Session '11: Reps. Zerwas and Coleman

AUSTIN (KXAN) - On this edition of Session '11, Reps. John Zerwas, R-Simonton, and Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, discuss Texas' need for a health care insurance exchange. Also, John Langmore of the Capitol Metro Board of Directors, Rep. Eddie Rodriguez, D-Austin, and Ben Wear of the Austin-American Statesman take on the transportation funding debate on our onpolitix panel.

TRANSCRIPT BELOW:

Rep. John Otto, R-Dayton: "This bill came before the full Appropriations Committee."

Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio: "It's clear that the people of Texas didn't send any of us here to slash the budget in the way that Republicans are doing."

Rep. Myra Crownover, R-Denton: "But you were always welcome in the appropriations process. We were there at seven in the morning, until late at night."

Retired teacher: "To pass House Bill 1 is an irresponsible act when you think about the children in the state that must be educated."

Rep. Jason Isaac, R-Dripping Springs: "There's not going to be anymore money. We're not going to raise taxes."

Texas House members worked well past midnight Saturday and plan to come back this afternoon to continue tackling their budget proposal for the state.

Education and Medicaid are taking heavy blows. With a two-thirds "supermajority", Republicans have easily prevailed. With the House only hours from passing its proposal and the Senate version soon to follow, we're just 57 days away from the end of "Session 11."

Announcer: "From KXAN Austin News, this is Session 11. Live interactive breakdowns, insights, interviews, and our weekly roundtable discussion. You're watching Session 11 on KXAN Austin News."

Rep. Lon Burnam: "The individual that signed the bill that caused the structural deficit has been living an excessively lavish lifestyle for the past several years."

Jabs at Governor Perry were just part of this weekend's heated debate on the House floor. Democrats say Republicans are letting the governor call the shots this budget season - with his warning against dipping into the rainy day fund. Good morning. I'm Robert Hadlock. Thanks for joining us on Session 11. "No new taxes." "Living with what's available." And "shifting money around." So far, Republicans have added amendments to move funding from "family planning" to programs to promote alternatives to abortion, help children with special needs, and fund autism research. Many Democrats have refused to vote on some of those items.

The battle began Thursday as members worked to close a gap in the current budget. It took about a billion dollars in extra cuts. And 3-point-2 billion from the rainy day fund. But Republicans say "no" to taking money from that fund for the 2012-2013 budget. Their budget proposal is 164-point-5 billion dollars. That's about 23 billion dollars short of what the state needs to maintain current services. It's something Democrats say voters will remember in the next election.

Rep. Mike Villarreal, D-San Antonio: "When they go into a booth to pull a lever, they're going to ask themselves who was with them in prioritizing our children's schools and making college affordable and accessible to all."

Rep. Raul Torres, R-Corpus Christi: "It's about doing what I think in the long run will provide the greatest benefits to the most people that need it the most. That's my goal. If I can do that, I'll be satisfied with a two-year term, because I can sleep at night. It's not about the future for me. It's about the people I was sent to represent.

This morning, we break down the budget and some "emerging ideas" to help cuts costs. Slot machines and casinos are among those with a better chance than ever this session. Our newsmakers take up that topic after diving into the cuts to "health care." And our onpolitix Panel will discuss the trouble transportation funding could see after this session. But first, our Political Reporter "Josh Hinkle" shows you how to interact with us this morning. Hello, Josh.

Hello, Robert. The House will be back in session in seven hours to finalize its version of the budget. While Republicans are still siding with the governor to protect the rainy day fund for a future emergency use, Democrats are holding out - hoping that will change to give more money to areas like nursing homes and schools. This morning, our onpolitix Poll asks: Do you think the House will end up dipping into the rainy day fund in the 2012-2013 budget? Log on to kxan.com and let us know what you think. And while you're there, click on the onpolitix tab at the top. You'll go straight to our special political site, where you can find our latest coverage and blogs. Plus, click the blue bar at the top to chat with us. This morning, we're talking transportation and the state's financial crisis. Our onpolitix Panel will field your questions later in the program. Robert?

