Morning everyone the Committee will come to order. we are conducting our final legislative markup of the year. I just came from a help Committee markup. It's their last Mark of the year, and it was really pretty encouraging to listen to a rundown of what that Committee has done over the years and it just reminds me that here in this Committee, we too have had significant legislative success and we are ending out our our year with moving even more bills. Have a total of 19 bills on the short list Today. Most most are focused on public lands issues. We have a couple of energy bills mixed into it. I wanna start by highlighting a bipartisan bill from Senator Crapo and 19. other members included myself to extend the secure rural schools program for two years. This is something that Senator widen cares deeply about. We worked on it for many years. Many Alaskans yes, mister Senator Mansion. He also likes this one but many. Communities are forced to rely on it, SRS due to a decline in timber receipts, but it's authorization has now lapsed our ability to fund it uncertain. I've been pushing to extend SRS in the year-end package that is is out there for discussion and negotiation now, but I feel pretty strongly that we need to report this building case. We can't reach agreement in that appropriations process. Another important measure is a small County pilled. Senator Danes has sponsored this bipartisan bill. It has nine members, including me that are cosponsors. We're seeking to correct a bias in existing law so that small rural communities in Alaska, Montana, Nevada are not disadvantaged compared to more populous counties in other States. I know Senator Manchin has some concerns about this and we will hear from him later on it but I am hopeful that we will be able to address this matter another bill in our short list. Help Preserve American battlefields This was a top or is a top priority for our friend and soon to be retired colleague Senator Johnny Isakson. I think knowing that he is one of the individuals around here who works consistently to build good strong bipartisan support not only here in the Senate, but in both chambers, I think for us to be able to advance it today with certainly be another fitting tribute to his great record of congressional service. I also wanna mention two bills. Will benefit our nation's veterans? The first is the Wounded Veterans Recreation Act from Senator Shaheen and several others. It would make the National Parks and our Federal Recreation Lands pass available to those with service-related disabilities. These passes will be free for life as we recognize the sacrifices that these men and women have made for us. The second is the Department of Energy Veterans Health Initiative Act. This is from Representative Ralph Norman has 20 - six co-sponsors. It will facilitate a joint research program between the Department and the VA to improve The Senate version earlier this year and I'm hopeful that we can agree to send the House bill to the President's desk in the very near future. We also have a few other energy-related measures on the agenda, including one focused on wind energy, R and D. After this Mark up the window is essentially closed on base additions to our energy package. Not everything. of course that we've reported will be included but will now turn to the negotiating it so that we can be ready to bring it to the floor hopefully very early next year. The process of today's markup will begin consideration of amendments. once we have seven members looks like we're there. once we dispense with those and have 11 members present will move on to final votes. Nearly all of the measures on our agenda have can be moved on block by voice vote with members being recorded. No at their request. We know that several members have constraints on their schedule, so we'll need to move expeditiously in order to finish our business. this morning. Our staffs had advised that we'll probably do final votes begin. 11 o 'clock and if we can't make that stick well, no, I guess we're not gonna do votes at 11 other people have votes between 11 and 1115, so they've gotta scoot out of here. so we wanna try to to be expeditious with his business meeting, so I would encourage members to be concise as we move along, but I certainly give the floor now to to my friend and ranking member Senator Manchin. Thank you. Sharon Makowski for all of this meeting today and our final business meeting of 2019 today. we're gonna be voting on. Which will bring our total for the year to 70 - seven bills reported out of this Committee, which I think is a we take a moment to reflect on that and that's one of the most Progressive I think committees and and in this US Senate Our Committee on mostly bipartisan basis will have favorably considered 50 - two energy bills, 20 - five public land builds over the course of this year. This is of course, in addition to getting the first public lands package in five years enacted and none of that would be possible without all of us working together across Senate flooring with our House counterparts so thank you Chairman Murkowski for your leadership. I wanna thank you, Senator Cantwell and Senator Wyden for all their