From ou statehouse studio in Montgomery.

I'm Todd Stacey, welcome to Capitol Journal.

Today was committee day in the legislature.

As the 2025 regula session is in its final stretch.

We'll start in the House Judiciary Committee, where a public hearing over parole board legislation lasted for almost two hours.

Lawmakers are considering Hous Bill I'm sorry, Senate Bill 324 from State Senator Clyde Chambliss, which would increase the number of seats on the Board of Pardons and Paroles from 3 to 5 and make the chair selected by the board instead of the governor.

Some see the change as needed, given some dysfunctio the board has seen, while others see it as a back door way to increase the parole rate.

The law says that those guidelines are to be updated periodically, and the law says that they have to do that.

Well, they've not done that.

And a matter of fact, they only adhere to those guidelines 20% of the time.

Now, that is not the parole rate.

I'm not focused on the parole rate.

My focus is if we as government write the rules, we as a government should follow the rules.

And if we as a government ar not going to follow the rules, we should change the rules to what we're going to do.

People need to know we are asking you to vote against this bill.

I think just offering a different perspective.

When we were over here in 2010, working on the parole board reforms, a really important clause was added to their statute that said that the board's paramount duty is to promote public safety.

And right now, our In-custody prison population is about 80% violent.

Excuse me, 85% violent.

So the candidates coming up for parole, don't make it easy for them to find a lot of people to parole, but the fact that we don't have any oversight means that those folks, specifically the chair, can ignore the law, and there is no recourse.

So that's the point.

That's why we're here.

And again, we have to move those deadlines now because we were flat out ignored.

That bill was eventually advanced by the committee and will now go to the full House in the Senate Judiciary Committee today, a vote on a measure called the Back to Blue Legal Protection Act.

House Bill 202 from State Representative Rex Reynolds, would grant law enforcement officers legal immunity when they use force deemed constitutional and within the scope of their duties.

It would also create a process for judges to decid before trial whether an officer is immune from prosecution or civil liability.

Supporters say the bill strengthens protectio for officers who face dangerous high pressure situations and brings Alabama law in line with federal standards.

But critics argu it could reduce accountability and lead to more deadly encounters, particularly for black Alabamians.

In the end, the bill advanced along party lines.

Law enforcement officer who use force constitutionally while carrying out their duties are immune from prosecution.

Again, law enforcement officers are not immune.

Not immune for any unconstitutional use of force during execution of their duties, so they operate outside the scope of their duties.

They have no coverage.

It is a green light, like I see it.

To kill black people.

And only black folks with is green light to kill them.

As chair was saying but I'm happy that I did times.

But the escalation force, as I see this right here, opens the green light for them to do anything and their discretion, they can walk in here now and in their discretion, they look at me and they say, you know, hey, he looked like a threat to m and bam doesn't care about me.

In the Senate Education Policy Committee, lawmakers considered an advanced and controversial bill regarding gender ideology in schools.

House Bill 244 from State Representative Matt Butler would prohibit public schoo employees from discussing gender identity with students in grades pre-K through 12.

This sparked plenty of debate in committee, with supporters saying the measure protect traditional values and parental rights, and critics arguin that it's a political overreach that could further isolate gay and lesbian students.

Despite Clearing Committee committee chairman Don Steen voiced skepticism that the bill would make it to the Senate floor before the session ends.

When a student enters a school, they still carry with them their First Amendment rights.

They can absolutely talk to a nurse, a teacher, a counselor, whoever they want.

This is banning classroom discussions of such.

It also includes, prohibitions on sexual insignia like a pride flag.

This is a bill that does not accomplish anything besides further creating an atmosphere of fea and uncertainty in school kids and in middle school and high school are aware that gay and transgender people exist as they have access to the internet.

Additionally, some of them are gay and transgender, attempting to stifle discussions of such topic will not change these realities.

This does align with President Trump's executive order, and just recently we had almost 40,00 applications for the Choose act.