Thanks, Josh. It's been a big part of this weekend's back-and-forth -- the Texas Health Care Debate. Looking ahead, by 2014, federal health care reform requires states

to have in place what's called an "insurance exchange." If they don't, the federal government will. But by creating its own exchange, some lawmakers argue Texas can better focus on its residents. It could offer competitive choices of health care insurance carriers. The system would help people better understand which plan is the best and least expensive for them. And it's also a way to reform the insurance industry by weeding out the "worst" - and driving down the cost. This morning, our newsmakers are from two different parties, but both are pushing legislation to create a Texas Insurance Exchange. Representative "John Zerwas" is a Republican from Simonton - and one of only three doctors in the House. He is Chairman of House Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Services and also serves on the Public Health Committee. Representative "Garnet Coleman" is a Houston Democrat and one of the original authors of the Children's Health Insurance Program in Texas. He is Chairman of the County Affairs Committee and is also the senior ranking member of the Public Health Committee. While it's yet to be seen if Congressional and court battles will win out against the president's health care reform - these men told our Josh Hinkle this week -- a "statewide plan" is still a good idea - no matter that outcome.

THE STAKE HOLDERS ARE ALL
ONBOARD WITH THIS.
WE HAVE THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF
HEALTH PLANS, THE TEXAS HOSPITAL
ASSOCIATION, TEXAS MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION, SMALL BUSINESS
SUPPORTING IT.
THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF
BUSINESS, AND TEXAS RESTAURANT
ASSOCIATION, I MEAN ANYBODY THAT
YOU CAN ALMOST IMAGINE HAS SAID
YEAH, WE NEED TO DO AN EXCHANGE.
THE REALITY IS WHETHER THE
HEALTH CARE REFORM BILL
CONTINUES TO EXIST AS IT'S
PORTRAYED TO BE OR NOT, THERE'S
A VALUE FOR AN EXCHANGE IN THE
STATE OF TEXAS THAT MEETS SMALL
BUSINESS NEEDS AND AN INDIVIDUAL
MARKET.
>> I LIKE THE WAY CHAIRMAN
ZERWAS PUT IT TOGETHER.
IT CONNECTS PEOPLE WITH THE
APPROPRIATE PLAN, AND PRICE FOR
THEIR NEEDS JUST LIKE
TRAVELOCITY.
WE'RE GETTING USED TO THOSE
THINGS, AND IT HELPS PEOPLE SHOP
FOR THE BEST PRODUCT FOR
THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILY.
>> THE QUESTION MIGHT COME IN IS
HOW DOES IT PLAY OUT IN TERMS OF
IDENTIFYING OUR MEDICAID
RECIPIENTS AND SO FORTH.
I THINK THE HEALTH INSURANCE
EXCHANGE CAN HELP COORDINATE
THAT.
THERE WILL BE PEOPLE THAT
QUALIFY FOR MEDICATE, THE CHIP
PROGRAM, HEALTHY TEXANS, A NOT
SO WELL KNOWN PRODUCT OUT THERE
THAT WAS PASSED THE LAST
LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
THERE'S GOING TO BE THOSE THAT
IF THE HEALTH CARE BILL STANDS,
THERE WILL BE SUBSIDIES OUT
THERE. 5
THAT NEEDS TO BE SORTED OUT.
>> IF YOU DON'T KNOW YOUR
CHOICES, YOU MIGHT CHOOSE THE
WRONG THING AND IT COSTS MORE.
WHEN EVERYTHING IS IN FRONT OF
EVERYBODY AT THE SAME TIME AND
IT GUIDES YOU TO THE RIGHT
CHOICES, THAT MAKES THE MARKET
FOR COMPETITIVE IMMEDIATELY,
BECAUSE EVERYBODY SAYS OH, NOW
