March House Journals

The House was in session for seven days in March, the 6th, 7th, 8th, 13th, 14th, 15th, and 20th; this does not include committee meetings. When reviewing the House Journals I look primarily for robust discussions; the list of bills that pass the House or Senate are posted in the weekly legislative updates. On the 7th, 8th, and 20th, there wasn’t much discussion.

On the 6th, on pages 18-20 of the pdf version, auto emissions were debated.

On the 13th, on page 11 of the pdf (p. 359 of the print version) the lobbying bill comes up.

The Journal for the 14th was 151 pages long. Much of the space is taken up by the reprinting and spirited discussion around gambling legislation. On pages 43-45 of the pdf (407-409 of the print), Rep. Vitali asked Rep. Gannon about a 45 page amendment; one item of contention was the location of casinos in Philadelphia. The discussion of gaming went on through p. 52 of the pdf (416 of the print version). Some highlights:

Mr. Gannon: The unfortunate fact is, Mr. Speaker, that the city of Philadelphia historically does not have a good track record, and what this provision does, quite frankly, is attempts to prevent the opportunity for mischief in the city of Philadelphia with respect to the physical location of a gaming facility. I wish Philadelphia had a better track record, but they do not, and that is unfortunate. I am sure that in the future that will change, but for the time being, this is simply to put guardrails on the opportunity for mischief, and that is why this language is in here. (p. 49 of the pdf, 413 of the print)

There was more discussion of gaming, with Rep. Wheatley asking about minority and women owned suppliers.

Starting on page 124-7 of the pdf (486-489 of the print) there is discussion of a bill that includes wording specific to one business in Philadelphia. There were a number of objections to this. I found it particularly slimy.

Following that a bill concerning liability came up. That issue of the Journal had gone on so long I didn’t read through the debate on this bill as closely as I could have.

On the 15th, starting on p. 14 of the pdf version (531 of the print) there was a discussion on late fees for banks. Starting on p. 16-21 of the pdf (p. 533-537 of the print) there is a long discussion of cardiology units in hospitals.