Senate Bill No. 229, entitled

A bill to amend 1931 PA 328, entitled “The Michigan penal code,” by amending section 90h (MCL 750.90h), as added by 2011 PA 168.

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 63 Yeas—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Nays—16

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: President

Senators Barrett and Hertel asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Barrett’s statement is as follows:

Today is a proud but also a sad day for the state of Michigan and the Michigan Senate—proud that we can take a stand for life, but sad that this legislation is even necessary. Today, though, we are taking a stand for life, which is the central and highest responsibility of any government. If we do not get right the issue of life fundamentally, then every other spirited debate that we have in this chamber doesn’t matter.

The act of aborting a live, unborn baby just weeks shy of viability, or in some instances past the point of viability, is something that should concern us all. However, the act of dismembering limb by limb these developing babies shocks the conscience of everyone here. Notably, this bill includes an exception to protect the life of the mother and would punish the person performing this abortion in dismembering these babies, not the woman seeking or obtaining it.

Sadly, in our committee testimony we heard from a doctor who opposes this bill and objected to the standard of a reasonable medical judgment by the physician to determine that the mother’s life was at risk. If we can’t stand up for women with a standard of reasonable medical judgment, then we are absolutely failing them.

In 2008, a Republican-controlled Senate in this chamber joined a Democratic-controlled House of Representatives to overwhelmingly pass the partial birth abortion ban act here in Michigan, with broad bipartisan support. Senate Bill No. 229 that we’re about to vote on amends that act to ban the gruesome practice of dismemberment abortion as well.

That same year—in 2008—I was deployed overseas in Iraq and I saw the real effects of a culture that did not value human life. Today, I am proud to stand here and support life here at home.

We aren’t going to settle the fundamental question of abortion and human life and the value of human life today with this vote, but I really hope that we can at least take a step back and say that this particular procedure is gruesome and barbaric and we need to stop it.

Senator Hertel’s statement is as follows:

I was not planning on speaking today, and I can understand the disagreements that sometimes happen in this chamber and that reasonable people can have different opinions on issues. That being said, rhetoric like what we just heard from the good Senator from the 24th District is dangerous in a state where we have doctors and women being threatened as they are trying to receive basic health care in this state.

We have got to be careful of our language in this building. It will be replayed over and over again and when you start using words like “barbaric,” you are in some people’s eyes going to justify horrible, horrible actions. I am sure that is not your intent, but we must be careful in this body. I am deeply afraid; we literally have death threats that have happened at clinics across the state. We have had people threatened on their way in who are just trying to receive birth control. We have to watch what we say here.

I understand how the vote is going to go down. We understand why it’s being done today—that it’s a lobby day at the Capitol. We understand that for the last four years, Republicans controlled every part of this body and didn’t run this bill and are running it now for political reasons. You get your day, I get that. But I will not have those doctors and those women who are trying to receive legal, safe medical treatment, and oftentimes are going into a Planned Parenthood for something else to have their lives risked by words we use on this floor.

I am asking my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to be careful in the language that is chosen here on this floor today.

Senate Bill No. 230, entitled

A bill to amend 1927 PA 175, entitled “The code of criminal procedure,” by amending section 16d of chapter XVII (MCL 777.16d), as amended by 2016 PA 88.

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 64 Yeas—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Nays—16

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: President

Senator Brinks’ statement, in which Senator Polehanki concurred, is as follows:

Protests

Senators Brinks, Polehanki, McMorrow, Moss, Geiss, Bayer, Hertel, Alexander, Hollier, Ananich and Irwin, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill Nos. 229 and 230.

Senators Brinks, McMorrow, Geiss and Irwin moved that the statements they made during the discussion of Senate Bill No. 229 be printed as their reasons for voting “no.”

The motion prevailed.

As we consider this legislation before us, I want to make sure that the stories of the people who have lived the experience you seek to criminalize are heard.

Nearly 99 percent of abortions occur before 21 weeks, but when they are needed later in pregnancy, it’s often in very complex circumstances—the kind of situations where a woman and her doctor need every medical option available. In fact, abortions later in pregnancy often involve rare, severe fetal abnormalities and serious risks to women’s health.

Criminalizing a procedure that, according to the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, is the “predominant approach to abortion after 13 weeks” and is “evidence based and medically preferred because it results in the fewest complications for women compared to alternative procedures” will only result in increased complications and adverse medical outcomes. More bluntly stated, more suffering, and more death.

Not only is this legislation dangerous to the health and well-being of women, it also infringes upon the rights of patients and their families to make difficult, compassionate decisions to spare unbearable suffering. So before you vote on this, I want to share just a few stories of women who made the decision to end their pregnancies—a decision that would be made even more difficult and dangerous by this legislation.

Christie was pregnant with her second child, a planned and wanted pregnancy. “My husband and I were confronted with two equally horrible options—carrying the pregnancy to term and watch our baby girl suffocate to death upon birth, or end the pregnancy early and say goodbye to our much wanted and much loved baby girl.” After a 20-week ultrasound, they found out their daughter would be born with a complication called congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) and would suffocate at birth. And they made the difficult decision of ending the pregnancy at 21 weeks.

Julie’s doctor told her and her husband that their son’s brain had a serious abnormality, a diagnosis they confirmed with tests, more ultrasounds, and an MRI.

“We were excited about the 20-week scan because we thought we were just finding out if it was a boy or a girl. When the technician said we were having a boy, and sent us back to our OB/GYN’s office. The first thing she said when she walked in was, “I’m so sorry,”

If the baby survived birth, he would never speak, walk, or have a conscious thought based on what had developed in his brain. Julie and her husband decided to terminate the pregnancy, and the soonest they could get an appointment was at 21 weeks.

Kate’s story. At the 18-week ultrasound, the technician thought he saw something indicating a problem with the brain, but at the Level 2 scan, the technician found nothing wrong. “When we make this illegal,” Kate said, “we are just talking about making it unsafe. I believe it is my obligation as a mother to do whatever I can to make a terrible situation better. I did that for my daughter. I resent it very much when politicians try to force me to carry a very sick baby to term and watch her die a slow and tortured death just because it fits their, not my, religious sensibilities.” Kate insisted on another level 2 scan during her third trimester and it turned out that her baby and moderate to severe Dandy-Walker syndrome as well as another brain malformation. If she survived, she would have had trouble swallowing and breathing, and she would have been afflicted by seizures, vomiting, choking, and muscle spasms. Her short life would have been filled with suffering.

Chelsea’s much-wanted baby was diagnosed at 22 weeks with multiple heart defects including transposition of the great arteries, pulmonary atresia, and ventricular septal defect. “People have a perception that women who terminate at a later stage just don’t want to be pregnant anymore or are selfish because they don’t want a sick baby. But that is not something I did for myself. This is something I did for him” she said. “I did this so that he would not have to suffer.” He also had DiGeorge syndrome, a genetic disorder that caused not only his heart defects but would have caused many other problems for him as well. She and her husband decided to terminate the pregnancy after consulting with a team of medical specialists, as well as a genetics counselor. It was at 24 weeks.

When Lindsey had her 12-week ultrasound, everything looked completely normal. But the picture was different at the 21-week anatomy scan. “If I had carried her to term, she would not have survived. As her mother, it is my right to spare her suffering, and that is what I did.” Lindsey and her husband learned that the baby had a lethal skeletal dysplasia. And Lindsey sought out additional opinions from three maternal-fetal specialists, and they all agreed that the baby would not survive because her lungs were not developing properly. Lindsey and her husband chose to terminate the pregnancy and they feel grateful that they had the choice to do so with compassion.

Danielle’s pregnancy was going well and was considered low-risk. A mother of two, she had all the tests and scans, none of which indicated any problem. “What my husband and I experienced was just so terrible,” she said. “Unless people have walked in my shoes, they don’t understand. I did what was right for my son and my family, and it’s no one’s business.” In the 29th week, she learned that her baby had multiple brain problems, including unilateral brain swelling, brain asymmetry, malformed cerebellum, and no corpus callosum. If her baby lived to term, he would have a life of suffering.

Those are the stories that people have been sharing in light of this legislation introduced throughout the nation in recent weeks. I cannot imagine facing these decisions as a mother. I cannot comprehend the pain they must have experienced. What I can understand to the depths of my heart, is the desire to spare my children the kind of suffering that these conditions cause.

I urge you to really think about these stories before you cast your vote. I urge you to let parents make these incredibly complex and heart-wrenching decisions free from the fear of unnecessary medical complications and even maternal death. I urge you to let physicians practice in the best way they know how and are trained, to assist these families without fear of prosecution for doing what they know is medically best.

