up to that bill. We will keep the desk open until Friday to allow all the members of the General Assembly to draft whatever amendments they would like to have drafted to the budget document itself. We intend to run an amendment to the rules which would say that every member that took money, the money would have to come from another department within the budget in order to be

33 1996 LEGISLATIVE JO URNAL - HOUSE 1073 able to fund one of the programs that the members would come up with. That was done several years ago. We would like to see that done again. It is called the Manderino rule. It is what Jim Manderino did. It was a fair way to do it. The budget document has roughly $16.2 billion. We cannot go over that. It would be our intention to do that, to run that budget bill next week. We will start it on Monday and we will go until we are done, Mr. Speaker. PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY Mr. LLOYD. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Lloyd. Mr. LLOYD. Mr. Speaker, if we are going to start with the Governor's budget number, that assumed a $60-million tax decrease, and some of us believe that there are needs of State government which should be paid for before we do any tax decreases. If you could explain to me procedurally what kind of an amendment I am going to have to order so that whatever line items I want to fund in a more generous amount out of the tax decrease money, that that amendment would be in order. The SPEAKER. The Chair yields to the gentleman, Mr. Perzel, because I have not seen the amendments nor have I seen the temporary rules. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, as a lot of the members of the General Assembly do know, the $60 million was coming from the resecuritization of the Sunny Day Fund, and that is where the money was coming from. That would be done in a separate document. It would take a Tax Code bill to do that, to be able to cut that tax. Mr. LLOYD. Mr. Speaker, if I want to use that money for some purpose other than tax cuts, do I need to put something into this budget authorizing or directing the sale of the notes that we hold in the Sunny Day Fund and then turn around in another line item and spend some of the money? Mr. PERZEL. I was told it would be done by legislative intent within the amendment, but Mr. Rosenstein from our Appropriations Committee is here, and I will make a clarification of that statement. The SPEAKER. Without having adopted the rules, it is difficult to answer, but our impression, based on your question, is that it would be out of order, what you have suggested. Mr. LLOYD. Well, Mr. Speaker, are we going to then have an opportunity to amend the rule, and if so, when are those amendments due and when do we have a copy of the rule? The SPEAKER. Well, I believe the gentleman, Mr. Perzel, said that the question of changing the rule would take place tomorrow. Mr. PERZEL. Yes, Mr. Speaker. We have the rule in the Reference Bureau right now being drafted, and we expect it to be down any minute, and we will be glad to get a copy around to all the members so they can see it. Mr. LLOYD. So then, Mr. Speaker, it would be fair to assume that the Democratic staff will have access to that tonight so that amendments could be prepared to be offered tomorrow. Mr. PERZEL. Yes. Mr. LLOYD. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Thomas. Mr. THOMAS. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if this is the wrong time to raise this question, then I will withdraw it, but since the earlier speaker raised it, it became very important, and that is, my first question is whether or not in the proposed budget that is coming out of the Appropriations Committee tomorrow, whether that budget includes the $60 million for the $60-million reduction in taxes. That is the first part of the question. The SPEAKER. You are right; it is too early to answer that. Mr. THOMAS. Then maybe the second question can be answered, as we look forward with respect to dealing with this issue. I talked to the Revenue Department a couple weeks ago, and I was very much concerned about, one, who were the beneficiaries of the $279-million reduction that was provided for in last year's budget, with an eye towards who would be the beneficiaries of a proposed reduction in this year's budget, and the Revenue Department indicated that they have no way of knowing who benefits from this proposed tax reduction. And my question is, is there any way possible for those of this body that would be supporting this reduction in taxes, do they have any way of knowing or can they have some way of knowing who will ultimately benefit fiom the reduction in taxes? The SPEAKER. Mr. Thomas, there is no legislation pending. At such time as legislation is on the floor that does that, read it, is all I can say. I mean, I am not going to guess at it and I am not the proper one to be interrogated on it and no one can answer it. Mr. THOMAS. Well, I understand that when the document comes forward, we will have an opportunity to read it and respond, but I guess looking prospectively at this issue, whoever would have responsibility for at least identifying who will ultimately benefit from a particular line item in the budget, maybe they can, you know, start to take a look at that and be able to provide that when we begin to discuss this issue. I was just thinking prospectively. Thank you. The SPEAKER. Mr. Sturla. Mr. STURLA. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, a line of questioning similar to what Representative Lloyd had originally gone down, although in a different vein perhaps. The nonpreferred appropriations being separate bills, under the rule that the majority leader is proposing, would we be able to substitute moneys fiom nonpreferred appropriations for line items in the budget? Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, I would- The SPEAKER. Assuming the rule that is adopted is similar to that that was adopted some years ago termed the Manderino amendment to our rules, it would be inappropriate to do it because it was separate legislation. Mr. STURLA. Then if I could follow up with another question to the majority leader. Do we have or do you know at this point in time which order we will be running bills in? Will we be running nonpreferred appropriations first and then the budget bill or will we be running the budget bill and then nonpreferred appropriations so that we know at some point in time whether we can, regardless of any rule, substitute various moneys if in fact nonpreferred appropriations do not gain a two-thirds majority vote? Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker?