THERE'S SOMEBODY WHO'S TELLING
THEM THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THESE PLANS, AND THEY SAY OH,
THIS ONE WORKS FOR ME AND IT'S
LESS EXPENSIVE, AND THEN THE
OTHER PERSON HAS TO DROP THEIR
PRICE.
THAT'S HOW IT WORKS TO SAVE
MONEY OUT IN THE MARKETPLACE.
IT'S A MARKET-BASED SYSTEM.
>> THE PARTICULAR BILL THAT I'VE
BROUGHT FORTH IS ONE CREATING A
NEW QUASI GOLF ORGANIZATION,
CREATING A NEW BOARD.
THIS WOULD FUNCTION SEMI
INDEPENDENTLY WITH LEGISLATIVE
OVERSIGHT, OF COURSE, AND HEALTH
AND HUMAN SERVICES WOULD BE A
RESOURCE TO THIS GROUP, AS WOULD
BE THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF
INSURANCE.
IT WOULD BE A STRONG
PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP,
LEVERAGING OUR PRIVATE HEALTH
CARE INDUSTRY OUT THERE IN TERMS
OF TRYING TO BEING THE PRODUCTS
TO THE MARKET THAT WOULD BEST
IMMEDIATE THE NEEDS OF
INDIVIDUALS OUT THERE.
IT WOULD BE AGAIN, ONE OF THESE
TYPE OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT RUNS
SOMEWHAT SEPARATE FROM THE
GOVERNMENT ITSELF.
IT WOULDN'T BE A NEW AGENCY OR
ANYTHING.
IT'S SOLE FOCUS WOULD BE MAKING
SURE THE HEALTH INSURANCE MARKET
FUNCTIONS.
>> HOW MUCH DOES THAT COST TO
SET UP? 6
>> THAT'S A VARIABLE FIGURE.
I THINK IN MY BILL, I THINK THAT
COSTS A FEW MILLION DOLLARS TO
GET IT SET UP TO BEGIN WITH.
THERE WOULD BE WAYS OF
OFFSETTING THAT.
IN FACT, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
HAS SAID THEY'RE GOING TO COME
IN AND PAY THE VAST MAJORITY OF
THAT, ABOUT 90%.
>> 90%.
>> REALLY, WE WOULD PROBABLY
NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING BE
CREATED DURING THIS SESSION OR
VERY EARLY THEREAFTER, TESTED IN
2012, SO THERE WOULD BE A GROUP
OF PEOPLE WE COULD TEST IT ON TO
MAKE SURE ITS WORKS THE WAY IT'S
IN VISIONED TO WORK AND TWEAK
IT, AND THEN CONTINUE TO REFINE
IT DURING 2013.
IT GOT A GREAT HEARING IN THE
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INSURANCE,
VERY WELL SUPPORTED BY ALL THE
STAKE HOLDERS INVOLVED, AND IT
IS PENDING RIGHT NOW.
THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE HAS GIVEN
US A SENSE THAT IT PROBABLY
WON'T GET OUT OF THEIR OFFICE,
AND SO THAT THEN CREATES A SENSE
OF OK, HOW FAR DO YOU PUSH THIS
THING IF THERE'S A -- IF YOU'RE
PRETTY CERTAIN THAT

THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE ISN'T GOING TO
SUPPORT IT.
>> IT HAS KIND OF GONE TO A
POINT WHERE THE INSURANCE
COMPANY, THE INSURANCE COMMITTEE
IS THERE, THEY'RE READY TO ACT
ON IT IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES LOOK
LIKE YOU CAN GET SOME LEGS AND
SO FORT.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF IT'S
NOT GOING TO GET THROUGH THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, THEN WE HAVE
TO HAVE SOME SENSE OF WHY SHOULD
WE PUT NUMBERS IN A POSITION TO
HAVE TO TAKE VOTES ON SOMETHING
IF THEY KNOW IT'S GOING TO STALL
OUT WHEN IT GETS TO THE 7
EXECUTIVE OFFICE.

Their debate goes on for almost another hour, and we have the entire conversation streamed on our websites kxan.com and onpolitix.com. Plus, there's still more to come here on Session 11.

Lane Hutchins: "I don't want to have to race out of state. I want to keep our money here and our jobs."