I urge you to remember these stories, and to find the compassion to cast a “no” vote for this legislation.

Senator McMorrow’s statement, in which Senator Moss concurred, is as follows:

About a month ago, I met a resident named Michal. She’s around my age, and happily married with two wonderful daughters. I look at them and I see exactly what I would hope in a vibrant, loving family—exactly the type of family I’d hope to have myself. But without access to a D&E abortion that allowed them to terminate their first pregnancy, this family may never have been. Michal reached out to me to share her story, and I rise today to share it with you.

One year after they were married, Michal and Jordan found out they were pregnant and they were overjoyed. Throughout the pregnancy, Michal felt wonderful—as healthy as could be. All of the regularly-scheduled checkups in the early stages of her pregnancy showed everything was on track. They were excited about starting a family and the opportunity to bring someone new into the world and share all of the love and joy that they had to share. When they got to their 20-week appointment, they had no reason to expect anything different.

Heartbreakingly, her doctor came back in a somber matter. The diagnosis was severe osteogenesis imperfecta, a form of skeletal dysplasia caused by defective genes which prohibited the fetus from producing collagen. The bones simply weren’t developing. After discussing the severity with their doctor, Michal and Jordan learned that if their baby survived being carried to term, it would likely live a very short life suffering in great pain. The diagnosis was so severe that a sneeze could break a rib. Their doctor advised that they should consider terminating the pregnancy.

Michal tells me that even discussing her story with her friends, many say they could never consider abortion an option. Michal says neither could she, until she was faced with the situation head-on. Until she was faced with the idea that she would be bringing someone into the world who would do nothing but suffer, if they made it through the pregnancy at all. Her husband Jordan didn’t realize they were suddenly in a category of abortion. To him, he said, they needed medical care. He thought that given their situation, the system would help them get the care that they needed.

But getting that care wasn’t easy. Despite living in Oakland County and having access to some of the best hospitals and medical professionals in the state, Beaumont couldn’t perform the procedure. Despite making the difficult decision to terminate the pregnancy with the counsel of their doctor, and together as a family, Jordan says the team there suddenly became very nervous and made it difficult to schedule an appointment. In the midst of the most emotionally-challenging time of their lives, they had to go onto www.michigan.gov and fill out a government form acknowledging the procedure they were seeking. They felt exposed, vulnerable, and angry that the system suddenly seemed to work against them, not for them, in their time of need.

Michal and Jordan had family connections in medicine and were eventually connected with the maternal female medical specialists at the University of Michigan Women’s Hospital. The hospital was incredibly careful with how they chose to proceed, running further tests, spending time discussing all of the options, the harsh reality, and the challenges with Michal and Jordan. The hospital independently verified the recommendation of the first doctor—that due to the severity of the case, terminating the pregnancy now would save the fetus from tremendous pain and suffering, and would also protect Michal from future complications.

After the procedure, which the hospital meticulously performed over two days, Michal and Jordan spoke with their doctor. “I know you don’t need any more information that you made the right choice,” the doctor said to them, “but the situation was worse than what we were able to see in the ultrasound.” The doctor informed them that there were skull fractures and that the situation would have only gotten more dangerous and complicated as time went on. This D&E procedure was the safest option, conducted by a top team of professionals, for Michal and Jordan.

According to the University of Michigan, it has become the standard treatment of care for terminations performed after such complications arise, just like the situation for Michal and Jordan.

Michal’s D&E procedure took place in November. The following August, she was pregnant. Zoe will be turning three at the end of this month. Lior, her second daughter, was born 18 months later. In Hebrew, her name means “my light,” which Michal and Jordan chose because she was born on the last night of Hanukkah.

Michal shared her story with me—a story not dissimilar to many other women and families facing this decision—because without access to the care that she needed, she would not have the wonderful family and two healthy daughters she has now. Had she not had access to this D&E procedure, Michal’s situation would likely have gotten much worse—and would have resulted in her own life being in danger—or complications that may have resulted in the inability for her to ever conceive again.

I know how passionately people feel about this issue. I know that everyone here believes they are doing what is right to protect families. But without this procedure, the safest procedure possible when complications like this arise, Michal and Jordan’s happy, healthy, wonderful family would not exist.

I urge a “no” vote on Senate Bill Nos. 229 and 230 for the protection of families.

Senator Geiss’ statement, in which Senators Bayer, Hertel, Alexander, Hollier and Ananich concurred, is as follows:

I’m going to start with a quote: “I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant: I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.” This is the oath that our medical professionals take before they are tasked with improving and saving lives, and the heavy mental and physical burden that goes along with that. In its letter to the Senate committee, this is one of several reasons the Michigan State Medical Society—which represents more than 15,000 physicians caring for millions of people across the state, came out in opposition of this bill.

Colleagues, I can stand here and call out the hypocrisy of predominately male legislators—most of whom have no medical background-somehow deciding when they take office that they are medical experts and experts of women’s bodies and healthcare. Instead of regulating the things that government should be regulating, the focus on regulating and criminalizing medical decisions and women’s healthcare is, in itself, criminal.

What matters—or rather, should matter—are the people who are experts in this arena: the women and families who’ve had to have this difficult conversation with their doctors, and the doctors who have had to have these difficult conversations with their parents.

As we have heard from my colleagues from the 13th and 29th Districts, sharing stories of real people, real humans, real women, real families—these decisions are not made lightly—as the science fiction thriller writers of this legislation would have us believe. In committee, women who wanted—wanted—to have their babies—women who were preparing to welcome a new addition, women who were decorating nurseries, deciding on whether to breastfeed or formula feed, had names picked out, and were excited to welcome a new arrival that would start or expand their families—and then bam. Something went horribly wrong during gestation—these women testified in opposition to this legislation because of the danger it poses, because they know the reality. These brave women sat in front of primarily men and tried to explain to them that unfortunately, circumstances arose in which this medically sound procedure was necessary.

Think about that colleagues. They left themselves bare and raw before members of this chamber to share their stories at how bad this legislation is for our state. It wasn’t something they merely wanted on a whim—a simple capricious change of mind—it was needed and it was medically necessary. And that’s the reality of what we’re voting on today.

The dilation and evacuation method is, “the predominant approach to abortion after 13 weeks,” according to more professionals in the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. My question is, if we’re willing to interfere in the judgment of our medical professionals, where does it stop? Will we tell them they can’t performs other life-saving procedures? Because without this procedure, women carrying these deceased fetuses can die. Without this procedure some women forced to carry to term and deliver a severely ill or deformed baby can be made infertile.

Colleagues, this legislation is not about so-called “right to life.” This is a coordinated attack from interest groups with more money than sound, accurate medical research, and who have imaginations wilder than those of Sam Raimi, Stephen King, and George R. R. Martin. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle like the free market and less regulation, vote no on this bill. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle don’t want to be told by big government how to live their own lives, vote “no” on this bill. Because anything less is a sexist attack on more than 50 percent of our population with a set of biology that many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle neither have nor seem to understand.

I urge this chamber to believe medical facts and realties and stop this foolishness now by voting no on these bills.

Senator Irwin’s statement is as follows:

I rise to oppose this legislation because I believe that decisions about women’s health should be made by women and in consultation with their doctors, with no role for the politicians in this room. I oppose this legislation because it bans the safest procedure that is used in rare cases, but important cases around complicated pregnancies that don’t fit the anti-abortion narrative.

Now, I rise to speak against this bill today because a constituent of mine asked for me to read her story. A story about a complicated and difficult pregnancy. A story of how access to healthcare and how access to safe and legal abortion without meddling from politicians allowed her continuing growing her family. This is her story: “I have always been aware that many women choose to end pregnancies for a variety of reasons. At the same time, I never thought I would have to make such a choice. In my seventh year of marriage, I planned my first pregnancy and had a wonderful, healthy labor and baby when my oldest daughter Sylvia was born.” This isn’t the story of my constituent, but my oldest daughter happens to be Sylvia. “When Sylvia was five, my husband and I decided to have another baby and I got pregnant right away. Since I had been blessed with a smooth pregnancy before, and since my daughter was excited about my growing belly, I brought her to our 18 week ultrasound appointment. There, we learned the sex of our baby, a boy, and watched him move around.

However, that night we got a call from the hospital saying that he had a rare brain malformation and that he was missing an important part of his brain. The subsequent week is a blur in my memory. We learned more about his condition, went to appointments with specialists for testing, and ultimately consulted with genetic counselors to understand our options. He was unlikely to live to his full term, and we had the option to terminate the pregnancy. However, since some women would choose to carry the baby as long as possible, my physicians made it clear that the choice to intervene and have an abortion was mine to make. I was grieving and did not want to stay pregnant when I knew that I would lose my baby.