work on these bills that finally came to fruition. we have a lot of work ahead of us next year to get some of this important legislation across the finish line and I'm glad to have all of my partners here today. Attorneys today's agenda. We're gonna be considering a number of public lands bills and five energy bills and I'm proud to co-sponsor two of these bills. The first is Senator Heinrich Energy Workforce Bill, which will create a program in the Department of Energy to. Participation of minorities, veterans and displaced and unemployed energy and manufacturing workers in the growing clean energy workforce. We need a Department of Energy to apply their knowledge of the energy sector, not just to the technologies, but also to the workforce that produces the fuel and electricity we depend on and I look forward to working with Senator Murkowski and Committee members on a workforce title to our larger energy package. But I'd also like to know that workforce training programs are only fruitful if there are jobs available once workers graduate from these programs, it's so important States. At Workforce Development is accompanied by economic development and really what I'm saying in a nutshell is if you're going to go in a different direction and we are and we're expanding and mentoring new clean technology, then make sure you don't leave the people that give you the energy you have today behind and that's what's happened in the past. we're also gonna be putting out energy bills pertaining to win research and development energy efficiency at schools providing flexibility and Title 17 loan guarantee program and putting the DOE Super computers to work improving our veterans health care. These bills join those we've already reported out to make a sound base for the robust energy innovation package. The chairman are working on public land bills. The other Senator Crapo Bill, which has been mentioned by Senator Murkowski to authorize the secure Rural schools program for two additional years. The secure rules Schools program is critical to my state of West Virginia. The program Hanley provides over one point seven million to 14 of our forest and smallest counties. If we do not react authorize this program over 40 - 400. Across the country will feel the impacts I'm pleased to Co-sponsor Senator Cortez Masto's Amendment to that bill this morning, which would allow some SRS funny to be used to expand broadband Internet in rural counties and I wanna thank her for working with me on the amendment to ensure the funding can be used to address what people are calling the homework gap. This one short students have the ability to access the Internet once they leave school weather on a school bus and a library or at home and on public land side. We've got a problem here and I wanna work through this problem. I do not wanna vote against any bill here, but the way the bills being. Right now and as far as the payments for 40 - six smaller counties, I have small port small poor countries in my state. I know I do. I don't think anyone intended to harm any of these counties, but the way the bill is written right now it will unless there's additional funding we have an amendment for that and I'm gonna ask you name is consent so we can fix this to where all of us meet the intent of what we wanna do, which is help the poorest counties under 5000 population, the smallest counties and usually the pores but not at the detriment Other poor countries around the country and we have that and it's gonna take additional funding. If there's no additional funding I can assure you someone's got to pay. It's gotta come from somewhere and you could have a state where you have a poor County of less than 5000 and. You can the counties in your state. you can have the Richard counties or the more populous guy. they're gonna have money taken away from them to pay for the poor counties. I don't think that was the intent and we're trying to fix that. and I think we have an amendment that can do that. So I look forward to that Chaco. I'd also like to acknowledge that while we won't be voting on Senator Henry's Chaco Canyon build today, we are striving to removing it in the near. Finally, I would like to call attention to Senator Daines Building name the mountain in Montana. The beef 40 - Seven Ridge. The ridge is the site of the crash of an Air Force B 40 - seven bomber during a training mission 50 - seven years ago. The crash took the lives of all for the Plains Crew members. One of them Lieutenant Fred Hickman Bar was from Burton West Virginia. All were married and had families and I think it's right that we commemorate their service and their sacrifice for reporting this bill and I wanna thank Senator Reporting today's bills until next year, when we will finish the job so thank you to the chairman my colleagues for all the White bipartisan working all the bills. We've got the makings of a great energy innovation package. that is a key step in addressing the climate challenge and I look forward to seeing it across the finish line with everybody here. Thank you. Ma' am Chairman Madam Chair. We we We. We have a quorum and so I'm gonna take no more than 30 seconds. We wrote in this room