34 The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Perzel. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, we will be running the general appropriations act first. Mr. STURLA. And if I could just make a comment then, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. Under unanimous consent, the gentleman is in order. Mr. STURLA. I guess my concern is that then at that point in time, nonpreferred appropriations moneys that do not get spent will simply be left in the General Fund somewhere, I would assume. And I guess I would just urge that we perhaps run some of the nonpreferreds first as opposed to doing it the other way, because I think there might be some abilities to shift some moneys there. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. DeWeese. Mr. DeWEESE. Just a point, Mr. Speaker. It is worthy of note that the floor leader and indeed the Speaker from the dais has invoked the name of one of the great floor leaders on this side of the aisle, the gentleman, Mr. Manderino. If we are indeed going to do justice to that retrospection, we should remember that in the Manderino rule, there was a proviso that no money would be cut from the welfare budget. I just allow the members of the Grand Old Party to be aware of that history, of that lineage, and of the inspiration that gives to those of us on our side of the aisle. LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Blaum. Mr. BLAUM. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just ask the majority leader to correct me if I am wrong in my interpretation. Tomorrow we will be given a rule. In light of 1, *,..,,... :11,. I...Ll,*,..,,-A &L-&-.I, &,,.I, IVU. ~ L U IS I ~UIIIIIICIILD, ~ wc WIII uc aulc LU ~IIICIIU illai IUIG LU uu the things perhaps Mr. Sturla would like to do dealing with nonpreferreds or other things. We will also, I assume, be able to offer amendments to the proposed rule to make it more to our liking. Is that correct? The SPEAKER. I hate to jump into the fray a day early, but, yes. Mr. BLAUM. Okay. The SPEAKER. When the amendment- It will be necessary for the rules of the House to be suspended to consider a rule change. At such time, other amendments could be considered. Mr. BLAUM. To that rule. To the proposed change. The SPEAKER. To that rule. Mr. BLAUM. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. Unless the motion to suspend - and I am just guessing this; I have not thought this out - unless the motion to suspend is very narrow. We really have to wait until tomorrow morning. I am just suggesting that that possibility exists. Mr. BLAUM. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, then I would ask if the majority leader would kindly stand for a parliamentary inquiry so that I may ask his intent in offering the proposed change to our rules. My question to the gentleman, Mr. Perzel, is, will the members of the House be permitted to offer amendments to the proposed rule that will be put forward tomorrow? PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Druce. For what purpose does the gentleman rise? Mr. DRUCE. Mr. Speaker, may I raise a point of parliamentary ' inquiry, please? The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. DRUCE. Just so I am clear, Mr. Speaker, it would seem to me that if we have rules of the House and someone were to offer an amendment to those rules, I am not clear why it is that any other member would have an opportunity to amend what is in essence an amendment, and it would seem to me that members should then offer their own amendment, not amend an amendment to the existing rules. The SPEAKER. We probably should not haw started this discussion when we have nothing before us. I am assuming that what is going to be offered is a resolution to amend, and that resolution is subject to amendment. Mr. DRUCE. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. One more bite. Mr. BLAUM. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman, Mr. Perzel, would say that, I would be extremely happy. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, we were simply trying to provide information for the members of the General Assembly as to not bring it up at the last second and hear that we tried to run over everyone with a freight train. We are intending to adopt the Manderino amendment or the Manderino rule for this budget process, Mr. Speaker, a little bit of a liberalized version, which we will get into tomorrow, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. Mr. BLAUM. Mr. Speaker, my question is, when that resoiution is put forward, my question to the gentleman, Mr. Perzel, is, will we be allowed to amend it? I am asking for the gentleman's intent. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, you will be afforded the same courtesy that Mr. Manderino afforded everyone else in this General Assembly. Thank you. Mr. BLAUM. Mr. Speaker, again, I think, you know, the members of the House just want to be clear as to what the process will be, and I think it is a simple yes-or-no answer. When the resolution is put forward, will the members of the House be allowed to offer amendments to it? Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker? The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman, Mr. Snyder, seek, recognition? Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, I was just asking parliamentary ' procedure. There is no business before us right now, and unless people ask for a personal privilege, what are we debating? The SPEAKER. I was making an announcement. Mr. MIHALICH. Mr. Speaker? The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Mihalich. Mr. MII-IALICI-I. Mr. Speaker, would it be permissible for me now to ask one question of the Appropriations chairman relative to the outline- The SPEAKER. He does not appear to be on the floor at the moment. Mr. MIHALICH. Perhaps the majority leader can answer my question.

35 1996 LEGISLATIVE JOURNAL - HOUSE 1075 To save some time, Mr. Speaker, I am seeking to find out if they have a vehicle for the budget, and if they do, I would like to get started early to prepare my amendments. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, there is no bill at this current time. There is no way to amend something that we do not have before US. Mr. MIHALICH. Well, let me ask the question in the negative. Then you are telling me that HB 2661, PN 3631, is not the vehicle? Mr. PERZEL. It is in the Appropriations Committee. It should be coming out. If you would like to draw your amendments to it, you are welcome to, but I would wait for it to come out of committee to get the proper printer's number. Mr. MIHALICH. Well, then your answer is that HB 2661, PN 363 1, is not the vehicle? Mr. PERZEL. We believe that to be the vehicle, Mr. Speaker, if the Appropriations Committee passes that tomorrow. Mr. MIHALICH. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The Chair thanks the gentleman. The gentleman, Mr. DeWeese. Mr. DeWEESE. Mr. Speaker, again, just for clarification, what time are we going to meet on the floor of the House tomorrow? I have three quick questions. They are very simple. The SPEAKER. It would be the intention of the Chair that we would go in at the regular time - 11 o'clock. The gentleman, Mr. Perzel. Mr. PERZEL. At that time, Mr. Speaker, we would like to recess and come back at 1 o'clock. Mr. DeWEESE. So for all intents and purposes, we will commence with voting at 1 in the afternoon. My second question: Understanding what I have just heard, we still will have the opportunity up until 2 o'clock or so on Friday to draft amendments- Mr. PERZEL. Until Friday, yes. Mr. DeWEESE. On Friday we will have the opportunity, our caucus and yours, to draft amendments for the budget debate of next week - up until midafternoon on Friday. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, the rules of the House say Wednesday, but as a courtesy and to not catch your members by surprise, we are extending that until Friday, Mr. Speaker. Mr. DeWEESE. I would thank the gentleman for his magnanimity. One other comment, or I guess it is a question also. The draft of the rules change I would assume would be proffered to our staff this evening so that we might be able to look at it tonight, the change that would be called the Manderino rule. Could we have a copy of that tonight so that our staff may look at it? Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker, as soon as it comes down from Reference Bureau, we will be glad to supply a copy to the minority leader. We do not have it as of yet, Mr. Speaker. Mr. DeWEESE. But it is the gentleman's intention to try to get it to us this evening sometime? I take the nod in the affirmative as a positive response. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker? The SPEAKER. Mr. Perzel. Mr. PERZEL. Yes, Mr. Speaker. Mr. DeWEESE. The Chair thanks the gentleman, or the gentleman thanks the Chair, or I am very grateful. Mr. PERZEL. Mr. Speaker? The SPEAKER. Mr. Perzel. Mr. PERZEL. Just for the information of the members, I did sit down with the minority leader to explain the process and what we were trying to do. Had he had these questions then, I was more than willing and glad to answer them. I was not trying to be secretive, Mr. Speaker. Mr. DeWEESE. No. I was just mixed up, and I appreciate the clarification. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. REPUBLICAN CAUCUS The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Fargo. Mr. FARGO. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just remind the Republican members that we will have a caucus tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock; 10 o'clock. Thank you. DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS The SPEAKER. Mr. Cohen. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Similarly, I would like to remind the Democratic members there will be a 10 o'clock caucus tomorrow on the budget and other related matters. COMMERCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING The SPEAKER. Mr. Hasay. Mr. HASAY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow the House Commerce Committee will meet sometime after we break after the 1 o'clock hour on the same legislation we discussed at today's meeting, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. The SPEAKER. Mr. Hasay, for purposes of the Sunshine Act we will change your committee meeting to immediately upon the break after the 1 o'clock voting session. Thank you. VOTE CORRECTIONS The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Kirkland. Mr. KIRKLAND. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to correct the record. The SPEAKER. The gentleman is in order. Mr. KIRKLAND. Mr. Speaker, on HB 1302 I was recorded in the aff~rmative and would like to be recorded in the negative. The SPEAKER. The remarks of the gentleman will be spread upon the record. Mr. KIRKLAND. Thank you, sir. The SPEAKER. The gentleman, Mr. Myers. Mr. MYERS. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to correct the record. I would like to take you back to May 21, SB 284, amendment No I was recorded as nonvoting. I would like to be recorded in the affirmative. The SPEAKER. The remarks of the gentleman will be spread upon the record.