Still, choosing to end a wanted pregnancy was incredibly difficult and so deeply sad. We named him Robert and later let our daughter choose his middle name. He is Robert Brother to us. The following week I was off from work and cried the whole week straight. Somehow I emerged, and received counseling and support from family and friends and we began to plan for another baby.

Thankfully, I got pregnant again easily, though we were tentative the whole pregnancy. I had a fast, easy labor and I recently celebrated the birthday of my beloved, youngest daughter, Julia, and my husband and I told her birth story as we tucked her in. I don’t like to think of how I may have felt waiting to lose Robert at people smiling at my pregnancy body and holding doors open for me while I grieved privately. And I am grateful that access to safety, quality medical care with Robert did not impair my ability to have a healthy pregnancy and labor with Julia.

Once again, I am grateful that access to safety, quality medical care with Robert did not impair my ability to have a healthy pregnancy and labor with Julia, some friends and family members do not think that what we experienced was abortion, because I was married, had a planned pregnancy, and a child already, that my situation was different. However, I know from deep within that deciding to end a pregnancy is personal and the reasons vary widely. My story is one of many. Through my healing, I was amazed at how many people I became connected to who had similar situations. Ending a pregnancy can be painful enough. It is my plea that you respect the range of women’s complex experiences and not increase their burden and difficult time.”

And so I would add to the belief of my constituents that all of you, I hear time and time again, with high-minded rhetoric about how frustrated you are when government, the big hand of government, reaches into your wallet or reaches into your business affairs. Imagine for a second, if that big hand of government was reaching inside your very body.

By unanimous consent the Senate proceeded to the order of

Resolutions

Senator MacGregor moved that consideration of the following resolutions be postponed for today:

Senate Resolution No. 25

Senate Resolution No. 30

Senate Resolution No. 38

The motion prevailed.

Senator VanderWall offered the following concurrent resolution:

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 8.

A concurrent resolution to declare Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) a critical health issue, commit the Legislature to action, and encourage the Governor to direct agencies to assess and report progress on reducing ACEs.

Whereas, Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are now widely recognized as a dominant factor in the current and future well-being of children due to the harmful effects of toxic stress related to abuse (including physical, emotional, and sexual abuse), neglect (including physical and emotional neglect), and various family dysfunctions; and

Whereas, The relationship between ACEs and future health issues and conditions has an evidence-based foundation starting with the groundbreaking ACE study conducted collaboratively between the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Kaiser Permanente. This study has been cited more than 17,000 times in peer-reviewed scientific research articles; and

Whereas, The growing body of evidence on the science of human development incorporates research findings on ACEs and the long-term neurobiological, biomedical, and epigenetic consequences of toxic stress; and

Whereas, National and state surveys indicate that as many as 70 percent of Michigan adults had at least one ACE during their childhood and as much as 20 percent of Michigan’s adult population had four or more ACEs; and

Whereas, The relationship between ACEs and the current prevalence of chronic disease, addictive behaviors, and related conditions is now recognized by many as a major public health crisis. Nationwide, these conditions and illnesses cost billions of dollars in resources and reduce lifetime expectancy, and they all have their roots in childhood trauma; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That we declare that ACEs constitute a critical health issue in Michigan and commit to an ongoing strategy to significantly reduce ACEs in Michigan through legislative leadership, legislative acts, appropriations, reporting, and oversight; and be it further

Resolved, That we encourage the Governor to issue an executive directive that would require administrating agencies to assess if the implementation of their programs reduces ACEs and provide an annual state report and data to the Legislature and general public about progress in reducing ACEs in Michigan; and be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the Governor of the State of Michigan and the Director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services.

Pending the order that, under rule 3.204, the concurrent resolution be referred to the Committee on Government Operations,

Senator MacGregor moved that the rule be suspended.

The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.

The question being on the adoption of the concurrent resolution,

Senator MacGregor moved that the concurrent resolution be referred to the Committee on Health Policy and Human Services.

The motion prevailed

Senators Bayer, Hollier, Johnson, MacGregor and Wojno were named co-sponsors of the concurrent resolution.

Senator McBroom offered the following resolution:

Senate Resolution No. 49.

A resolution to oppose the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community’s application to regulate water quality and air quality under federal law on the L’Anse Reservation.

Whereas, The Keweenaw Bay Indian Community is seeking federal approval to set water quality standards within the L’Anse Reservation and regulate activities impacting water quality through the water quality certification process under the federal Clean Water Act. The community is also seeking to be treated the same as a state for the purposes of receiving federal funding for air regulation and submitting recommendations on air operating permits issued by the state of Michigan and other states; and

Whereas, Approving these requests would inevitably lead to unreasonable consequences, a patchwork of regulations, and be inappropriate for non-tribal property owners within and outside of the reservation borders. This is a significant concern given that the reservation boundaries encompass approximately 59,071 acres of land, of which only 35 percent (20,427 acres) are tribal lands; and

Whereas, The state of Michigan already has in place strong water quality standards to protect state waters. The state has designated that all state waters should be safe for fishing, swimming, and other uses and support native aquatic life and wildlife. The state has established—and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved—scientifically based water quality criteria that ensure these uses are preserved; and

Whereas, The state of Michigan has administered for decades permit programs that protect the air and water for all Michigan residents. Michigan has been addressing air pollution since at least 1965 and issuing operating permits to protect air quality since the mid-1990s. Since 1972, Michigan has administered a permit program under state law that prevents discharges that would impair the designated uses of state waters. The EPA delegated authority to administer permit programs under the federal Clean Water Act to the state in 1973 based on these laws and has recently re-approved that delegated authority. This request by the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community raises questions and concerns on how future permits issued by the state could be impacted, including wetland permits, permits for discharges into state waters, and hydropower licenses; and

Whereas, Approving the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community request would not improve air or water quality but would create an unnecessary layer of government bureaucracy and increase the regulatory burden on businesses, property owners, and the state. Regardless of whether the request is approved, the state of Michigan will continue to regulate activities impacting state air and waters within the reservation under state law. Michigan’s programs are sufficient to protect residents and wildlife from pollution; and

Whereas, Approving the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community request would lead to jurisdictional conflicts between the community and the state related to control of activities on state-owned land within the reservation boundaries. These conflicts would involve complicated and not easily resolved legal questions regarding state versus tribal sovereignty. It would also raise questions regarding potential impacts to state-owned mineral rights within the reservation; and

Whereas, Approving the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community request would subject non-tribal property owners within reservation boundaries to the decision-making of a tribal government in which they have no representation. Only around one-third of the people living within the reservation boundaries are tribal members. Our nation was founded on the democratic concept that people should have a say and be represented in the government that impacts their lives; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate, That we oppose the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Lake Superior Band of Chippewa request for treatment as a state under the federal Clean Water Act and the federal Clean Air Act; and be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation.

Pending the order that, under rule 3.204, the resolution be referred to the Committee on Government Operations,

Senator MacGregor moved that the rule be suspended.

The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.

The question being on the adoption of the resolution,

Senator MacGregor moved that the resolution be referred to the Committee on Natural Resources.

The motion prevailed

Senator VanderWall was named co-sponsor of the resolution.

Introduction and Referral of Bills

Senators Irwin, Polehanki, Wojno, Bullock, Alexander, Moss, Geiss, McMorrow and Barrett introduced

Senate Bill No. 315, entitled

A bill to amend 1967 PA 281, entitled “Income tax act of 1967,” (MCL 206.1 to 206.713) by adding section 277.

The bill was read a first and second time by title and referred to the Committee on Finance.

Senators MacDonald, Wojno, Lucido and Ananich introduced

Senate Bill No. 316, entitled

A bill to amend 1931 PA 328, entitled “The Michigan penal code,” by amending sections 49 and 50 (MCL 750.49 and 750.50), section 49 as amended by 2018 PA 461 and section 50 as amended by 2018 PA 452.

The bill was read a first and second time by title and referred to the Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety.

Senators Wojno, MacDonald, Lucido and Ananich introduced

Senate Bill No. 317, entitled

A bill to amend 1927 PA 175, entitled “The code of criminal procedure,” by amending section 16b of chapter XVII (MCL 777.16b), as amended by 2018 PA 652.

The bill was read a first and second time by title and referred to the Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety.

Senator Zorn introduced

Senate Bill No. 318, entitled

A bill to amend 1949 PA 300, entitled “Michigan vehicle code,” by amending sections 710d, 710e, and 907 (MCL 257.710d, 257.710e, and 257.907), section 710d as amended by 2009 PA 57, section 710e as amended by 2016 PA 460, and section 907 as amended by 2015 PA 126.