Pat Carlson, Texas Eagle Forum: "The very people who don't have resources to gamble are the very ones who gamble hoping to hit the big jackpot."

Some lawmakers say there's billions to be made, if the state would only give the "green light" to gambling. From slot machines at racetracks to Las Vegas-style casinos, it's all next, when our Newsmaker debate continues here on Session 11.

Lyle Lovett: "This legislation will ensure we have a vital horse industry moving forward."

That's right. "Lyle Lovett" was among hundreds of supporters at this "dog and pony show" on the Capitol lawn pushing slot machines at racetracks. It's just part of a bigger move to get gambling in the state and raise billions in the process.

Welcome back to Session 11. A House committee is reviewing several bills from slots to bingo to Las Vegas-style casinos in Texas. And another bill is waiting for review in a Senate committee. Our political reporter "Josh Hinkle" continues our newsmaker debate with Representatives "Zerwas" and "Coleman." To find out if this "socially controversial" idea has a better chance in a financially-strapped session.

THERE ARE IMPACTS THAT COME
FROM GAMING.
WE THINK OF GOING AND GAMBLING
NOW AS AN EXCURSION.
WE GO OUT OF TOWN, WE GO TO
LOUISIANA, YOU KNOW, TO VEGAS,
BUT A LOT OF FOLKS HAVE NEVER
HAD A CASINO IN THEIR BACK YARD.
THAT'S ANOTHER THING.
MY MORTGAGE LIVED IN LAS VEGAS
FOR 10 YEARS.
I CAN TELL YOU, IT IS NOT WHAT
PEOPLE THINK IT IS WHEN THE 8
LOCAL PEOPLE PAY MORE THAN THE
PEOPLE WHO COME IN FROM ANOTHER
DESTINATION, SO I HAVE SOME
CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.
>> AND YOURSELF?
>> I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE BILL TO
USING THE HORSE TRACKS.
I HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE INVOLVED
IN THE HORSE INDUSTRY OUT IN MY
DISTRICT, AND THEY'VE MADE THEIR
VOICE VERY WELL KNOWN TO ME, AND
MY CONVERSATIONS WITH PEOPLE
THAT ARE IN THE HORSE RACE BE
INDUSTRY IS THAT UNLESS WE CAN
REALLY GENERATE A HIGHER PURSE
OUT THERE, WE'RE GOING TO SEE
REALLY THE HORSE INDUSTRY LEAVE
THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND THAT
WOULD BE A TRAGEDY, FRANKLY.
IF THE B.L.T.'S AT THE HORSE
TRACK ARE THE ANSWER, I'M
SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
WITH THE CASINOS, I NO HE LOTS
OF PEOPLE THAT ENJOY SOME GAMING
PERIODICALLY, AND THEY ENJOY
PART OF THE TRAVEL TO A
DIFFERENT PLACE TO ENJOY THAT
GAMING, SO I'M NOT CERTAIN THAT
IT WOULD BRING THE SAME SPIRIT
IF WE HAD IT IN OUR BACK YARD,
BUT I COULD ALSO BE CONVINCED
THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN PARTS OF
THE STATE THAT MIGHT BENEFIT
FROM THAT, WHERE THEY ARE KIND
OF DESTINATIONS ON THE COASTLINE
THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE WILLING TO
TRAVEL TO TO ENJOY THAT.
PEOPLE MAKE THE POINT THAT
THERE'S A LOT OF TEXAS LICENSE
PLATES AT CASINOS RIGHT ACROSS
THE BORDER, AND WITH THAT COMES
A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF TAX
REVENUE.
WE NEED TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION
ABOUT IS THIS AN INDUSTRY THAT
WE WANT TO BE A PART OF OUR
ECONOMY, IT IS GOING TO BE A
POSITIVE, AND HAVE THAT
DISCUSSION AND DEBATE.
>> I THINK WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL 9
IN THIS CURRENT ECONOMIC TIME
THAT WE'RE IN IN GETTING TOO
CAUGHT UP THAT THIS IS GOING TO
BE THE PANACEA FOR OUR ECONOMIC
WOES.