years ago, secure rural schools and it's been a For rural communities, we've desperately need to get this package renewed for two more years as the chairman should get it in to the final piece of legislation before we wrap up the years work for two reasons, one a rural communities needed and second, it will be a bridge to the proposal. We had a hearing on just about 10 days or so ago to create an endowment to get these rural communities off a roller coaster. I too think Center. Masto and others are recognizing the need for rural investment for members who care as Senator Murkowski and I Senator Mansion can't well and others do go to the leadership now and tell them how important it is that secure rural schools get into the final bill because it will be a bridge to the future. We will build on a law that we wrote in this room with Senator Craig years ago and we'll get our rural. Off the roller coaster, Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you, Senator Weiden. We have we have seven members present so we can take up amendments now so we will move to consideration those adoption of any substitute amendments will now allow those bills to be available for possible amendments for our standard practice. There will still be an opportunity for members to either vote or be recorded as no on the final measures. So we'll first move to accept the Joint staff amendments on block to 16 of those agenda items they. Amendments in the nature of substitutes for agenda items, Number 13 through nine 1112 and 18 amendments for agenda items, Number 1314 1519 and 20 title amendments to agenda items Number 3468, 12 and 20. We'll also include amendments that have been filed by individual members which have been cleared by joint staff on block Those are an amendment filed by Senator Cortez for Agenda item. Seven and two second degree amendments on studies filed by Senator Lee for Agenda item Number seven and those are PHAT 19 B 29, as modified by the Joint Staff, Amendment, FLO 19919 and P M A T 19 B 31. So if there's no objections, the Committee will voice vote on block the amendments. I've just listed any objections. Let me ask you on 17. I'm gonna hold for amendment. I'm I ask unanimous consent on 17. On the Senate Bill, 20, - 120 - 108, it's item 1717. I didn't mention 17. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So no objections all those in favor indicate by saying I I all those opposed, say nay the ayes have it. The amendments are adopted we We now have a reporting form of 11 members present, which allows us to report legislation from the Committee so without objection we will now vote on 18 items on the short list on block as cleared by joint staff and as amendment as amended, if amended, we will also allow any member who wishes to be recorded. No on any measures to be recorded. As such, those are agenda items number 13 through 911 through 16 eight to 18 through 20 and 20 - two. So are there Hearing none all those in favor say I I all those opposed nay the eyes have it. The measures are ordered reported. Are there any members who wish to be recorded as no on any of these agenda items? and I'm sure I'd like to be recorded as a no on the items identified him as list we will accept those you will be recorded as no on the items identified on the list. Senator Barrasso Madam Chairman Yes. please to be identified as a No on items. Number 311 and 13 Center Brasso will be recorded, according reported accordingly as. Any other members wishing to Senator Rich yes, Mam Sherman and I want to be a three 1113. You will be recorded as a no on those amendments as you have indicated any other members. Alright so Senator Mansion You have mentioned agenda item number 17 small County pills you wouldn't care if I can speak to that to them. First of all, I'd like to ask consent to offer an amendment that I think fixes it cuz I don't think anyone's intent is to harmony counties that basically what they're getting now and we know we have to fight for what we get on the field built money the way it is. if if you have a County that's less than 5000 right now, it's a hundred and 80 - $6 and 50 -. We have a County that has 10000 or less it starts at a hundred and 30, so I have counties many countries. They're very poor, very rule with less than 10000. They're getting a hundred and 30 to hundred and $40. We're not we're not complaining about that 5000 mile 180 - six, but we know that unless there's more money, the money has to come from somewhere so you have to change the formula. I think what we really need to do is set and redo the whole formula for Pelt because it makes no sense. It's so complicated the way it is right now. No one understands it and it's not fair but to Senator Dan That's not your intent. You know I've talked. I truly believe you on that and I truly wanna help and fix it. I know small large rural counties, but I've got counties that are so poverty stricken that you take $20 $30 per person away and it hurts them immensely and I know that's not our intent. so I have an amendment that basically all it says, Is it provides There's a new formula If this is what we're gonna work with what we have right now, we're only we only take effect if