House and Senate Republican media availability | Feb. 29, 2024

joining us today are Senate Republican leader John Brun from the 20th legislative district Senator Mike padon the ranking on the Senate Law And Justice committee from the fourth legislative district house Republican leader Drew stokesberry from the 31st legislative district and house Republican Flor leader representative jacqulyn maycumber from the seventh legislative district with that I will defer to Senator Braun to give opening comments well thank you Kim thanks for everybody for here this morning we're getting close to the end one week from the day we'll be wrapped up for 2024 so we have a lot of work a lot of work in front of us in the next uh eight days um happy to be here with uh my friend and colleague Senator Mike padon uh from the fourth legislative district and uh I'll just start by restating pretty much the same thing I've said entire session that we remain focused on on public safety and I think the biggest news in public safety this week is the initiative that was heard that would uh undo the tragic change in the police pursuit law that was put in place by the Democratic majority in 2021 um we're focused on affordability uh we heard of course the the initiative that would prohibit income tax here in the state of Washington which surely is is prohibited by the Constitution and is culturally you know not a thing that we're interested and the voters have have opposed that uh I think 11 times or 12 depend on how you count I suppose uh I think the biggest fight is in front of us on on affordability in the next week is going to be on a bill that may come up in the Senate today having to do with the the provision of natural gas to cons customers uh particularly in western Washington but this is a bill that would uh expedite the transition from gas to electric in a way that is laying squarely on the backs of working washingtonians uh it would significantly increase the rates we're already seeing significantly increased rates we hear about that from our constituents every day for gas for heating energy cost and this bill would do more of that unfortunately and then finally we're focused on education again we heard an initiative uh yesterday that would give parents more rights with regard to their their children's education uh we know that the key to success in their education is involvement of parents and and this this bill would would improve that so it's a good thing uh there's a lot of things going on in education we continue to work on uh but I'm not going to go into those uh until unless I have a question so I'm going to I'm going to end pretty quickly and turned over to Drew stokesbury to do an introduction for the house yeah uh thanks Senator Bron uh I'm Drew stokesberry and uh joining me today from the house is house Republican floor leader jacqulyn maycumber um will Echo a lot of what Senator Bron said you know we we've been talking all session about uh all the things that are broken here in Washington uh we've got the fewest police police officers per capita uh and skyrocketing crime rates uh you know we are between one and three uh Nationwide when it comes to things like auto theft and property property crime um so uh uh restoring uh the police pursuit law I think will go a long way in uh in improving Public Safety in Washington uh it is not the only thing we need to fix but it's one of several things we need to fix and uh am very pleased that uh that that appears to be headed to the floor and that that's just one way we can help help fix Washington um excuse me another area we we have struggled in as Senator Brun said uh is education and he is right uh the the by far the biggest indicator of academic success for a student is uh is an involved parent that is something that is sort of hard to legislate around and and to mandate but providing more parental rights for uh parents to be involved in their kids education and make it easier for them to uh get information from their teacher and their school about uh the curriculum and things like that are something that parents around the country have been crying out for uh and that this initiative would provide and so again uh grateful that uh the majority is uh sort of listening to the same folks that that we are and has realized that uh this is a common sense thing that can help help fix Washington uh and then lastly uh you know affordability Washington is one of the least affordable states in the country we've got among the highest gas prices highest home prices uh Seattle I think is the 11th most expensive metro area in the entire country uh and so uh telling the wash washingtonians that income taxes state and local income taxes are off the table uh doesn't necessarily put more money in their pocket but it'll at least is a signal that uh the state will will stop taking so much of it out of their pocket uh and that is the least we can do so still plenty more we can do to lower gas prices uh make things like groceries and housing more affordable but uh very much a good thing to tell the people of Washington that uh they will not have a state or local income tax so uh look forward to those three initiatives coming to the floor and and passing next week uh and uh with that I will uh turn it back over for some questions actually before we get started uh I think that Senator Patton would like to make a few opening comments