Legislature(2003 - 2004)
2004-04-29 House Journal
Full Journal pdf2004-04-29 House Journal Page 3627 HB 472 Amendment No. 1 was before the House. Representative Anderson placed a call of the House on the bill. The Speaker stated the call was satisfied. Representative Croft moved and asked unanimous consent to withdraw Amendment No. 1. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representatives Stepovich, Gara, Seaton, Weyhrauch, and Kerttula: Page 2, line 19, following "250,000": Insert ", except that, in the case of severe permanent physical impairment or severe disfigurement, the damages may not exceed $1,000,000. The limit on damages applies" Page 2, line 25: Delete "$250,000" Insert "the maximum amount allowed under (d) of this section" Representative Stepovich moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 2 be adopted. Representative Anderson objected. Amendment to Amendment No. 2 was offered by Representative Anderson: Delete "1,000,000" Insert "500,000" Representative Anderson moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment to Amendment No. 2 be adopted. 2004-04-29 House Journal Page 3628 Representative Croft objected. Representatives Weyhrauch and McGuire moved and asked unanimous consent that they be allowed to abstain from voting because of a conflict of interest. Objection was heard, and the members were required to vote. Representative Croft moved the previous question. The question being: "Shall Amendment to Amendment No. 2 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 472(JUD) Second Reading Amendment to Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 14 NAYS: 25 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Anderson, Coghill, Fate, Foster, Harris, Hawker, Holm, McGuire, Meyer, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Stoltze, Wilson Nays: Berkowitz, Chenault, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Dahlstrom, Gara, Gatto, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Heinze, Joule, Kerttula, Kohring, Kookesh, Kott, Lynn, Masek, Morgan, Moses, Seaton, Stepovich, Weyhrauch, Williams, Wolf Excused: Kapsner And so, Amendment to Amendment No. 2 was not adopted. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 2 be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 472(JUD) Second Reading Amendment No. 2 YEAS: 24 NAYS: 15 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Hawker, Heinze, Joule, Kerttula, Kohring, Kookesh, Kott, Masek, Morgan, Moses, Ogg, Rokeberg, Seaton, Stepovich, Weyhrauch, Williams, Wolf Nays: Anderson, Chenault, Coghill, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Gatto, Harris, Holm, Lynn, McGuire, Meyer, Samuels, Stoltze, Wilson 2004-04-29 House Journal Page 3629 Excused: Kapsner And so, Amendment No. 2 was adopted. Amendment No. 3 was offered by Representatives Stepovich, Gara, Seaton, Weyhrauch, and Kerttula Page 3, line 24, through page 4, line 4: Delete all material. Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Representative Gara moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 3 be adopted. Representative Anderson objected. Amendment to Amendment No. 3 was offered by Representative Gara: Delete "line 24, through page 4, line 4": Insert "lines 25 - 30" Delete "bill sections" Insert "subsections" Representative Gara moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment to Amendment No. 3 be adopted. There being no objection, it was so ordered. Representative Rokeberg moved the previous question. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 3 as amended be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 472(JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 3 as amended YEAS: 19 NAYS: 20 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 2004-04-29 House Journal Page 3630 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Joule, Kerttula, Kohring, Kookesh, Lynn, Masek, Moses, Ogg, Seaton, Stepovich, Weyhrauch, Wolf Nays: Anderson, Chenault, Coghill, Dahlstrom, Fate, Foster, Gatto, Harris, Hawker, Heinze, Holm, Kott, McGuire, Meyer, Morgan, Rokeberg, Samuels, Stoltze, Williams, Wilson Excused: Kapsner And so, Amendment No. 3 as amended was not adopted. Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representatives Seaton, Wolf, and Stepovich: Page 2, line 19: Delete "250,000" Insert "400,000" Page 2, line 25: Delete "250,000" Insert "400,000" Representative Seaton moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment No. 4 be adopted. Representative Anderson objected. Amendment to Amendment No. 4 was offered by Representative Seaton: Beginning with "Page 2, line 25:" Delete all material. Representative Seaton moved and asked unanimous consent that Amendment to Amendment No. 4 be adopted. There being no objection, it was so ordered. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 4 as amended be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: 2004-04-29 House Journal Page 3631 CSHB 472(JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 4 as amended YEAS: 20 NAYS: 19 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Dahlstrom, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Heinze, Joule, Kerttula, Kohring, Lynn, Masek, Morgan, Moses, Seaton, Stepovich, Weyhrauch, Wolf Nays: Anderson, Chenault, Coghill, Fate, Foster, Gatto, Harris, Hawker, Holm, Kookesh, Kott, McGuire, Meyer, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Stoltze, Williams, Wilson Excused: Kapsner And so, Amendment No. 4 as amended was adopted. Representative Dahlstrom moved and asked unanimous consent that the House rescind previous action in failing to adopt Amendment No. 3 as amended (page 3629). There being no objection, it was so ordered. The question being: "Shall Amendment No. 3 as amended be adopted?" The roll was taken with the following result: CSHB 472(JUD) am Second Reading Amendment No. 3 as amended YEAS: 22 NAYS: 17 EXCUSED: 1 ABSENT: 0 Yeas: Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Dahlstrom, Gara, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Heinze, Joule, Kerttula, Kohring, Kookesh, Lynn, Masek, Morgan, Moses, Seaton, Stepovich, Weyhrauch, Williams, Wolf Nays: Anderson, Chenault, Coghill, Fate, Foster, Gatto, Harris, Hawker, Holm, Kott, McGuire, Meyer, Ogg, Rokeberg, Samuels, Stoltze, Wilson Excused: Kapsner And so, Amendment No. 3 as amended was adopted. 2004-04-29 House Journal Page 3632 Amendment No. 5 was not offered. Representative Coghill moved and asked unanimous consent that CSHB 472(JUD) am be considered engrossed, advanced to third reading, and placed on final passage. Objection was heard. CSHB 472(JUD) am will advance to third reading on tomorrow's calendar.