Capitol-watchers showed up today for what they thought would only be the thirty-ninth day of the 2009 session of the Georgia General Assembly, and lo and behold, an "amendment party" broke out!  Bills being considered in both the House and the Senate were altered significantly, and most of the amendments sought to revive legislation that had not made it past the scrutiny of committees prior to this day.

Let's make sure the stage is set.  At this point, the House is considering bills that had passed the Senate, and the Senate is working on bills that had passed the House.  Legislators who had not been successful in getting "their bills" on a calendar to be considered by the opposite chamber typically seek creative ways to get their bills enacted anyway, and the way it is done is to add one's bill to another "moving" bill as an amendment.  That, in many ways, is the story of this day.

Before delving too deeply into amended bills, though, it must be acknowledged that the Senate officially passed its version of the FY2010 Budget.  Senator Jack Hill (R-Reidsville), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, spent less than five minutes reviewing the Senate version of that budget, and after a short period of amendment-related dickering among members, the budget-related legislation passed and was immediately sent to the House of Representatives.  To no one's surprise, the House disagreed with the Senate version and sent it right back.  After both chambers officially insisted on maintaining their positions on the budget (a common parliamentary procedure), a conference committee consisting of three representatives and three senators has already begun meeting to resolve differences and reach a final compromise on this critical document.  Final action will be taken by both chambers at some point late on Friday, April 3, the fortieth and final day of this regular session.

Now to action taken by the House and Senate on legislation.  Of keen interest to many readers of this site is whether HB 455, the bill calling for a one-month extension of the teacher contract deadline date for 2009 only, would be considered by the Senate.  In fact, it was on the Senate calendar for this date, and it passed!  But, with amendments, two of them.   Added to this bill were amendments that (1) eliminated the sunset date on the statute creating the Master Teacher program, and (2) prohibits teachers who earn leadership degrees in future years from being paid for those degrees unless they hold leadership positions.  This amended bill now goes over to the House for their consideration (which may involve removing these amendments or simply agreeing to them).  Under any circumstance, the progress of this bill has been slowed once again, and interested parties will not know its fate until late on the final day of the session.  Even if it passes at that point, it would still need a quick signature by Governor Perdue to be of any use in local school systems.

The Senate also went "amendment crazy" with another House bill, HB 278.  This bill, a Governor's bill, was originally intended to do nothing but waive the statutorily-mandated expenditure controls on state funds for the next two years.  When it reached the Senate Education and Youth Committee, it was amended to include:  (1) a requirement for a specific level of funding for students in certain dual enrollment programs, and (2) a change in the statute so as to eliminate the requirement that a school house all of grades 6, 7, and 8 in the same building in order to qualify for middle school funding (rather than middle grades funding).  On the floor of the Senate, this bill received four additional amendments, and they are as follows:

• Added the contents of SB 178, a bill intended to extend the sunset dates on the state's school capital outlay programs;
• Added the anti-nepotism provisions included in the original version of SB 84, the school board governance bill;
• Added a never-before-discussed-or-introduced amendment requiring public disclosure of a litany of school system expenses, including "expenditures for association dues,.....litigation expenses,.....website operation costs,....."; and
• Added another never-before-discussed-or-introduced provision seeking to prohibit local school superintendents from being eligible to be employed by "any education association, regional educational service agency, or the Department of Education.....until one year after the termination date of the superintendent's employment or leaving such office."  [Editor's note:  It will not surprise any of the regular readers of this site to learn that the chief sponsor of this amendment is Senator Eric Johnson (R-Savannah).  Other senators who joined him as co-signers on the amendment were Tommie Williams (R-Lyons), Bill Heath (R-Bremen), John Wiles (R-Marietta), Chip Pearson (R-Dawsonville), and Mitch Seabaugh (R-Sharpsburg).]

This heavily-amended bill passed by a 41-14 vote (Click here to see how your senator voted.) and now heads to the House for further consideration.

The House had their turn at amending legislation on this day, too, and their "shot" at amending a Senate bill was on SB 178, the bill originally calling for nothing more than the extension of the sunset dates for the capital outlay program (Yes, you have heard this one before!).  Added as amendments were the contents of HB 400 (the BRIDGE bill) as well as the contents of HB 208 (requires a "bi-lingual endorsement" on high school diplomas).  This amended bill now goes back to the Senate for more work.

Observers have already begun seeing the reaction in the chambers to some of this amended legislation.  For example, the amended version of HB 251 (the school choice bill) returned to the House, and they formally "agreed" to the Senate substitute, but "amended" it to take out all the additions made by the Senate (said additions consisting entirely of the Eric Johnson-sponsored language seeking school choice across district lines with local money going from one system to another).  This bill now returns once again to the Senate for agree/disagree/insist with final resolution to occur on Day 40.

The same held true for HB 193, which passed the Senate in an amended version on Day 38.  The House "agreed" to the Senate substitute, but once again amended it to remove the contents of SB 250 as well as some other language that was redundant.  This bill, too, returns to the Senate for further consideration/action.

It wasn't all so convoluted on this day.  Some bills just simply passed, didn't pass, or were tabled.  On this simpler list were:

•   SB 114, calling for procedures to ease the transfer of students of parent in the military, which passed the House and now goes to the Governo;
•   SR 153, calling for a constitutional amendment to create Education Improvement Districts, which was tabled in the House after considerable discussion and debate;
•   HB 243, dealing with the compensation of teachers who have earned the National Board certificate, which passed the Senate in a form very different than the House version; and,
•   HB 483, seeking a dramatic increase in the homestead exemption over the next decade, which failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote in the Senate and may (or, may not) be reconsidered by that body on the 40^th day.

Day forty, set for Friday, April 3, will undoubtedly be a long one filled with strong emotions and contentious debate.  The stage is already set for that with opportunities for strong disagreements between House and Senate over budget, transportation issues, and other hot topics.  Sine die will be a welcome time.