The bill was read a first and second time by title and referred to the Committee on Families, Seniors and Veterans.

Senator Moss introduced

Senate Bill No. 319, entitled

A bill to amend 1992 PA 147, entitled “Neighborhood enterprise zone act,” by amending section 2 (MCL 207.772), as amended by 2010 PA 9, and by adding section 2a.

The bill was read a first and second time by title and referred to the Committee on Economic and Small Business Development.

By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of

General Orders

Senator MacGregor moved that the Senate resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole for consideration of the General Orders calendar.

The motion prevailed, and the President, Lieutenant Governor Gilchrist, designated Senator Irwin as Chairperson.

Senate Bill No. 141, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of insurance and financial services for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-1)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 143, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of licensing and regulatory affairs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-1)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 139, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of health and human services for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-2)

The following are the amendments to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole:

1. Amend page 8, line 22, by striking out “2,045,200” and inserting “2,515,200”.

2. Amend page 9, line 4, by striking out “2,152,466,000” and inserting “2,152,936,000”.

3. Amend page 9, line 16, by striking out “91,746,900” and inserting “92,216,900” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

4. Amend page 20, line 6, by striking out “46,067,400” and inserting “46,067,500”.

5. Amend page 20, line 11, by striking out “111,783,200” and inserting “111,783,300”.

6. Amend page 20, line 20, by striking out “45,850,600” and inserting “45,850,700” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

7. Amend page 23, following line 27, by inserting:

“Substance use disorder hospital pilot program.................................... 100”.

8. Amend page 24, line 1, by striking out “230,431,800” and inserting “230,431,900”.

9. Amend page 24, line 5, by striking out “64,701,600” and inserting “64,701,700” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

10. Amend page 53, following line 9, by inserting:

“Sec. 257. The department shall, in consultation with the Michigan department of education, the American Foundation of Suicide Prevention, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, the Michigan Psychiatric Society, the Community Mental Health Association, and members of law enforcement, redraft the curriculum for the “Safe and Sound for Life” and “Social & Emotional Health” modules to include age-appropriate and medically accurate information about the warning signs and risk factors for suicide and depression, and the protective factors that help prevent suicide as outlined in MCL 380.1171.”.

11. Amend page 118, following line 15, by inserting:

“Sec. 690. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for Food Bank Council of Michigan, the department shall allocate $470,000.00 to a nonprofit, community-based organization organized under the laws of this state that are exempt from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 501 located in a county with a population of between 601,000 and 603,000 and in a charter township with a population of between 30,900 and 31,000. The nonprofit selected shall use the funds to gather and distribute food to relieve hunger and increase food security.”.

12. Amend page 175, following line 27, by inserting:

“Sec. 1424. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for community services, $100.00 is appropriated for Alzheimer’s disease services and shall be remitted to the Alzheimer’s association-Michigan chapters. The Alzheimer’s association shall provide enhanced services, including 24/7 helpline, continued care consultation, and support groups, to individuals with Alzheimer’s disease or dementia and their families, and partner with a Michigan public university to study whether provision of such in-home support services significantly delays the need for residential long-term care services for individuals with Alzheimer’s disease or dementia. The study must also consider potential cost savings related to the delay of long-term care services, if a delay is shown.”.

13. Amend page 200, line 20, by striking out section 1776.

14. Amend page 211, line 2, after “service” by striking out the balance of the section.

15. Amend page 228, following line 3, by inserting:

“Sec. 1919. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for substance use disorder hospital pilot program, $100.00 is allocated for a specialized emergent peer recovery coach services pilot project administered by a substance use and case management provider in conjunction with a hospital within a county with a population of at least 1,500,000 and 911 service district. The hospital must have a wing with at least 5 beds dedicated to stabilizing patients suffering from addiction by providing a specialized trauma therapist as well as a peer support specialist to assist with treatment and counseling. The substance use and case management provider shall collect and submit to the department data on the outcomes of the pilot project throughout the duration of the pilot project and shall provide a report on the pilot project’s outcomes to the senate and house appropriations subcommittees on health and human services, the senate and house fiscal agencies, and the state budget office.”.

The Senate agreed to the substitute, as amended, recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 148, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of talent and economic development for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-2)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 133, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of agriculture and rural development for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-1)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 137, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of environmental quality for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-2)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 145, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of natural resources for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-3)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 144, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of military and veterans affairs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-2)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 142, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the judiciary for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-1)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 147, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of state police for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-2)

The following are the amendments to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole:

1. Amend page 5, following line 16, by inserting:

“Automobile insurance fraud investigations........................................................................... 100”.

2. Amend page 6, line 2, by striking out “305,231,000” and inserting “305,231,100” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

The Senate agreed to the substitute as amended recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 135, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of corrections for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-2)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 138, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the legislature, the executive, the department of the attorney general, the department of state, the department of treasury, the department of technology, management, and budget, the department of civil rights, the department of talent and economic development, and certain other state purposes for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations; to provide for the disposition of fees and other income received by the state agencies; and to declare the effect of this act.

Substitute (S-2)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 149, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the state transportation department for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-2)

The Senate agreed to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 134, entitled

A bill to amend 1979 PA 94, entitled “The state school aid act of 1979,” by amending sections 201 and 201a (MCL 388.1801 and 388.1801a), sections 201 and 201a as amended by 2018 PA 265.

Substitute (S-1)

The following is the amendment to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole:

1. Amend page 2, line 14, by striking out all of subsection (2) and inserting:

“(2) Subject to subsection (3), the amount appropriated for community college operations is ~~$322,250,900.00,~~ $327,084,600.00, allocated as follows:

(a) The appropriation for Alpena Community College is ~~$5,707,600.00, $5,665,900.00 for operations and $41,700.00 for performance funding.~~$5,782,500.00, $5,716,100.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $66,400.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(b) The appropriation for Bay de Noc Community College is ~~$5,624,800.00, $5,589,000.00 for operations and $35,800.00 for performance funding.~~$5,747,300.00, $5,686,500.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $60,800.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(c) The appropriation for Delta College is ~~$15,104,300.00, $14,990,700.00 for operations and $113,600.00 for performance funding.~~$15,277,400.00, $15,099,500.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $177,900.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(d) The appropriation for Glen Oaks Community College is ~~$2,620,000.00, $2,601,400.00 for operations and $18,600.00 for performance funding.~~$2,655,200.00, $2,617,800.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $37,400.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(e) The appropriation for Gogebic Community College is ~~$4,844,300.00, $4,809,700.00 for operations and $34,600.00 for performance funding.~~$4,942,500.00, $4,888,700.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $53,800.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(f) The appropriation for Grand Rapids Community College is ~~$18,709,300.00, $18,556,800.00 for operations and $152,500.00 for performance funding.~~$19,126,400.00, $18,869,100.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $257,300.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(g) The appropriation for Henry Ford College is ~~$22,463,600.00, $22,299,200.00 for operations and $164,400.00 for performance funding.~~$22,689,200.00, $22,423,600.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $265,600.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(h) The appropriation for Jackson College is ~~$12,698,200.00, $12,617,200.00 for operations and $81,000.00 for performance funding.~~$12,858,300.00, $12,726,400.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $131,900.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(i) The appropriation for Kalamazoo Valley Community College is ~~$13,046,600.00, $12,948,700.00 for operations and $97,900.00 for performance funding.~~$13,224,500.00, $13,065,600.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $158,900.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(j) The appropriation for Kellogg Community College is ~~$10,214,400.00, $10,143,600.00 for operations and $70,800.00 for performance funding.~~$10,396,300.00, $10,279,000.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $117,300.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(k) The appropriation for Kirtland Community College is ~~$3,321,600.00, $3,289,400.00 for operations and $32,200.00 for performance funding.~~$3,399,300.00, $3,346,200.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $53,100.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(l) The appropriation for Lake Michigan College is ~~$5,672,100.00, $5,631,000.00 for operations and $41,100.00 for performance funding.~~$5,743,800.00, $5,674,600.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $69,200.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(m) The appropriation for Lansing Community College is ~~$32,725,800.00, $32,515,500.00 for operations and $210,300.00 for performance funding.~~$33,152,900.00, $32,806,100.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $346,800.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(n) The appropriation for Macomb Community College is ~~$34,124,000.00, $33,863,600.00 for operations and $260,400.00 for performance funding.~~$34,489,500.00, $34,079,100.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $410,400.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(o) The appropriation for Mid Michigan Community College is ~~$5,112,400.00, $5,068,300.00 for operations and $44,100.00 for performance funding.~~$5,312,500.00, $5,240,500.00 FOR OPERATIONS AND $72,000.00 FOR PERFORMANCE FUNDING.

