Lisa A Shepperson

The speaker supports the report because it removed a sentence that caused concern and added language to create a compromise meeting both sides' needs.

The speaker supports the bill because it represents a compromise that addressed concerns by modifying specific language from the Senate version to meet both chambers' needs.

The lawmaker opposes the standing committee amendment because it infringes on rights by requiring chemical test consent from anyone carrying a concealed weapon, not just those who are intoxicated.

The lawmaker opposes the amendment because she believes locking lands in perpetuity is wrong and that circumstances change over time. She argues the EQC should retain authority to remove designations if they were made incorrectly or are no longer needed.

The lawmaker supports the bill because it provides legislative oversight for a task force that has found market-driven exchanges to be beneficial in other states.

The lawmaker urges defeating the bill because there is no industry-wide support, she believes producers will be forced to pay an extra dollar with nothing in return, and the Beef Council lacks accountability.

The lawmaker supports the amendment because removing 'indirect' clarifies the law by limiting it to definable direct effects rather than vague indirect consequences.