That tells you there is clearly a dissatisfaction with what we're doing in the public education.

If we lean back on some of what this legislation grows out of, it grows out of those two commandments, and that it basically where it says, love thy neighbor as thysel and grow, you know, that peace.

And so a part of this for us, I hope, is not making others feel in any way alienated and invalidating, not all making promises as t where this bill goes from here.

I appreciate your work on this, but, if you don't brin something like this next year, you need to get it early.

So that we're not backed up with all the House bills that that we currently have.

Before we try to move forward.

Anything like this.

And in the House Education Policy Committee, lawmakers considered legislation that would require schools to include twice in a student's career instruction on life choices that lead to better outcomes.

Senate Bill 289 is sponsored by State Senator Arthur or, but is being carried in the House by State Representative Danny Garrett.

We are a 21% of our state at least is in poverty 40.

We are 45th in the country in terms of family stability.

45.3% of the children born in Alabama are born to unwed mothers.

And we also that was 35% 20 years ago.

So we're on a bad trend here.

This bill basically takes data.

It's not values that it's trying to impose on anybody.

But take statistical data and said there's three things you can do in this order that will minimize your likely the likelihood that you will have a life in poverty.

Number one is graduate high school.

The next thing is get a job.

And the third thing is marry before you have children.

What this bill does is require school boards to set a policy to age appropriate for any, any grade, any age to, t to teach those three sequences twice before they graduate high school.

So you do it in the fifth grade in the Assembly.

You can have a curriculu you want to do more frequently, but you can do it in the fifth grade or the 10th grade, just twic for that graduate high school.

Tell somebody, if you do these three things in these orders, your life just might turn out better.

From a economic standpoint.

That bill advance and now goes to the full House.

And finally, tonight, Alabama lawmakers are moving forward with significant changes to the state's grocery tax, aiming to provide relief to residents and grant more autonomy to local governments.

This morning, the Senate Finance and Taxation Education Committee approved a substitute version of House Bill 386, which not only accelerates the reduction of the state's grocery tax, but also incorporates provisions clarifying the authority of local governments regarding their own sales tax on food.

House Bill 336 is sponsore by Representative Danny Garrett.

It would reduce the state sales tax on groceries from 3% to 2%, effective on September 1st.

This move builds upon the 2023 legislation that lowered the tax from 4% to 3%.

It goes ahead and removes the second penny on the grocery tax.

And then at that time, it, includes the contents of House Bill 387.

So what this substitute does is basically combine House Bill 387.

And that's the one for the locals.

You know, there's been that dispute about the locals ability to drop a penn on their groceries or whatnot.

This clarifies all tha and gives the local governments the authority to do that if they so choose to do it incrementally, as opposed to one fell swoop, that they can do it like we're doing here in Montgomery.

We'll be right back with tonight's guests.

You can watch past episodes of Capital Journal online at Video adaptive.org.

Capital Journal episodes are also available on AP TV's free mobile app.

You can also connect with Capital Journal and link to past episodes o Capital Journals Facebook page, and you can listen to past episodes of Capital Journal.

When you're driving or on the go with Capital Journal podcast.

Keep up with what's happening with Capital Journal.

Welcome back to Capitol Journal.

Joining me next is State Representative Jamie Keel from Russellville.

Representative thanks for coming on the show.

Thank you for having me.

Been a long session has been and you've got some pretty interesting legislation moving through the process.

We're getting toward the end here.

You had a bill on the floor last night I wanted to ask you about has to do with masking, especially as it has to do with protests.

We've seen a lot of these protests on college campuses and a lot of students.

Mast you got legislation addressing this kind of walk me through it.

Sure.

Well, the issue here is when someone's at a protests currently if they have on a medical mask, they do not feel inclined to, to pull it down to, to identify themselves to a police officer.