(p) The appropriation for Monroe County Community College is ~~$4,708,600.00, $4,665,500.00 for operations and $43,100.00 for performance funding.~~$4,776,700.00, $4,707,400.00 for operations and $69,300.00 for performance funding.

(q) The appropriation for Montcalm Community College is ~~$3,542,900.00, $3,515,200.00 for operations and $27,700.00 for performance funding.~~$3,597,400.00, $3,547,100.00 for operations and $50,300.00 for performance funding.

(r) The appropriation for C.S. Mott Community College is ~~$16,381,600.00, $16,258,100.00 for operations and $123,500.00 for performance funding.~~$16,538,000.00, $16,339,100.00 for operations and $198,900.00 for performance funding.

(s) The appropriation for Muskegon Community College is ~~$9,264,700.00, $9,203,000.00 for operations and $61,700.00 for performance funding.~~$9,409,500.00, $9,307,800.00 for operations and $101,700.00 for performance funding.

(t) The appropriation for North Central Michigan College is ~~$3,402,600.00, $3,368,400.00 for operations and $34,200.00 for performance funding.~~$3,590,200.00, $3,536,000.00 for operations and $54,200.00 for performance funding.

(u) The appropriation for Northwestern Michigan College is ~~$9,625,400.00, $9,559,700.00 for operations and $65,700.00 for performance funding.~~$9,860,300.00, $9,750,100.00 for operations and $110,200.00 for performance funding.

(v) The appropriation for Oakland Community College is ~~$22,093,000.00, $21,905,700.00 for operations and $187,300.00 for performance funding.~~$22,371,400.00, $22,056,800.00 for operations and $314,600.00 for performance funding.

(w) The appropriation for Schoolcraft College is ~~$13,112,900.00, $12,991,300.00 for operations and $121,600.00 for performance funding.~~$13,351,200.00, $13,147,500.00 for operations and $203,700.00 for performance funding.

(x) The appropriation for Southwestern Michigan College is ~~$6,946,900.00, $6,903,300.00 for operations and $43,600.00 for performance funding.~~$7,052,400.00, $6,972,300.00 for operations and $80,100.00 for performance funding.

(y) The appropriation for St. Clair County Community College is ~~$7,358,700.00, $7,300,100.00 for operations and $58,600.00 for performance funding.~~$7,434,500.00, $7,338,100.00 for operations and $96,400.00 for performance funding.

(z) The appropriation for Washtenaw Community College is ~~$13,764,000.00, $13,631,400.00 for operations and $132,600.00 for performance funding.~~$13,983,500.00, $13,761,300.00 for operations and $222,200.00 for performance funding.

(aa) The appropriation for Wayne County Community College is ~~$17,487,200.00, $17,338,300.00 for operations and $148,900.00 for performance funding.~~$17,701,500.00, $17,468,200.00 for operations and $233,300.00 for performance funding.

(bb) The appropriation for West Shore Community College is ~~$2,573,400.00, $2,556,300.00 for operations and $17,100.00 for performance funding.~~$2,620,400.00, $2,585,900.00 for operations and $34,500.00 for performance funding.”.

The Senate agreed to the substitute, as amended, recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 136, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of education for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Substitute (S-1)

The following is the amendment to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole:

1. Amend page 24, line 20, by striking out all of section 702 and inserting:

“Sec. 702. The funds appropriated in part 1 for the State Board of Education/Office of Superintendent may only be expended once the Department or Superintendent of Public Instruction has requested the waivers and state plan amendments to the state’s federal accountability plan necessary for 2018 PA 601 to come under compliance with the Every Student Succeeds Act, Public Law 114-95.”.

The Senate agreed to the substitute, as amended, recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

The Committee of the Whole reported back to the Senate, favorably and with a substitute therefor, the following bill:

Senate Bill No. 146, entitled

A bill to amend 1979 PA 94, entitled “The state school aid act of 1979,” by amending sections 11 and 17b (MCL 388.1611 and 388.1617b), section 11 as amended by 2018 PA 586 and section 17b as amended by 2007 PA 137.

Substitute (S-3)

The following are the amendments to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole:

1. Amend page 170, line 13, after “exceed” by striking out “$1,045,996,100.00” and inserting “$1,045,496,100.00”.

2. Amend page 238, line 9, by striking out “$5,000,000.00” and inserting “$4,700,000.00”.

3. Amend page 269, line 10, after “(b)” by striking out “The” and inserting “Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, the”.

4. Amend page 269, line 12, after “pay” by striking out “the greater of $1,500.00 or”.

5. Amend page 269, line 13, after “(a).” By inserting “however, subject to subdivision (d), for a district with fewer than 1,000 pupils, the department shall pay the greater of the costs submitted under subdivision (a) not to exceed $1,000.00, or, if the costs exceed $1,000.00, 1/2 of the costs submitted under subdivision (a).”.

6. Amend page 269, line 13, after “pay” by striking out the balance of the sentence through “(a),” on line 14.

7. Amend page 270, line 16, after “tool.” By inserting “the department shall not reimburse a constituent district for the purchase of a separate school data analytical tool if that constituent district is located in an intermediate district that makes a school data analytical tool available for that constituent district and that constituent district uses that isd-offered tool.”.

8. Amend page 270, line 22, after “tool.” By inserting “the department shall not reimburse a public school academy for the purchase of a separate school data analytical tool if its authorizing body makes a school data analytical tool available to that public school academy and that public school academy uses the tool offered by its authorizer.”.

The Senate agreed to the substitute, as amended, recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

Recess

Senator MacGregor moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.

The motion prevailed, the time being 12:32 p.m.

12:42 p.m.

The Senate was called to order by the President, Lieutenant Governor Gilchrist.

Senator MacGregor moved that the Senate resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole for consideration of the General Orders calendar.

The motion prevailed, and the President, Lieutenant Governor Gilchrist, designated Senator Irwin as Chairperson.

Senate Bill No. 140, entitled

A bill to amend 1979 PA 94, entitled “The state school aid act of 1979,” by amending sections 236 and 236a (MCL 388.1836 and 388.1836a), sections 236 and 236a as amended by 2018 PA 265.

Substitute (S-1)

The following is the amendment to the substitute recommended by the Committee of the Whole:

1. Amend page 2, line 1, by striking out all of section 236 and inserting:

“Sec. 236. (1) Subject to the conditions set forth in this article, the amounts listed in this section are appropriated for higher education for the fiscal year ending September 30, ~~2019,~~ 2020, from the funds indicated in this section. The following is a summary of the appropriations in this section:

(a) The gross appropriation is ~~$1,669,732,600.00.~~ $1,693,001,800.00. After deducting total interdepartmental grants and intradepartmental transfers in the amount of $0.00, the adjusted gross appropriation is ~~$1,669,732,600.00.~~$1,693,001,800.00.

(b) The sources of the adjusted gross appropriation described in subdivision (a) are as follows:

(i) Total federal revenues, ~~$123,526,400.00.~~$128,026,400.00.

(ii) Total local revenues, $0.00.

(iii) Total private revenues, $0.00.

(iv) Total other state restricted revenues, ~~$500,188,300.00.~~$500,537,300.00.

(v) State general fund/general purpose money, ~~$1,046,017,900.00.~~$1,064,438,100.00.

(2) Amounts appropriated for public universities are as follows:

(a) The appropriation for Central Michigan University is ~~$87,415,000.00, $85,654,400.00 for operations and $1,760,600.00 for performance funding.~~$89,720,800.00, $88,695,000.00 for operations and $1,025,800.00 for performance funding.

(b) The appropriation for Eastern Michigan University is ~~$76,979,300.00, $75,169,900.00 for operations and $1,809,400.00 for performance funding.~~$77,960,500.00, $77,118,800.00 for operations and $841,700.00 for performance funding.

(c) The appropriation for Ferris State University is ~~$54,950, 700.00, $53,595,500.00 for operations and $1,355,200.00 for performance funding.~~$56,304,000.00, $55,739,700.00 for operations and $564,300.00 for performance funding.

(d) The appropriation for Grand Valley State University is ~~$72,056,600.00, $70,100,100.00 for operations and $1,956,500.00 for performance funding.~~$73,882,000.00, $72,855,400.00 for operations and $1,026,600.00 for performance funding.

(e) The appropriation for Lake Superior State University is ~~$13,987,000.00, $13,775,000.00 for operations and $212,000.00 for performance funding.~~$14,414,400.00, $14,303,300.00 for operations and $111,100.00 for performance funding.

