Our sergeant at arms today are Barry Moore, B.H. Pile and David Lynch. We are delighted to have two members of the North Carolina senate with us today. And, we're going to take the first Bill because senator Bingham was here first, we're going to him explain his Bill. And we have a quorum. Thank you leader[sp?]. Good morning! It's a pleasure to be here. I was 15, must been many years ago. But at any rate and I do play string [xx] but it's not a cello or it's a banjo. So, anyway you got some wonderful pages here and we owe thanks for the nice introduction. This bill [xx] covering get to this quick. So, I'll be as quick as I possibly can. You heard something similar earlier, which passed unanimously, this deals with vital records. Excuse me. There is a birth record and I think you've got a copy of a birth certificate that was presented to the Davison county Register of Deeds. He called me upon seeing this and had great concern about the legitimacy of it. And so, what this bill will do, will allow the Register of Deeds to put in bold letters. This certificate or this document is not an official birth record. What it does, it prevents fraudulent in misleading records by allowing the register of deeds to do just what I've mentioned because what happens, if you take a birth certificate from the Register of Deeds without this on them. They may go to other agencies and create havoc and fraud applying for services, etc. Basically that's what this does, so assumed. fraud and abuse bill and I would urge your support, I'd be happy to try and answering questions. And we've got the president of the Register of Deeds Association here, [xx] Adapt and he can certainly help me answer some of these questions if [xx] some I can. Before we do [xx], Ms. Churchill you want to go with the bill. quickly? Yes Sir. The bill as Senator [xx] said, if before the register of deeds reports the document that supports[?sp] to be an official birth certificate, they determine it to be put and giving it in official birth certificate. It is not there to put on the [xx] in the first [xx] because this [xx] birth record. Does anyone in the audience want to speak here, either for or against the bill? Any questions of any member of the committee, representative [xx]? [xx] is there any,[xx] what file these things that are already in or [xx] or you do? I think someone wants to respond. Please identify yourself. Good afternoon [xx], committee members, Wayne Rash from the North Carolina association of Registers in Deeds, Registered Deeds in our whole county, thank you George. Under current law, there is no provision once a document is put on record, it is always on record. However, judge can enter an order or something that we would attach to that document, that would say it's a fraudulent document and that does happen many times when these things come in court cases. But what we are dealing with here would be, these filings like you see in front of you, would actually be filed in our Real Estate records. We would not file something like that in our birth records, only official birth certificates [xx] that are produced by the North Carolina Department of [xx] Records. But many times that they end around, that these folks try to do, is file these in our real estate records and then, as was mentioned before, what happens is, then they want certified copies to take somewhere else and try to use them for fraudulent purposes. And so, what we're trying to do, is find a way to keep that from happening. Representative McNeill. Well, I was going to say, just the same thing as President Zocher, but I would like to make a comment. This looks like, work of Sovereign Citizens, which is a group that is very well known to law enforcement. They're known to follow [xx] in court against law enforcement officers and other government officials. They're known to use false registrations and tags. They're very anti-government. I think a couple of Sovereign Citizens actually slayed two police officers in Tennessee a couple of years ago. So this is a group, this is very, very important, and I'm in favor we should pass it.
Representative Zocher, you have a motion you want to make? Yes Mr. Chair, I make a motion to give Senate Bill 82, a favorable recommendation. Further discussion or debate on the motion, if not, all in favor of the motion let it be known by saying Aye, Aye. Opposed no, and the Ayes have it, and Representative Szoka will be running the bill on the floor. Actually, Sam is going to be running the bill. Well thank you [xx]. Representative Szoka will be [xx]. I'd be more than happy Senator. Next bill we have, for the day is, Senator Randleman's bill, disqualification notice of pistol sale. Thank you Mr. Chairman. And ladies and gentlemen, if you will remember last year, those of you that were here, we passed legislation regarding submitting information to NICS by the clerks of court. And how that language was worded, it said that the course of court shall determine which information can practicably be transmitted to NICS which is the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and shall transmit their information to NICS within 48 hours. Well, the way this language is worded and what I want to point out, we have 100 clerks in a state. So, the way the language is worded, you have, we are directing each of those 100 clerks to determine what information needs to be entered into NICS, which isn't necessary. So what senate [xx] [xx], the legislation is intended to clarify that the court does not need to make any independent judgement regarding the existence of the disqualifying factors and what needs to be entered into NICS, because NICS prescribes the format required from the data transmission. So, that's already established and it also directs that the AOC, in consultation with the FBI, to work with NICS to determine the feasibility of reporting additional information from the state court and law enforcement records. So, we're just trying to make it clear that the clerk is not the determining factor that NICS already determines what it can be entered and the one thing they have stressed, they did not want duplication. So, what we are just trying make living[sp?] clear worked by the clerks are not the determining factor. Miss Churchill, you want to explain the bill. Miss Bradford. Thank you Mr chair. [xx] thorough[sp?] acknowledge this particular bill [xx] explains how the first section basically does the verification [xx] mean to do, for data transmitting to international organisation. And then the second part provides that in March 1st, 2015 [xx] committee, there would be a report about, basically how we can improve the information. Any questions from any member of the, Representative Gremer[sp?]