additional funds are appropriated. And then we can make that adjustment. If a new funds, we can't make it with the existing funds unless someone loses that's really where we are now and you can have losses in your own state by your larger counties and I don't think anyone wants to do that. So we're trying the best we can to fix this. the two things you can do. I would hope that you would look favorably upon the amendment. It does no harm, but truly puts our attention towards those smaller counties that we can help roll small or large counties. If we get more money and on the other hand, we can go back. Redo the whole funding mechanics that we have so that's my amendment. if if if that's the direction we would go and hopefully you will look favorably upon that. Yeah. Thank you. Chairman Mikowski and ranking member mentioned. Thank you for working with me on this truly is not anybody's intent right. I know any County. It's funny as results of this this provision at all, I think we probably have a bit of a different view. In terms of what's possible and what the outcomes might be looking at the fact that the pilots been funded since 2011, that they're looking at a hypothetical if if somehow didn't get funded where there's no increase in funding well in the the secret, the interior was here when they testify ask specific questions. they said. There will not be any impact on any counties here as long as we keep funding tilts at the full levels, which we've done since 2011. So it's probably just. A disagreement in terms of what what might happen, I don't think I think we all agree. There's only so much money in a dollar. There's so many pennies on the dollar and if it stays flat and we're gonna get more money to certain counties. It's gotta come from somewhere, but it doesn't come out of the air unless there's more money in appropriations. Yeah and and as we as we continue just as you think about with this one, I like change the pie does get it does get bigger when you talk about what full funding of guilt is on the amendment doesn't hurt the moment the moment basically that we've put in here directs of any additional money goes towards the poor. Yup and and and the concern if we if the funding were to go down, actually their smaller counties, Disproportion get hurt hurt in a more harmful way, not on a per capita basis, disproportionately on a per capita basis, A smaller countries get more per capita than all the larger counties and I got smaller counties that were here. Here's the we have the chart we given everybody the chart. Yeah. I'm gonna go ahead and jump in here and kind of weigh in here. I'm in a somewhat unique position as a chairman of the Interior Appropriations Committee that has oversight of of pills and I I I can tell you that this is a priority of mine. I have made it a priority and as long as I'm sharing the interior appropriations subcommittee, I intend to fully fund pill. That's exactly. We did this year we have worked to make sure that that those needs are are met what Senator Danes speaks to and you certainly know Senator Mansion What we're trying to do is make sure that you've got some level of of equity and I think what we've identified and what Senator Danes has has done through his through his bill, which I am a supporter of is there is there is an inherent inequality or an inequity within the formula itself this. All counties with small populations are deliberately disadvantaged by and I think this is one of the reasons why we've got Nico the National Association of Counties that supports us they they send us I think I had I'm gonna make sure that communication that we received last night where they said that that they continue to support this in that in that communication, they wrote under the current pilot Formula Monetary multiplier limitations increase as populations decrease, but this increase then cuts off at 5000 people and so legitimate question. As to why do you have the 5000 people cut off? I don't know that there's any good answer on that but what we do. Is we know what the outcome is that the countries with large populations are deliberately deliberately advantaged under the belt formula and so they do fine. but the county's with a small populations, which more often than not have more federal lands and fewer opportunities to develop a tax base or certainly in my state. they received then less than they should, and I think that's what what Senator Danes was just trying to point out. So if I may let me just finish up here though, but I I I I do. Honest to I wanna make sure that what we're trying to do here is to get to to the end goal, which I think you Senator Danes and Youth Center mansion are both talking about right. We wanna make sure that the most just advantage of these counties are able to do that. Yeah. So let's figure out if we can maybe we need to add advance this and see if we can figure out how to work it out from there. but I don't think that we are at odds with the angle. Sure, so I mean sheriff I remember I will go there. I couldn't centrally. The mansion Iron in violent agreement in terms of the outcome. We want the photo violence the Dream I like that Yeah, but but I think it's just probably