(f) The appropriation for Michigan State University is

~~$350,703,300.00, $281,239,100.00 for operations, $5,035,100.00 for performance funding, $34,591,400.00 for MSU AgBioResearch, and $29,837,700.00 for MSU Extension.~~$355,605,600.00, $287,272,800.00 for operations, $2,937,200.00 for performance funding, $35,110,300.00 for MSU AgBioResearch, and $30,285,300.00 for MSU Extension.

(g) The appropriation for Michigan Technological University is ~~$49,949,600.00, $49,052,200.00 for operations and $897,400.00 for performance funding.~~$50,814,100.00, $50,301,800.00 for operations and $512,300.00 for performance funding.

(h) The appropriation for Northern Michigan University is ~~$47,998,400.00, $47,137,400.00 for operations and $861,000.00 for performance funding.~~$49,124,500.00, $48,676,200.00 for operations and $448,300.00 for performance funding.

(i) The appropriation for Oakland University is ~~$52,819,200.00, $51,235,900.00 for operations and $1,583,300.00 for performance funding.~~$53,828,000.00, $53,005,000.00 for operations and $823,000.00 for performance funding.

(j) The appropriation for Saginaw Valley State University is ~~$30,528,000.00, $29,766,100.00 for operations and $761,900.00 for performance funding.~~$30,925,400.00, $30,680,400.00 for operations and $245,000.00 for performance funding.

(k) The appropriation for University of Michigan – Ann Arbor is ~~$320,782,400.00, $314,589,100.00 for operations and $6,193,300.00 for performance funding.~~$324,355,200.00, $321,059,300.00 for operations and $3,295,900.00 for performance funding.

(l) The appropriation for University of Michigan – Dearborn is ~~$26,071,800.00, $25,421,900.00 for operations and $649,900.00 for performance funding.~~$26,494,400.00, $26,146,600.00 for operations and $347,800.00 for performance funding.

(m) The appropriation for University of Michigan – Flint is ~~$23,585,400.00, $23,061,800.00 for operations and $523,600.00 for performance funding.~~$24,006,400.00, $23,770,800.00 for operations and $235,600.00 for performance funding.

(n) The appropriation for Wayne State University is ~~$202,363,200.00, $199,169,800.00 for operations and $3,193,400.00~~ ~~for performance funding.~~$204,230,500.00, $202,529,900.00 for operations and $1,700,600.00 for performance funding.

(o) The appropriation for Western Michigan University is ~~$111,151,000.00, $109,376,800.00 for operations~~ ~~and $1,774,200.00 for performance funding.~~$112,795,300.00, $111,743,900.00 for operations and $1,051,400.00 for performance funding.

(3) The amount appropriated in subsection (2) for public universities is appropriated from the following:

(a) State school aid fund, $494,286,300.00.

(b) State general fund/general purpose money, ~~$1,027,054,600.00.~~$1,050,174,800.00.

(4) The amount appropriated for Michigan public school employees’ retirement system reimbursement is ~~$5,133,000.00,~~ $5,017,000.00, appropriated from the state school aid fund.

(5) The amount appropriated for state and regional programs is $315,000.00, appropriated from general fund/general purpose money and allocated as follows:

(a) Higher education database modernization and conversion, $200,000.00.

(b) Midwestern Higher Education Compact, $115,000.00.

(6) The amount appropriated for the Martin Luther King, Jr. - Cesar Chavez - Rosa Parks program is $2,691,500.00, appropriated from general fund/general purpose money and allocated as follows:

(a) Select student support services, $1,956,100.00.

(b) Michigan college/university partnership program, $586,800.00.

(7) Subject to subsection (8), the amount appropriated for grants and financial aid is ~~$139,583,200.00,~~ $139,283,200.00, allocated as follows:

(a) State competitive scholarships, $32,361,700.00.

(b) Tuition grants, $38,021,500.00.

(d) Children of veterans and officer’s survivor tuition grant programs, $1,400,000.00.

(e) Project GEAR-UP, $3,200,000.00.

~~(f) North American Indian tuition waiver, $300,000.00.~~

(8) The money appropriated in subsection (7) for grants and financial aid is appropriated from the following:

(a) Federal revenues under the United States Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, GEAR-UP program, $3,200,000.00.

(b) Federal revenues under the social security act, temporary assistance for needy families, ~~$120,326,400.00.~~$124,826,400.00.

~~(c) Contributions to children of veterans tuition grant program, $100,000.00.~~

(c) ~~(d)~~ State general fund/general purpose money, ~~$15,956,800.00.~~$11,256,800.00.

(9) For fiscal year ~~2018-2019 only,~~ 2019-2020 in addition to the allocation under subsection (4), from the appropriations described in subsection (1), there is allocated an amount not to exceed ~~$669,000.00~~ $1,234,000.00 for payments to participating public universities, appropriated from the state school aid fund. A university that receives money under this subsection shall use that money solely for the purpose of offsetting the normal cost contribution rate. As used in this subsection, “participating public universities” means public universities that are a reporting unit of the Michigan public school employees’ retirement system under the public school employees retirement act of 1979, 1980 PA 300, MCL 38.1301 to 38.1437, and that pay contributions to the Michigan public school employees’ retirement system for the state fiscal year.”.

The Senate agreed to the substitute, as amended, recommended by the Committee of the Whole, and the bill as substituted was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills.

Recess

Senator MacGregor moved that the Senate recess until 1:15 p.m.

The motion prevailed, the time being 12:48 p.m.

The Senate reconvened at the expiration of the recess and was called to order by the President pro tempore, Senator Nesbitt.

Recess

Senator MacGregor moved that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.

The motion prevailed, the time being 1:16 p.m.

1:27 p.m.

The Senate was called to order by the President pro tempore, Senator Nesbitt.

By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of

Motions and Communications

The following communication was received:

Office of Senator Tom Barrett

May 14, 2019

I, Senator Tom Barrett, would like my name added as a co-sponsor of Senate Bill 310, sponsored by Senator Santana. If there are any questions, please contact me or my office.

Best,

Tom Barrett

State Senator

24th Senate District

The communication was referred to the Secretary for record.

Senator MacGregor moved that the rules be suspended and that the following bills, now on Third Reading of Bills, be placed on their immediate passage:

Senate Bill No. 141

Senate Bill No. 143

Senate Bill No. 139

Senate Bill No. 148

Senate Bill No. 133

Senate Bill No. 137

Senate Bill No. 145

Senate Bill No. 144

Senate Bill No. 142

Senate Bill No. 147

Senate Bill No. 135

Senate Bill No. 138

Senate Bill No. 149

Senate Bill No. 134

Senate Bill No. 140

Senate Bill No. 136

Senate Bill No. 146

The motion prevailed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor.

By unanimous consent the Senate returned to the order of

Third Reading of Bills

Senator MacGregor moved that the following bills be placed at the head of the Third Reading of Bills calendar:

Senate Bill No. 141

Senate Bill No. 143

Senate Bill No. 139

The motion prevailed.

Senate Bill No. 141, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of insurance and financial services for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 65 Yeas—38

Alexander Geiss MacGregor Santana

Ananich Hertel McBroom Schmidt

Barrett Hollier McCann Shirkey

Bayer Horn McMorrow Stamas

Bizon Irwin Moss Theis

Brinks Johnson Nesbitt VanderWall

Bullock LaSata Outman Victory

Bumstead Lauwers Polehanki Wojno

Chang Lucido Runestad Zorn

Daley MacDonald

Nays—0

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

Senator Stamas asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Stamas’ statement is as follows:

Before you is fiscal year 2020’s budget plan that increases investments in key priorities while living within the means of the state.

I want to start by thanking each of the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, the subcommittee chairs, and our dedicated staff for all their hard work in putting together a responsible budget that will help improve our state for Michigan’s families, workers, and job creators.

Under this budget, we will have increased annual state spending on transportation by over $1.75 billion since fiscal year 2010—a boost of over 88 percent. We are investing an additional $132 million entirely to local roads, fully implementing the $1.2 billion from the 2015 roads plan a year ahead of schedule.

The K-12 budget would invest $15.2 billion in education, a total increase of nearly $400 million. Schools would see a foundation allowance boost of between $135 and $270 per pupil—the largest increase per-pupil in 18 years and $107 million more of a foundation allowance increase than the Governor’s plan. Under this budget, Michigan will have increased state funding for schools by over $2.6 billion over the past several years.

The budget plan also includes an additional $51.2 million in constitutional revenue sharing for local governments, graduates 85 new troopers, and invests $120 million for drinking water projects.

We are also restoring the Governor’s planned funding cuts in several programs, such as skilled trades training to help prepare workers for increased demand.