If you have something to say about that debate or the state budget crisis, let us know. Robert is standing by with our onpolitix Panel to field your questions. Just go to our special political site, onpolitix.com and chat with us. Our budget breakdown and future transportation trouble for the state... when Session 11 returns.

Welcome back to Session 11. A state-sanctioned committee says Texas is looking at some major transportation trouble - as lawmakers set priorities for other parts of the budget. That group gave the state a "failing grade" for its highway system and warned "congestion" is only going to get worse. The 2030 Committee presented those findings to the Texas Transportation Commission this week. The recommendation - either raise the gas tax to pay for better highways or spend more time sitting in traffic.

For the latest in the transportation debate, we turn to our onpolitix Panel this morning. "John Langmore" is a longtime transportation consultant and also sits on the Capital Metro Board of Directors. State Representative "Eddie Rodriguez"

is a Democrat from Austin. He sits on the House Transportation Committee. And "Ben Wear" is a reporter at the Austin-American Statesman, where he covers transportation issues.

THE STATE OF TEXAS IS BROKE,
TRANSPORTATION SEEMS TO BE AT
THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST OF
PRIORITIES.
TAXPAYERS TAXED OUT, DON'T WANT
ANYMORE TAXES.
SHOULD WE BE RESIGNED TO
MAINTAIN WHAT WE HAVE AND CALL
IT GOOD LUCK FROM THERE?
>> I MIGHT MENTION STARTING OFF
THE REPORT THAT YOU REFERENCE
SAID IF WE CONTINUE FUNDING AT
THE LEVEL WE'RE DOING TODAY, BY 10
2030, THEY WILL GRADE OUR
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM A GRADE F.
THAT'S CONTINUING ON OUR CURRENT
COURSE.
THAT GRADE IS CONSIDERED
COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE.
IT WOULD BE A GREAT RISK TO THE
STATE IN TERMS OF OUR QUALITY OF
LIFE, AND OUR ECONOMY AS A WHOLE
TO CONTINUE ON THE SAME PATH
WITHOUT FIXING CURRENT FUNDING.
>> MR. RODRIGUEZ.
>> THAT'S RIGHT.
YOU MENTIONED THAT EVERYTHING'S
ABOUT THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW,
ROUGHLY $30 BILLION IN THE HOLE,
DEALING WITH A BUDGET EVEN LATER
TODAY, WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING
ABOUT IT ON THE HOUSE FLOOR.
THE SPEAKER ESTABLISHED THE
INTERIM COMMITTEE TALKING ABOUT
TRANSPORTATION FUNDING, THE
PURPOSE OF WHICH TO COME UP WITH
IDEAS TO TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE.
ONE OF THE THINGS, THE DRUM I
WAS BEATING IS THE COST OF DOING
NOTHING.
I THINK IT'S AN EDUCATION
PROCESS ON THE PART OF
LEGISLATURE.
WE HAVE TO DO OUR PART.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD GIVE
IT UP THIS SESSION.
WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TRYING, BUT
MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE HE NEED TO
TALK ABOUT WHAT IT'S GOING TO
COST THE STATE IF WE DON'T DO
ANYTHING OVER THE COMING YEARS.
THAT'S MORE GLOOMY THAN DO WE
HAVE THE NUMBERS TO PAY FOR
EVERYTHING.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 30,000 JOBS
THAT WILL BE LOST.
>> YOU COVER THIS EVERY DAY.