just looking at the algebra. Yeah, maybe potential unintended consequences correct concern and I very much respect that. but at the end of the day with the passage of this provision, the algebra changes so the pie gets bigger so full funding a pill before and then full funding a pill after it's actually larger because we just changed the way the funding Algebra works for counties of less than 5000 people so it it really isn't a zero. Game unless unless unless built wasn't fully funded which that is the hypothetical, But if you're funded to the level, you're funded right now is what we're talking about right to this year's funding. Okay this year's funding. If you have a County of 30000 people, you get 90 - $3 per person. If you have a funding of 5000 or less, you get a hundred and 80 - $6 now something's gotta change because either the 30000 counties when they get 80 - $5. For that to be transferred unless that additional money comes in so if I may sure response and that's exactly the algebra what happens if somebody wants upon a time made this arbitrary cut at 5000 people and somebody some well-meaning staff person. Remember that did that. But what it does when you have large counties with large percentages, often times of of federal lands. What happens they got large, large land masses, small populations, and they're struggling to try to get buying so. This is this just literally it makes the pie bigger. It's not a zero sum. That's a that's an important point of this cuz it's just that the funding for it actually changes that we got to put more money to fully fund built because of this provision, then the amendment doesn't hurt anything. it protects us cuz it give us a firewall. All we ask for is a firewall that gives us a firewall. Yeah. I just wanted to echo the point that Senator Danes made he made the point I was gonna make the pie does grow if we were plugging in a formula for Pierre Squared when our increases the total number of that. Get at the end of it increases this would do that to a corresponding degree and it I'm confident this is the way it is and I will continue to work with you on it, but that is what it says that's if I could Senator mentioned Sam can I have Sam Sam? I've had him research this thing inside and out to ask us. basically what would happen cuz I know what we're gonna be dealing with and sooner or later we gotta face it. It takes money. It takes you're saying automatically the money has to be put in there if we change to this formula. As long as it healthy is fully funded, which it has been really fun right. Yeah. As long as it's fully funded money goes to the pie will grow and West Virginia will get that. I think that the challenge is if we we pull back on the full funding and you know we've had a lot of conversation in this Committee about about LW CF but you know when you think about you think about full funding for. LW CF funding there is there's some Nexus there. I'll just suggest you Sam if you would care to respond to Senator Mansion's question. Certainly thank you. Senator Senator Mansion's Amendment basically leaves Senator Daines Bill intact except for two lines. It strikes two lines from Senator Danes this bill in places those two lines it inserts. Two new sudden paragraphs for two different situations. The second one B describes the situation That's in Senator Daines this bill. if adequate money is made available by Congress to the Secretary to fully fund the county's under the current formula or the the formula in Senator Danes is bill, then those smaller counties. The four new tears that are added by Senator Danes Bill will get the Senator Daines this bill the first of the sub paragraphs A deals with the situation that Senator mansion is concerned about what happens if Congress doesn't appropriate sufficient funds for the Secretary to pay the amounts and Senator Danes bill to all of the counties, including the for additional tears that are being added in that case, Senator Mansion's Amendment says you go back to. The current situation where the smallest of the counties are treated as if they had 5000 people like yeah, you're going down to a thousand. You want a category 1234 the category start at five and greater right now. I'm Sam so just to be clear on this fully funding built if this provision were to pass not the amendment. But just the the vision I have fully funding is larger. going forward is he's important cuz Joe's got a Center Mansion's Point is well taken that he wants to make sure it's not a zero-sum game that somehow then the small counties get dollars in expense of larger counties. and that's not the case as long as we keep funding built fully funding it because the new. Puts more money into what full funding bill means yeah correct. That is that is correct, and that's all we're doing is building a firewall. All we're doing is building the firewall in case that doesn't happen. It's okay, but that point is go ahead and then if we don't fully fund piled the concern here for I know my, I have some colleagues here across here also on this bill and the county's in Nevada in place like New Mexico, where then the small counties get disproportionally hit harder actually in that