And so that's what this bill simply does, is if you're wearing a surgical mask or a, mask that you that you might portray is for health care purposes, that you pull that down.

So an officer could add to you.

Okay.

You had some opposition to it on the floor, you know, saying it violate First Amendment or healthcare, you know, rights and things like that.

How do you respond to those arguments?

Well, I think it' a misunderstanding of the bill.

I think that is really a public safety bill.

We have people coming on to college campuses, doing the protests, and I think they're hiding behind the masks.

They're not necessarily using the mask for health purposes.

I see.

Well, so it's gone to the Senate and one of many House bills that are, getting ready to, get in line.

I guess you're in it.

Another bill you have has to do with, notifying parent if their children get a ticket.

And this is known as TJ's law.

What are we through the history of this?

Well, what I what I found out was, is that my daughter could be driving my car, my insurance, burning my gas.

I'm liable for her.

She could get a ticket, get pulled over for a ticket, and I would never know about it because she has a job, she could pay her own ticket and so I would never know about it.

And a friend of mine from high school, her son, was killed in a car wreck.

TJ Morgan, he was killed in a car wreck.

He was not wearing his seat belt.

And after he had passed away, his mom, April Davis, was cleaning out his bedroom and found three traffic tickets from when he was, a minor.

And they were all seat belt tickets.

And so she reached out to me, and I just never realized that a parent would not know if their child got a ticket or not.

And she wanted to be abl to help other children and other parents correct their children if they had this issue.

And so, it's a very simple ask of law enforcement is to attemp to contact a parent or guardian.

If a minor's pulled over, they're not required to actuall make contact, just to attempt.

And so it's a very low bar and it's a very small ask for for the safety of our children.

But the thought being you know, had that parent known, had that parent known specifically on the seatbelt thing, there would have bee some opportunity to intervene?

Well, April said this morning in, committee that she always wears her seat belt, always made her son wear his seat belt.

And had she known that he was not wearing his seat belt, she could have taken his keys.

The second time, she could have stopped you from driving as her car.

And so, she just wants to to make that available to parents going forward, tha we can correct our own children if there's if there's an issue there.

It's a tragic way to you know, go about that.

I mean is it's a tragic circumstance but common sense law.

What's the prospects of it passing through the Senate.

Well it passed Senate Judiciary Committee this morning on a voice vote.

And I'm very hopeful it gets on the floor.

I think what senators look at what we're actually asking of law enforcement, which is only to make a attempt, a phone call, a text, a letter in the mail if it comes from the agency, whatever the attempt is, is fine with us.

Just so there's an attempt made to notify the parent.

Now, doe that include college campuses?

Because I'm thinking, like, there's a lot of 17 year olds that'll go to college and maybe they get a ticket on campus or something.

Is that any consideration?

It is.

I work with the college campuses.

So a 17 year old college campus, if they get a traffic infraction, their parent would be notified.

However, if it's a parking ticket, that's not what we're after here.

Okay?

We're after seatbelts, speeding, reckless driving, all the things that, someone who's younger, they may not see the health risk in doing, but obviously, April v assault sees the health risk.

Now, with her son who has passed away.

We'll be watching that, somewhat related in terms of driving.

But this also has to do with immigration, your bill having to do with impounding vehicles.

If someone is pulled ove and they don't have the proper, identification.

Sure.

What we through what this what the point behind it?

Well, many cities already had this as an ordinance.

Russellville, where I live, for instance, we have an ordinance now that if a police officer pulls over someone who does not have a driver's license and not just in their possession, but they do not have a they have not had and do not have a driver's license because you can look up somebody, you know.

Yeah, they can look it up on the database and find out if somebody actually has a driver's license.

But if they do not have one, then they have the option to impound that vehicle.

I mean, you don't need to just ticket somebody and let them keep driving if they do not have a driver's license.

And so, that that's what I'm asking for.

Our other law enforcement officers across the state, that could happen in a city, but countie typically do not have home rule and cannot make those laws on their own or ordinances on their own.