>> EVERYTHING IS ALWAYS ABOUT
MONEY, BUT EVERYTHING YOU'VE
HEARD ABOUT HE REFERRED TO
$30 BILLION, THAT'S ALL ABOUT
THE STATE'S GENERAL FUND.
THE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING IN 11
THEORY IS SEPARATE FROM THAT, SO
THERE HASN'T BEEN MUCH TALK
ABOUT THAT THIS SESSION, BUT
BECAUSE THE GAS TAX ISN'T
INCREASING, THE LEGISLATORS HAVE
UNEARTHED PRIVATE TOLL
AGREEMENTS.
THERE ARE BILLS ROLLING AROUND
TO ALLOW LONG TERM TOLL ROAD
LEASES.
THE LEGISLATURE, WE HATE THESE,
PUT A MORATORIUM ON THEM, BUT
THEY'VE BECOME, I DON'T KNOW IF
POPULAR IS THE RIGHT WORD, BUT
ACCEPTABLE AGAIN.
>> WE'RE SO LIMITED IN WHAT WE
CAN DO.
THE GAS TAX IS ONE OF THOSE
THINGS THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO
TALK ABOUT NOW.
THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE
LEGISLATURE CHANGES ALL THE
TIME.
OUR CARS ARE BECOMING MORE
EFFICIENT.
I'VE HAD TWO BILLS DEALING WITH
ELECTRIC VEHICLES, DEALING WITH
THAT.
AS LONG AS THAT'S OUR MAIN
SOURCE OF REVENUE, IT'S A LOSING
GAME.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE GETTING
REVENUE FROM IT.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO GET US WHERE
WE ARE.
WE NEED TO BE CREATIVE.
>> MORE TOLL RODS IS THE ANSWER?
>> HE MAKES AN EXCELLENT POINT
WITH TWO GOOD PIECES OF POLICY
WORKING AGAINST EACH OTHER, ONE
IS GOOD FUEL EFFICIENCY, AT THE
SAME TIME TO THE EXTENT CARS ARE
MORE FUEL EFFICIENT, YOU REDUCE
YOUR OVERALL FUNDING FOR
TRANSPORTATION, AND THAT'S WHAT
WE'VE BEEN EXPERIENCING THE LAST
COUPLE OF YEARS.
TOLLS ARE A PAY AS YOU GO TYPE
SITUATION, WHAT YOU PAY FOR
EXACTLY WHAT YOU USE. 12
YOU THINK OF IT IN TERMS OF
UTILITY BILLS, ELECTRICITY,
WATER, YOU PAY FOR WHAT YOU USE.
THAT'S A WORTHWHILE DEBATE, BUT
ABOVE AND BEYOND WHETHER OR NOT
TOLLS ARE GOOD, YOU HAVE TO
FIGURE OUT WHO WOULD ACTUALLY
OPERATE THE TOLL ROADS.
IT COULD BE THE STATE THROUGH
THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, A LOCAL R.M.A.,
OR IT COULD BE THE PRIVATE
SECTOR, WHICH IS WHAT BEN TALKED
ABOUT, THEY ARE SORT OF PULLING
BACK OUT AGAIN.
THERE IS A LOT OF DEBATE ABOUT
WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE MODEL
FOR DELIVERING TOLLWAYS.
>> TALKING ABOUT PAYING HOW MUCH
YOU USE YOUR CAR IS OUT THERE,
AS WELL.
THERE EVER SEVERAL IDEAS OUT
THERE.
ARE WE THERE TO HAVE VOTES TO
MAKE THAT KIND OF DECISION NOW?
I'M NOT SURE.
THE CONVERSATION IS DEFINITELY
GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
>> WE'VE GOT A VIEWER QUESTION
IN ABOUT URBAN RAIL IN AUSTIN.
PEOPLE SAY IT REDUCES CONGESTION
BUT CAN WE AFFORD IT NOW WITH
OUR BUDGET PROBLEMS?
>> BEN, I KNOW YOU HAVE SOME
OPINION.
>> THE PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE IS
IT COST RIGHT NOW $1.3 BILLION,
AND A LOT OF SYSTEMS OVER THE
LAST 20-25 YEARS HAVE BEEN
HEAVILY FUNDED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, BUT THAT FUNDING HAS
BEEN REDUCED.
IT'S HIGHLY COMPETITIVE.
IT'S JUST NOT CLEAR AT ALL THAT
AUSTIN IF IT TRIES TO DO THAT
$1.3 BILLION PROJECT WILL GET
VERY MUCH OF IT FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, WHICH MEANS IT COMES
BACK ON US.
THEN THERE'S THE