Discussions can and will continue on additional funding for our roads, but we need to press forward and fulfill our other obligations with resources that we currently have. It’s one of our top jobs to pass a balanced budget on time, and we owe it to our Michigan families.

I ask for your support for this budget.

Senate Bill No. 143, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of licensing and regulatory affairs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 66 Yeas—38

Alexander Geiss MacGregor Santana

Ananich Hertel McBroom Schmidt

Barrett Hollier McCann Shirkey

Bayer Horn McMorrow Stamas

Bizon Irwin Moss Theis

Brinks Johnson Nesbitt VanderWall

Bullock LaSata Outman Victory

Bumstead Lauwers Polehanki Wojno

Chang Lucido Runestad Zorn

Daley MacDonald

Nays—0

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

Senate Bill No. 139, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of health and human services for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

Senator Wojno offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 12, following line 14, by inserting:

“Prepaid inpatient health plan financial contingency fund ..................... 20,000,000”.

2. Amend page 12, line 17, by striking out “3,401,241,700” and inserting “3,421,241,700”.

3. Amend page 12, line 24, by striking out “1,108,889,900” and inserting “1,128,889,900” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

4. Amend page 147, following line 11, by inserting:

“Sec. 1010. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for prepaid inpatient health plan financial contingency fund the department shall allow individual prepaid inpatient health plans to apply for up to $2,000,000.00 in general fund dollars if they can demonstrate financial hardship. The department shall establish a set of criteria necessary to be considered for financial hardship. When establishing criteria, the department shall take into consideration the individual PIHP’s risk-reserve balance, the level of services currently provided, the number of services that have been discontinued within the last 12 months, the number of patient denials for behavioral health services, and whatever other criteria the department deems necessary for financial hardship eligibility. The department shall provide a quarterly report to the senate and house subcommittees on the department budget, the senate and house fiscal agencies, and the state budget office detailing the status of these funds.”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Geiss offered the following amendments:

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 67 Yeas—16

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Nays—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

1. Amend page 18, line 11, by striking out “20,803,500” and inserting “20,053,500”.

2. Amend page 18, line 17, by striking out “331,425,200” and inserting “330,675,200”.

3. Amend page 18, line 20, by striking out

“Social security act, temporary assistance for needy families.................. 750,000”

and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

4. Amend page 166, line 10, by striking out section 1303.

5. Amend page 166, line 19, by striking out section 1304.

6. Amend page 166, line 24, by striking out section 1305.

7. Amend page 167, line 21, by striking out section 1307.

8. Amend page 168, line 27, by striking out section 1310.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Alexander offered the following amendments:

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 68 Yeas—16

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Nays—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

1. Amend page 8, line 24, by striking out “174,951,600” and inserting “177,951,600”.

2. Amend page 9, line 4, by striking out “2,152,466,000” and inserting “2,155,466,000”.

3. Amend page 9, line 16, by striking out “91,746,900” and inserting “94,746,900” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

4. Amend page 118, following line 15, by inserting:

“Sec. 689. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for low-income home energy assistance program, the department shall allocate $3,000,000.00 to a nonprofit, community-based organization organized under the laws of this state that are exempt from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986, 26 USC 501 in order provide assistance to prevent low-income customers from being shut-off from a municipal water system. The organization selected to receive the funds shall have been founded in 1985 and be located in a county that had a population greater than 1,700,000 according to the most recent decennial census.”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Bayer offered the following amendments:

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 69 Yeas—16

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Nays—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

1. Amend page 62, line 5, by striking out “January 31, 2021” and inserting “October 1, 2022”.

3. Amend page 62, line 12, by striking out “would trigger a full statewide, all managed care populations’ integration process beginning October 1, 2022” and inserting “the department may extend the length of the pilot beyond the 3 year period and at that time allow for new CMHSPs to enter into the project at the beginning of the next fiscal year”.

4. Amend page 62, line 27, by striking out “during” and inserting “after”.

5. Amend page 63, line 1, by striking out “, including utilization measures”.

6. Amend page 63, line 5, by striking out “between CMHSPs and” and inserting “with”.

7. Amend page 142, line 14, by striking out Section 964.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 70 Yeas—16

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Nays—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

Senator Irwin offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 12, line 11, by striking out “346,548,100” and inserting “396,548,100”.

2. Amend page 12, line 12, by striking out “2,478,086,100” and inserting “2,828,086,100”.

3. Amend page 12, line 17, by striking out “3,401,241,700” and inserting “3,801,241,700”.

4. Amend page 12, line 20, by striking out “2,232,858,000” and inserting “2,502,443,000”.

5. Amend page 12, line 24, by striking out “1,108,889,900” and inserting “1,239,304,900”.

6. Amend page 21, line 11, by striking out “393,359,100” and inserting “543,359,100”.

7. Amend page 22, line 8, by striking out “15,419,816,000” and inserting “15,569,816,000”.

8. Amend page 22, line 11, by striking out “10,901,074,400” and inserting “10,997,164,400”.

9. Amend page 22, line 17, by striking out “1,816,271,300” and inserting “1,870,181,300” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly

10. Amend page 146, line 23, by striking out “maintain” and inserting “increase”.

11. Amend page 146, line 24, by striking out “from the previous fiscal year” and inserting “to a minimum of $15.00 per hour”.

12. Amend page 201, following line 24, by inserting

“Sec. 1798. From the funds appropriated in part 1 the department shall increase the wage paid to individuals providing adult home help services to a minimum of $15.00 per hour.”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 71 Yeas—16

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Nays—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

Senator Brinks offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 21, line 26, by striking out “346,613,000” and inserting “446,613,000”.

2. Amend page 22, line 8, by striking out “15,419,816,000” and inserting “15,519,816,000”.

3. Amend page 22, line 11, by striking out “10,901,074,400” and inserting “10,965,134,400”.

4. Amend page 22, line 17, by striking out “1,816,271,300” and inserting “1,852,211,300” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

5. Amend page 201, following line 24, by inserting:

“Sec. 1799. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for Medicaid home- and community-based services waiver the department shall require all contractors and subcontractors providing Medicaid home- and community-based services waiver services to pay a wage of at least $15.00 per hour to all of their employees”.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 72 Yeas—16

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Nays—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

Senator McMorrow offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 17, line 9, by striking out “7,209,100” and inserting “7,209,200”.

2. Amend page 17, line 17, by striking out “179,737,000” and inserting “179,737,100”.

3. Amend page 17, line 26, by striking out “57,828,500” and inserting “57,828,600”. and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly

4. Amend page 164, following line 26, by inserting:

“Sec. 1227. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for local health services, $100.00 shall be allocated for grants to local public health departments to support vaccine education programs.”.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 73 Yeas—17

Alexander Chang Irwin Polehanki

Ananich Geiss McCann Runestad

Bayer Hertel McMorrow Santana

Brinks Hollier Moss Wojno

Bullock

Nays—21

Barrett LaSata McBroom Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Nesbitt Theis

Bumstead Lucido Outman VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 74 Yeas—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Nays—16

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

Senators Wojno, Geiss, Alexander, Bayer, Brinks and McMorrow asked and were granted unanimous consent to make statements and moved that the statements be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Wojno’s statement is as follows:

My amendment would create a contingency fund for community mental health agencies in Michigan so they could request state dollars during extreme time of need. All of the agencies in our state have been drastically unfunded for years. In Macomb County alone, the Macomb County Community Mental Health Authority experienced a 17 percent budget cut in 2017. That resulted in a 30 percent cut to services provided for mental illness, substance abuse disorders, and intellectual and development disabilities in children with serious emotional needs. All of you know that other community mental health authorities are facing similar problems throughout our state.

Michigan already invests too little into mental health, and after this there will be even fewer dollars for mental health and at a time that they’re sorely needed. I ask all of you for support on this amendment.

Senator Geiss’ statement is as follows:

My amendment eliminates the $750,000 allocated for the Real Alternatives program.

Real Alternatives funnels money to so-called crisis pregnancy centers that bully women into carrying pregnancy to full term, even when the pregnancy could potentially jeopardize their mental and physical health. Among their latest controversies, Real Alternatives has barely ramped up capacity to effectively use the millions of dollars this state has given them since 2013; they lack transparency on how that money is being spent; they have been caught providing medically-inaccurate information to clients; and Real Alternatives refuses to acknowledge birth control as more than just contraception, such as being helpful for female reproductive health conditions such as endometriosis.

This budget cuts funding for several critical programs everyone in this room cares about, while simultaneously giving money to an organization that’s constantly snared in controversy and directly linked to a special interest group with ties to religious organizations and is therefore in direct violation of the Michigan Constitution—article I, section 4, sentence 2. Let me read these carefully-chosen, meaningful words—words upon which important things such as oaths of office are taken: “No money shall be appropriated or drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious sect or society, theological or religious seminary; nor shall property belonging to the state be appropriated for any such purpose.”