And so I want to give that enforcement power to officers that if they run across somebody that, that does not have a driver's license and has not had a driver's license, they're driving illegally, that they can impound the car and not let them proceed to drive.

And is the thought partly that it could crack down on illegal immigrants who don't have driver's licenses?

You know, continuing to operate vehicles in the state?

Oh, sure.

I mean, anybody that does not have a driver's license.

And if you're here illegally, you do not have a driver's license.

And so, anyone that does not have a driver's losses, they don't care to abide by our laws.

I have to go get a driver's license, and you have to go get one.

And you're the people watching.

They had to go take a test and pay a fee, and they have to renew that.

They're following the law to be able to drive.

And so all we're asking i for everybody to follow the law.

And if you don't, you don't need to continue to drive.

Well, again, let me ask you what were its prospects in the Senate.

Same thing.

It's ready for the Senate floor.

I feel very good about getting that on.

It's part of our immigration package.

And so I feel like that we're going to, make a strong statemen and pass those bills this time, like many bills, it's waiting.

The Senate being so slow, it's really, up in the air in terms of what can kind of actually get to the floor and pass with so little time.

Absolutely.

Well, we're out of time.

Representative, thanks again for coming on.

I look forward to having you back.

Maybe after session, because we there's so much on the education front that you've been involved in, in that committee.

Not enough time today, but I hope you'll come back.

I'd be glad to take your time.

We'll be right back.

You can watch past episodes of Capital Journal online any time at Alabama Public Television's website.

aptv.org.

Click on the online video tab on the main page.

You can also connect with Capital Journal and link to past episodes on Capital Journal's Facebook page.

Alabama Public Television is your place for quality educational services.

Free professional development for educators and childcare providers with access to free, curriculum aligned videos, lesson plans and instructional resources with PBS Learning Media and all the PBS kids programs, parents know and trust.

Learn something new every da with Alabama Public Television.

Visit us at AP tv.org/education to learn more.

Welcome back to Capitol Journal.

Joining me next is state Representative Laura Hall from Huntsville.

Representative thanks for coming on the show.

Thanks for having me.

Well, we've got a lot to get to, but I wanted to first ask you.

It's been my observation over the years.

Watching you in the house.

You have a unique role.

You kind of hold everybody accountable in terms of if a bill is coming to the floor, you're going to make sure tha they get asked questions, right.

You draw out the information.

So could you kind of talk about that.

While that's your kind of rol in the House of Representatives?

Well, it really started out.

I've always been one that's been interested in making sure that the information that I'm voting on, I want to make sure I have all of the information in.

It was, a few year after I was in the legislature.

There was a bill that was introduced that the governor said that, that many people didn't kno what that what was in the bill.

I, I think they call it central to where they wanted that.

Six, six, six.

Bill but it was a large bill.

I mean, it was many pages.

And when the media, when he was questioned, the person was questioned.

They ask him, why?

Why are more people aware and he said they just didn't read the bill.

And that was one of those days when I had not really gone to read the bill, had not asked any question.

I had not talked to anyone because I was new in the legislature, and I decided that day I will never again be accused of not reading a bill.

All this bill and effort in making sure that that raised questions abou what may be present in the bill.

It's just interestin because when your light comes on and they see you coming to the mic, they know, oh, I better have my I better have my ducks in a row and know what my bill does, and I enjoy it.

I mean, it's not, anything that is, vindictive or.

But it is intentional.

Well, intended to make sure that the information that we have been provided is what I've heard.

Yeah I think that's well understood that you're not doing a performative thing.

And that's why I think it's interesting.

I wanted to also ask you about the issue of education.

You're an educator, a lifelong educator yourself.

Lots of happening o the education front right now.

You've got a pretty healthy budget, another record.

You've got the Raise act that has the student funding formulas in it.

How and yet you've got the Choose act, which I think you opposed.

