2005-05-10                     House Journal                      Page 1921
     SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 106(FIN)                                                   
     (same title)                                                                                   
                                                                                                    
There being no objection, it was so ordered.                                                        
                                                                                                    
Representative Croft placed a call of the House.                                                    
                                                                                                    
The Speaker stated the call was satisfied.                                                          
                                                                                                    
                                                                                                    
Representative Coghill moved that the House concur in the Senate                                    
amendment to CSHB 106(FIN), thus adopting SCS CSHB 106(FIN),                                        
and recommended that the members vote yes.                                                          
                                                                                                    
                                                                                                    
The question being:  "Shall the House concur in the Senate                                          
amendment to CSHB 106(FIN)?"  The roll was taken with the                                           
following result:                                                                                   
                                                                                                    
SCS CSHB 106(FIN)                                                                                   
Concur                                                                                              
                                                                                                    
YEAS:  21   NAYS:  19   EXCUSED:  0   ABSENT:  0                                                  
                                                                                                    
Yeas:  Anderson, Chenault, Coghill, Foster, Gatto, Harris, Hawker,                                  
Holm, Kelly, Kohring, Lynn, McGuire, Meyer, Moses, Neuman,                                          
Olson, Ramras, Rokeberg, Samuels, Seaton, Weyhrauch                                                 
                                                                                                    
Nays:  Berkowitz, Cissna, Crawford, Croft, Dahlstrom, Elkins, Gara,                                 
Gardner, Gruenberg, Guttenberg, Joule, Kapsner, Kerttula, Kott,                                     
LeDoux, Salmon, Stoltze, Thomas, Wilson                                                             
                                                                                                    
Weyhrauch changed from "Nay" to "Yea".                                                              
                                                                                                    
And so, the House concurred in the Senate amendment, thus adopting                                  
SCS CSHB 106(FIN).                                                                                  
                                                                                                    
                                                                                                    
Representative Coghill moved the effective date clause.                                             
                                                                                                    
The question being:  "Shall the effective date clause be adopted?"  The                             
roll was taken with the following result: