Tony Lovasco's Voting Record

Vote explanations will be listed below for recorded "roll call" votes made on pertinent matters (amendments, bill passage, etc). Roll call votes on routine procedural actions such as approving the daily House journal are not generally listed. If a particular action is notable for special or unusual reasons, it may be included in this list despite falling into a category not normally documented.

Click here to view a single page with all my votes listed by date.


votingboard.jpg


rss-feed2.png


02/18/19 -- HB 447 -- Mandate training for coroners

Bill Number: 
HB 447
Bill Purpose: 
Mandate training for coroners
Date of Vote: 
02/18/19
My Vote: 
No
Explanation: 

HB 447, introduced by Dan Houx (Republican - District 54) creates a new "Coroner Standards and Training Commission" within the Department of Heath and Senior Services.  The commission, made up of people appointed by the Governor,  would be tasked with establishing training standards for coroners.  After the program is implemented, elected coroners would be required to complete the specified training in order to sign off on death certificates.

This was a more difficult vote for me, as I recognize that the status quo of not requiring any training for coroners doesn't make much sense.  It is certainly a position in which one would assume a certain level of knowledge would be needed to do an acceptable job.  The argument could be made that its up to the voters to decide if someone is qualified or not, but the reality is most voters are unlikely to perform much vetting on a coroner's candidate.  Furthermore, in many cases only one person runs for the position, in which case the voters would not have any other choice.

So why did I vote no?  Ultimately, it was due to the way the training requirement was implemented.  I am not a fan of creating new commissions or bureaucracy.  Had the bill simply directly spelled out specifically what training would be required, I could have decided for myself if the requirements were reasonable or overbearing.  But by creating a commission to make the decision instead, the bill asks me to trust the results of such a committee to not be objectionable.  I cannot make that leap.  As such, I voted no.  It passed easily nonetheless.  You can see the full roll call vote here.

02/14/19 -- HB 185 -- Integrates the AMBER Alert system into law enforcement systems

Bill Number: 
HB 185
Bill Purpose: 
Integrates the AMBER Alert system into law enforcement systems
Date of Vote: 
02/14/19
My Vote: 
Yes
Explanation: 

HB 185, introduced by Representative Curtis Trent (Republican - District 133) adds some improvements to the oversight of the AMBER alert system, as well as requires it to be integrated into systems that law enforcement already use.  This will allow for quicker and more widespread AMBER Alerts, which will improve the effectiveness of the system.

I saw no issues with this bill.  There's little point in having an alert system that isn't easy for law enforcement to actually utilize, so minor adjustments like this that will make it better are a good idea.  I voted yes.  It passed easily.

02/14/19 -- HB 280 -- Requires vehicles to stop at railroad crossings with on-track equipment

Bill Number: 
HB 280
Bill Purpose: 
Requires vehicles to stop at railroad crossings with on-track equipment
Date of Vote: 
02/14/19
My Vote: 
Yes
Explanation: 

HB 280, introduced by Representative Becky Ruth (Republican - District 114), is a relatively simple bill.  It requires vehicles approaching a railroad crossing to stop at the tracks not only when a train is coming (existing law), but also when other on-track equipment operated by the railroad is approaching.  

It seems to me if you are about to cross a railroad track, on which a massive train might be traveling at high speed, you really need to stop and look in pretty much all cases.  If you don't and something hits you, there's a good chance it was foreseeable and your fault.  So adding "on track equipment" to the current statute seems pretty straightforward to me.   Accordingly, I voted yes. 

The bill did pass easily, though it was mostly a party-line vote.  Democrats seemed to feel that this bill offered too much protection for railroads, who some suggested could act negligently with their on-track equipment without consequence as a result of this bill.  I disagree.


This bill had a roll-call vote on an amendment that failed during perfection.  Read about that here.

02/14/19 -- HB 182 -- Allows voluntary payment at interest rates according to 32.065

Bill Number: 
HB 182
Bill Purpose: 
Allows voluntary payment at interest rates according to 32.065
Date of Vote: 
02/14/19
My Vote: 
Yes
Explanation: 

HB 182, introduced by Representative Noel Shull (Republican - District 16), is a simple bill that allows voluntary payments made by insurance companies to use the interest rates laid out in existing law (section 32.065).  While I admit I don't fully understand why this is needed, I could not find anything in the language that was objectionable, and no opposition was voiced on the floor by other members.  As a result, I voted yes.  It passed easily.

02/14/19 -- HB 108 -- Creates a Mental Health Awareness Month

Bill Number: 
HB 108
Bill Purpose: 
Creates a Mental Health Awareness Month
Date of Vote: 
02/14/19
My Vote: 
Yes
Explanation: 

My blanket statement on dedication bills:

I am not generally a fan of bills that dedicate days or months for particular causes.  That's not to say that I have problem with the underlying cause, only that using government time to express a sentiment is more often than not unlikely to actually make any difference regarding the cause being supported or opposed.  That said, such bills do not cost the taxpayers any money, and are typically debated for only a short time on the House floor.  As a result, out of courtesy to the bill sponsor, it is my policy to vote yes on such measures unless special circumstances apply.  Accordingly, I voted yes on this bill.

It passed, unsurprisingly.

02/14/19 -- HB 72 -- Creates a Celiac Awareness Day

Bill Number: 
HB 72
Bill Purpose: 
Creates a Celiac Awareness Day
Date of Vote: 
02/14/19
My Vote: 
Yes
Explanation: 

I am realizing that bills that dedicate a day of the week, month, etc to a particular cause are not uncommon at the State Capitol.  As a result, moving forward I will generally issue the same explanation regarding such bills, without commenting on the underlying cause or issue the bill seeks to address:

I am not generally a fan of bills that dedicate days or months for particular causes.  That's not to say that I have problem with the underlying cause, only that using government time to express a sentiment is more often than not unlikely to actually make any difference regarding the cause being supported or opposed.  That said, such bills do not cost the taxpayers any money, and are typically debated for only a short time on the House floor.  As a result, out of courtesy to the bill sponsor, it is my policy to vote yes on such measures unless special circumstances apply.  Accordingly, I voted yes on this bill.

It passed, unsurprisingly.

Pages