It's going to be implemented.

How would you you know, comment on the state of education right now in Alabama, how we're faring?

Well, I would say right now we are 5050.

We are certainly doin a good job in terms of raising, the process or changing the process by which we fund district and making sure those districts that do not have adequate funds are funds that we think that would adequately addres the education of our children, that those fund are being changed based on the poverty level, etc..

The other side of tha is that we could do even more, I believe, if we were not funding or providing funds for people to send their children to private schools, I think those funds could be used to provide services that many of those children need in those poverty areas that I just mentioned.

Talking of the choose to choose.

Yes.

So I think that we have on that side, I think that we ar certainly addressing the issue, but how much better could we address the issue if we had all of those funds going into our schools and making them the school that would meet the needs of our children?

What's been the feedback from your district?

Have there been parents that are curiou about utilizing the Choose act?

I mean, what are the wha was the feedback you've heard?

So there there are parents, there are community parents dearly are going to say if there is an opportunity and they see that their chil is going to benefit from that, they are certainly going to utilize it to that.

You can't blame them for that.

But on the other side, their parents that are saying, I want to make sure I want my chil to stay in the public schools, I want my child to have a teacher that is prepare and ready to meet that my child, a teacher that is going to believe that my child can learn like every other child.

And so that's the the that's t me is the most important thing.

A child walks into the classroom.

There should be a teacher that is saying welcome.

And we are going to provide what all of the resources that you need to make sure that you are successful.

Switching gears, I wanted t ask you about your legislation having to d with the Alabama coat of arms.

It's no secret on our coat of arm we've got the flags of all the, I guess nations if you will, British, Spanish, French.

But also the Confederate flag is right there.

And we know what that symbol can really mean.

And, have that connotation.

So your bill.

Well, what would your bill do?

So my bill really would have bring forth what we call the historical perspective in terms of the flag.

And it has been because the hearing that I had not last year, but the year before, many of those comments were raised from people that was in opposition to having the change, of the seal.

And so the idea is to include everybody, doctor Murray from the Department of State, History and Archives, Mister Barry Madsen, who is with, the Indians Commission.

Speaker Pro tem, has also been involved in the conversation.

And there are other individuals that have been a part of the conversation the past couple of years.

That idea is hopefully the effort we com and bring before the body is one that is going to be historically correct.

And that's our ultimate goal.

So you think this is probably a conversation for another session?

Yes, it definitely is.

Because the conversation we're at the point now where I feel that the conversation is really in a good place, but not to the point that we would have educated the legislators to that they would be clear and not be fearful about making the decision.

Well, sure.

And it's been a big deal over the years.

I mean, it was the early 90s when the flag came down off the Capitol, right?

It was the, I guess, 20 tens when the flags came down over here.

That's right.

And so but every time that seal was anywhere, you know, it's a it's small, but it's there and it's, there's that part of it is just that that symbol is not something we want.

Well, that is and that really I started this process because it was a state trooper that came to me and said, I have been a state trooper for almost ready to retire.

But one of the greatest challenge I have every day when I put this civil, because it's right there on his arm, is is the seal and what can we do about it?

And that's when we started the process.

Well, I will certainly want to follow that.

Going forward.

So we're out of time.

But thanks for your time.

My pleasure.

Good luck the rest of this session.

Thank you.

It's going to go fast.

Thank you very much.

We'll be right back.

You can watch past episodes of Capital Journal online at Video adaptive.org.

Capital Journal episodes are also available on AP TV's free mobile app.

You can also connect with Capital Journal and link to past episodes o Capital Journals Facebook page, and you can listen to past episodes of Capital Journal.

When you're driving or on the go with Capital Journal podcast.

That's our show for tonight.

Thanks for watching.

We'll be back tomorrow night at the same time, with more coverage of the legislature here on Alabama Public Television.

For our Capital Journal team, I'm Todd Stacey.

We'll see you next time.