situation right. Center If if if I may the the additional money that is in your amendment compared to what you see in the existing law they the dollar figures that are in your bill would still go to all of the counties under Senator Mansion's firewall the the one exception between his firewall and your bill is that. The event that enough money is not made available to fund all of the counties under your formula. Then the first four tears the 1000 2000 3000 4000 would be treated as if they had 5000 and under your bill. A County of 5000 gets a hundred and 80, - $6 and 50 - six cents and per person, and and that is the highest amount of A 1000 to 5000 would get that amount they would not get the additional amount in your bill, which go up to 250 - $4 and 40 cents per person so they they they would still benefit under under your bill, but they would not benefit as much if Congress is unable to appropriate the full amount and Murkowski is right and research that has been fully funded, but that is not always been the history of this program. So what I would like to do I I know that we're gonna lose members starting five minutes ago. who have other Committee markups that they're going to this is an important discussion. I think it is important that we try to get it right. I think you Senator mansion are are addressing a concern. I think Senator Danes and I certainly share that and we wanna make sure that the that these very small. Are not disadvantaged through a formula. My concern is is that if we if we if we try to address by way of an amendment, something where it's clear that we have yet all come to agreement. I think we all weather. I wanna do the same. We wanna get to the same place and so at this point in time, my inclination is to to oppose the amendment allow the the the measure to proceed. A vote and then allow us to work on on exactly what you have raised in exactly the goal that Senator Danes is trying to get to man chairman would you and so in an effort to try to move this out because I do think that this isn't important enough issue. You've got an agreement around the the the tables here that we don't want to to have an unintended consequence. I certainly don't want to and my commitment, but the bottom line is is that we all realize that we're all depending on. More funding we all realize it takes more money. Don't we I think to make your amendment it always does okay and there's no guarantee of that. We all understand. there's no guarantee so if it takes more money and there's no more guarantee someone's got to pay. and if you have a County more than 5000 or 10000, you're going to pay for the 1234 and that's as simple as that, and that's only if we don't fund. That's what we're saying that yeah. So I have said this is Sara. Moving forward, I think the whole thing needs to be looked at. We wanna help those little countries well. I'm not I'm not prepared to set it aside right now, simply give a suit. This is this is our last markup that we're gonna have this year. I'd like to think that we can. We can move it out and keep working on it. I'd like to think that we can because I think I think we're not too far apart. I think what we wanna try to do is make sure again that if we're going to make changes to formula what I don't like what I don't like is something that sets it up. As long as there's full funding, but if there's not then we revert to the old way cuz what I'm hearing from my my communities back home is. A little bit of certainty with this federal funding in terms of how much we can rely on in our little County. Every little municipal budgets is an important thing. The Center wish briefly Mr Chairman I this thing is really important and it's really unfortunate. We've got to this point where we're arguing amongst ourselves over language because everybody wants to get to the same place Center mention. I'm gonna vote against your amendment and I'll tell you why right. we're right now. we know where we are. We know what Senator Murkowski is gonna deliver. I believe, but I think as we go forward, we really ought to try to. Language to get to the point that you're talking about but right now, it is so important that we move this thing forward. I think we should do it so I'm gonna vote against the amendment but look we all need This is not Republican Democrat. This isn't partisan this is this is all of us that have States have this kind of a problem. so let me just try em in if I can just say one final thing that discussion in my state with counties less than 10000 people in the country right now is why is why in West Virginia. We try to find a County government with less than 10000 people. When I have another County was 6000, I put them together. I got 16000, I have one cent. Government It doesn't make sense sooner or later we're gonna have to to say we we wanna keep all 55 counties in West Virginia. We don't know if we can afford 50 - Five counties, 50 - five boards of Education, 50 - Five highway departments, 50, is ridiculous and these smaller counties and I don't know if we're just kinda exasperating the the problem that we have, but the bottom line is I know that it takes on a per capita basis. When you have large land, Mass