This appropriation of three-quarters of a million dollars for a religiously-tied program is neither morally nor fiscally responsible. Furthermore, it is unconstitutional. And while funding for them has been provided before, it was wrong then and it’s still wrong now.

I ask for your support of this amendment.

Senator Alexander’s statement is as follows:

I rise today to offer an amendment to fund the Heat and Warmth Fund.

This fund would ensure that people will not have their water and electricity turned off. This fund has been in existence since 1985. This particular bill has funded more than $190 million in assistance to more than 256,000 Michiganders. With your support, I would like to say to vote “yes” on this bill. I also have personal experience with THAW; they have helped me plenty of times, and this bill will help working people and poor people to keep their lights on.

Senator Bayer’s statement is as follows:

I’m proposing an amendment to eliminate the behavioral health fee schedule language and the revised section 298 of this budget proposal.

We must be very careful when we make decisions that impact our most vulnerable populations. As I stated in committee, implementing a Medicaid behavioral health fee schedule prior to seeing the integration pilots through is premature and risky. Furthermore, this idea that a flat fee schedule works for intensive behavioral health services like regular health services compared to mental health services is flatly not true. The cost of a behavioral health diagnosis is wide-ranging and varies greatly on a case-by-case basis.

As for section 298, my amendment strikes the language that would allow for HMOs to contract with non-CMH providers. I believe the requirement to contract with CMH providers and only CMH providers was core to the compromise that was made some years ago when the discussion on this topic first started.

This amendment also eliminates the statewide trigger language for integration pilots and instead allows those pilots to be extended after two years if metrics and goals determined by the Department of Health and Human Services are met. Other interested CMHs could also be part of the pilot. Colleagues, I believe it’s premature of us to be talking about a statewide implementation of a model before it’s even tested.

Because of this, this amendment is a reasonable compromise and I hope you will support me in voting “yes” for this amendment.

Senator Brinks’ statement is as follows:

Colleagues, I rise and offer this amendment to the Department of Health and Human Services budget to increase wages for the hardworking Medicaid home and community-based direct care workers across Michigan.

I know the importance of this work first hand and let me tell you the story of my brother, Owen. Owen will turn 58 years old this year and a short time after he was born, Owen started having seizures which were very difficult to control. As he grew, he failed to reach developmental milestones on schedule and it became clear that he would need constant care for the rest of his life. He would not be able to dress himself or go to the bathroom, bathe or engage in many basic tasks of self-care. For seven years, my parents cared for him at home. All the while, they knew that there would come a day when that would not be possible.

So when Owen was seven years old, he went to live in a group home where he received constant care that he needed including frequent medical appointments, therapies, appropriate educational and recreational opportunities, and for the last 50 years, Owen and our whole family have relied on caregivers to patiently and lovingly take care of him. They feed him, they change his diaper, they notice if he seems unsettled or in pain because he can’t tell them. He is nonverbal.

When he was in the hospital a couple of years ago with pneumonia, some of his caregivers visited and sat with him in the hospital on their own time. We rely on these caregivers to take care of Owen the way that we would, but we can’t. The hardworking direct healthcare workers who make sure that he is taken care of are a tremendous comfort to me and my family, but in Michigan we struggle to find enough trained workers to do this job and to counter high turnover rates as wages remain low in what is a physically and mentally demanding job.

Direct care workers are paid on average only $8.90 per hour and they serve 40,000 of Michigan’s most vulnerable residents, including our friends, family, and neighbors who are born with and live with disabilities, who like my brother Owen, who literally cannot get out of bed or dress themselves without a caregiver.

Individuals who may be nonverbal or who often struggle with change making a high rate of turnover in staff problematic. Their work, and the work of the MI Choice waiver, give Michiganders the option to avoid more costly nursing home settings and still receive the level of care that they need. It is our duty to protect our most vulnerable residents and that includes paying them well and retaining the workers who provide them with quality care and programming.

My amendment would bring the wages of Medicaid home and community-based direct care workers in line with other healthcare roles by raising wages to $15.00 an hour, an increase that will benefit people like my brother as well as direct care workers and their families, and our economy. Thank you, I ask for your support of my amendment.

Senator McMorrow’s statement is as follows:

Colleagues, I rise today asking for your support of my amendment to the Department of Health and Human Services budget, which would allow additional funding for health departments directed towards vaccine education.

Oakland County has become the epicenter of a measles outbreak in Michigan, one state out of many throughout the country. We are now facing the highest number of measles cases since the disease was considered eliminated in the United States in the year 2000 and actually the highest number since 1994.

Though our ability to treat measles has improved, the true impact spreads far beyond those who contract the disease. One resident who is receiving chemotherapy in my district while battling cancer was advised by her doctor to stay in her home until the measles outbreak is contained.

About one child out of every 1,000 who gets measles will develop encephalitis, swelling of the brain which can cause irreparable damage such as convulsions which can lead a child deaf, or with an intellectual disability. Dr. Nate Smith, a co-chair of the Infectious Disease Policy Committee for the Association of State and Territorial Health Offices, estimates that cost to state health departments could be $50,000 to treat and contain cases or $30 million nationwide.

In 1963 more than 90 percent of kids had received the measles vaccine by their 16th birthday—program that’s proven incredibly effective in eradicating the disease. But today, as more and more parents grow up in an era without the prevalence of such infectious diseases, there is a growing trend of distrust and refusal of vaccines, putting us in a dangerous position should we be exposed to further diseases.

According to the Journal of Infectious Diseases, measles has been a disease of a high burden historically and as recently as the year 2000, an estimated 733 individuals, mainly children, died from complications of measles.

I urge your support of this amendment to ensure our health departments have the resources they need to properly protect our residents.

Senator MacGregor moved that the following bills be placed at the head of the Third Reading of Bills calendar:

Senate Bill No. 148

Senate Bill No. 133

The motion prevailed.

Senate Bill No. 148, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of talent and economic development for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor.

Senator Santana offered the following amendments:

1. Amend page 3, following line 12, by inserting:

“Small business support grants.............................. 100”.

2. Amend page 3, line 27, by striking out “112,815,700” and inserting “112,815,800” and adjusting the subtotals, totals, and section 201 accordingly.

3. Amend page 27, following line 26, by inserting:

“Sec. 448. From the funds appropriated in part 1 for small business support grants, there is allocated $100.00 for the small business support grant program. Funds allocated under this section are intended to provide small businesses with grants to offset the cost of disruptions to business activity caused by road construction projects.”.

The yeas and nays were ordered, 1/5 of the members present voting therefor.

The amendments were not adopted, a majority of the members serving not voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 75 Yeas—16

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Nays—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 76 Yeas—38

Alexander Geiss MacGregor Santana

Ananich Hertel McBroom Schmidt

Barrett Hollier McCann Shirkey

Bayer Horn McMorrow Stamas

Bizon Irwin Moss Theis

Brinks Johnson Nesbitt VanderWall

Bullock LaSata Outman Victory

Bumstead Lauwers Polehanki Wojno

Chang Lucido Runestad Zorn

Daley MacDonald

Nays—0

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt

Senator Santana asked and was granted unanimous consent to make a statement and moved that the statement be printed in the Journal.

The motion prevailed.

Senator Santana’s statement is as follows:

My amendment would provide businesses with a grant if they experience financial hardships during the Michigan Department of Transportation’s projects. Sometimes projects disrupt and end existing small businesses. Small businesses, we all know, are the bread and butter to all our communities. Unfortunately, during construction seasons sometimes roads get closed, sidewalks get torn up, and parking lots are not accessible. But nearby businesses stay open to serve the consumers.

Construction is a necessary disruption, but it can create major financial headaches for small business owners. I ask my colleagues today to support the amendment, so we can support our local economies.

Senate Bill No. 133, entitled

A bill to make appropriations for the department of agriculture and rural development for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020; and to provide for the expenditure of the appropriations.

The question being on the passage of the bill,

The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows:

Roll Call No. 77 Yeas—22

Barrett LaSata Nesbitt Stamas

Bizon Lauwers Outman Theis

Bumstead Lucido Runestad VanderWall

Daley MacDonald Schmidt Victory

Horn MacGregor Shirkey Zorn

Johnson McBroom

Nays—16

Bayer Geiss McCann Santana

Brinks Hertel McMorrow Wojno

Alexander Bullock Hollier Moss

Ananich Chang Irwin Polehanki

Excused—0

Not Voting—0

In The Chair: Nesbitt