. Thank you very much Mr. Chair. In looking at the bill summary, as it describes current law it has the bolded list, folks are disqualified for being issued gun [xx]. So, under current law are those categories, part of what's being reported to NICS? Some of those categories are reported like court records those types of things. But only does records that within the clerk's parameter would Be those that the clerk would be required to report. And like I said, NICS specifies what you can enter, and also they do not want to duplication because if they are getting something from the registered [xx] is they don't want it from the clerk either. So, it's just to, ypu know make that clear that they're not the determining agency. NICS determine what they want and who it's coming from, and how the information is to entered. Just to help me understand, could you give me an example or couple of examples of type of information that, right now the clerks are sort of having the discretion, is to whether or not they should or should not through NICS. Well, it's not really in their discretion, but you know, of course they would be entering any felony, conviction that will cause the person not to be qualified for a permit. Miss Beth would like to comment? Yes sir. Additionally for instance, if a judge makes a finding that an individual
member [xx] court may oppose the real threat and makes the finding that it should not be qualified [xx] amount of time. The clerks would want to have that information and actually transmit [xx]. That in a [xx] question [xx]. So, is there some undercurrent law, is there [xx] concern which regard to information like that, to this [xx] to address. Miss Bradford, can you. Yes sir, there is [xx] of clarification so the clerk would put in a position to attend to determine what he/she should be ascending[sp?], where is this day, basically working with NICS, the format is somewhat clear and it's not a personal determination, on what you should send, what you need to send and format that they accept it in. A follow up either to bill sponsor or staff. So, Miss Bradford, you mentioned the clerk's personal determination. In the clerk's personal determination, what was he/she, is the domestic violence example one that the clerks were determining whether or not should or shouldn't be sent to NICS? Senator Randleman [xx] That parts were directed to enter certain information. So, it's not like they're making a personal determination. They are directed to enter certain information into NICS. It's not like well, do I enter this or do I not enter this? They know and they are instructed as to what information they should enter into NICS. So, it's not that they have an individual determination as to whether we should enter this or not. Thank you, the intend of the bill to ensure that it is not the clerk who decides. The information is NICS, they are responsible to enter this, is that right? Enter the offenses, but they are not the last word. The last word is NICS. Mr. Robinson. For motion I think Representative [xx], if you read what was [xx] out, like in line 9, it says that these things shouldn't be added and the way I am understanding it, tell me if I'm wrong, it says the conditions specified sub-section C of this [xx] shall determine which information can practicably be transmitted. That's what is changed, and so [xx] understand it is, it says this information shall be transmitted. That is correct. And say when the bill was ran last year and this language was [xx], and there was an attempt last year to try to get the language [xx] before we pass the language. Well, time fell short and it did not happen. Well, for the clerks this is an issue that needs to be resolved because NICS dictates what they can enter. So they are not in a position to be making an individual determination. Thank you [xx] again I'm trying to understand what sort of information with which the clerks are [xx] with under current law that needs clarification. Is there information that the clerks are reporting that we don't want reported, or is the information that is not getting recorded. That is not the issue of the bill. OK. That is not the issue of the bill. The issue of the bill is to clarify that the clerks are not the determining factor. NICS will determine what they can enter in and at what format that information can be entered. Miss Chair. I understand that but I'm trying to understand an example of the information with which they're currently, they might under current law is in their determination. What are they [xx] now that you need to make certain. Representative [xx] wants to answer that. I'm trying to follow along as well, but I think I know is just that it is not here. The item is in subsection C of this [xx] which is not really in here. Both of those refer to subsection C, this is C1. But that is not particularly stated here. So, I imagine that the stuff that you're talking about, we would just need to [xx] back to the subsection [xx]. This is not going to be on the floor today. So, Representative Robinson has a motion. Yes Mr. Chairman. I move that committee substitute for senate bill 89 be given a favorable report. All in favor of the motion let me know by saying Aye, Aye.Opposed no. Ayes have it.