and smaller fewer people, you gotta help them. I did the foul the algebras per capita versus per square mile. That's one of the problems. I think what we're doing is we're betting Right now, without a fix to it, we're betting on the come. We're betting that were 20 - three trillion dollars in debt. No one really gives a darn about being in debt in this country. So I'll just throw more fire to the fuel it fuel to the fire. I'm sorry. I got that backwards anyway. I wanna fix it. I wanna work on fixing it. I don't know about moving it forward and we're gonna sit down and fix it anymore than what we could have right now with the amendment that puts a firewall so well, Indiana in in fairness to that point. I think we really I've been Dansville now for for months, I don't I don't remember when you introduced it when I signed on to it, but it was some time ago and it seems like it's just been within literally a 40 -eight-hour period 20 - four -hour period, where where we kind of come to a mentor. It's worth what make's fully behind. this bill doesn't mean they've they've looked at it. They're behind it and anyway and so so again I think I think there's plenty of room here for us to Where we feel we've got flaws or an inconsistency or a different view in terms of income. I'm not gonna make anybody vote on this amendment. If you don't wanna vote on it and put you in a tough position. I think we're on a tough position. We all wanna help each other and we don't wanna harm each other. They don't care whether you're Democrat or Republican County people, people need help and we'll work through this. I'm hoping that's Senator Danes your staff and our staff can work through it. We're trying to honestly look at it, but when it comes down to it and all were basic. Saying is if it stays flat and there's no more money. can we put a firewall that we don't harm other counties? That's all I'm saying every one of us have counties in our States. they're going to be harmed. The larger counties will have to be taken away from to give to the smaller counties. I'm if that's what you wanna do. I'm fine. That's you do it. I can't vote for that. I'm not but if you wanna help a smaller County and we got more money, I'm all for that count me in so it sounds Senator mentioned that you will not interview so there's no there's no need to. I'm not gonna put him back on board right, but I want you you are gonna move it with we so it. Time it's appropriate that we have a roll-call vote on on the Danes item 17 oh. I thought we were gonna move the bill. Yeah with the ability to work The amendment. Yeah. After okay, we will move the we will move the bill. We'll vote the bill out and then you've got my commitment how about when it goes to the floor. If we if we can't make it if we don't come to an agreement on the floor and this I would I would I want this bill to be presented separately, not as a package that Madam chair, I think what we have the opportunity to do is move this bill from Committee that gives us time to address the issues you have raised and and. The unintended consequences that I think we all want to try to avoid and and hopefully we get to that point where we'd be able to actually move it through the full floor. Senator Gardner will just be clear. I mean we pass bills out of Committee regularly that will give us a chance to work on that bill as it gets to the floor on the floor and that's what regular order is about. so I don't think anybody is not when you put in the package. Senator. That's the thing you know we we we. We have. We change the order of we. We change the language of legislation packages all the time through negotiations and I don't think anybody is saying this can't continue but I think the type to put strings on its passage. Is not appropriate, I would I would I will what I will propose and commit to is I want to move this bill out of Committee. I'd like to continue to work with Senator Danes and Senator Mansion and any other member who has input to this. I think many of us view this as an important issue in our States in our regions and and work to get us to that good point where we can all come together and Indiana. As to a strong future for for not only the pilot program, but for these smaller counties, so with that, Senator mansion have you requested a roll-call voter Center Danes, or do we wanna just go by voice? Alright? Can we voice vote? We can absolutely voice voted all those in favor of agenda item number 17 this small country built. Indicate by saying I I all those opposed nay the eyes have it and the measure is agreed to so with that, there are no other items. According to pardon recording me is no in case it doesn't get yes, I will you are recorded as no Senator mansion. I wanna explain to my counties. Yes, they lost money. We will we will record you as no that does then conclude our votes. Senator Stabenow also wishes to be recorded as no. I think you can by Proxy so that concludes our business meeting. If members have any other matters that they would like to bring before the Committee. we can entertain that now or you may submit your comments to to the Committee. But for now, our business meeting is adjourned too many. Let's see.