as well uh thank you Senator Ron and representative stokesbury I'm glad to be here also with representative maycumber I I just want to focus on public safety and the hearings uh yesterday on the uh initiative 2113 uh I was disappointed in the way the hearings were run we only ended up with eight individuals uh speaking uh contrary to apparently the very fair hearing that representative Santos ran where they had 20 folks speaking and she restricted questions from Members so that we could hear from the people uh but one person we did hear from is Amber Gale whose uh daughter Immaculate was killed in Pierce county in 20122 due to the fact I believe that the laws were changed in 21 on Pursuit where now the police can only really uh pursue expeditiously uh for six different crimes and uh it's so important that we return this and I'll and take the handcuffs off the uh off the police and in addition to the death of her 12-year-old daughter uh by somebody who should have been in custody if the police had been able to pursue him earlier we had another incident just this Monday Up On the Border there with uh with Burian uh and uh a a another stolen vehicle that uh the police could have Pursuit but because of the pursuit law and not being able to go after Auto thefts uh there was a death uh and uh this has happened far too often uh so this is critical it appears we will be voting on this uh uh Friday and uh and hopefully as represent Stokes said be on the floor two other things I just want to emphasize in the uh house Community Safety Committee they kill two bills that really would have helped one was a bill by Cinder Linda Wilson that dealt with uh reckless endangerment on fentanyl we have these little babies that are dying all over the state the parents or caregivers are so reckless that the uh little kids end up sniffing or whatever uh consuming uh fitel and die there's been a couple cases in spok and the Tri Cities and a number in western Washington I I just don't understand why they would not want to uh have more accountability and return that to a felony for reckless endangerment of fentanyl the other bill which the retail folks pushed so hard was a bill I sponsored on habitual property offenders passed the Senate both these bills passed the Senate and then died uh in representative Goodman's committee so uh we need to do more uh the the consequences are are are really hitting home uh businesses are leaving a Spokan uh in record numbers the vacancy rate in the downtown Office Buildings is all-time high people cannot get insurance or if they do it's at a higher price for reduced coverage so uh we're having an exodus from Spokane into the other areas so this is not happening just in Spokane but in other major cities of the state well with that I'll be happy to uh turn that over a lady who represents a neighboring District of mine representative maycumber uh thank you I think you're hearing a growing theme um from the good gentleman in the Senate and the house is that uh we're we're constantly going back and fixing what's broken we mentioned two years ago uh these police pursuit uh policies police reform was going to make people less safe that we were going to result in in deaths that that people were not going to be safe in their homes or at their work and and that's what you're hearing also uh Senator padon made a very good point so the house had a battle on an amendment for a bill for fentanyl if you're a law enforcement officer or uh a firefighter and EMT and you enter a home with fentanyl uh you have uh l& and you have OSHA standards for which you have gloves you have respirators uh you cannot eat around fentanyl you cannot uh your clothes are uh washed and protected and you are protected as a worker but as a child you can be in the same home um it's it's just astronomically um misunderstanding we can't we protect adults but we don't protect children it's shocking uh that that's the way it would be so the growing theme you see this year especially with those initiatives is you see people uh are speaking up and saying that the policies that were passed that we stood against do not work and they make people less safe and are the the things are less affordable um so this just a growing theme that we have to go back and fix what was broken thank you very much uh Drew Mickelson would you like to go ahead with your question morning thank you all for making time for us I know these are long days here um kind of a a broad question here uh heading into the final week what are your biggest concerns are you is there something you're worried about a surprise that may come from the other side uh what what are you uh I guess what are your worst fears here with one week to go I I would say in the Senate we have two uh two what I would characterize as bad very bad bills that uh we're working on right now one may actually come up today it's the bill I mentioned earlier it's the the bill that originally would have banned natural gas that's been taken out and we've improved the bill somewhat but what uh we're learning is that while we've taken out some of the more obvious uh things they've been sort of supplemented in in another part of the bill with a bureaucratic way through the UTC to get to the same thing and all this does this bill does I mean fundamentally it's complicated Bill fundamentally it unnecessarily accelerates the transition from natural gas to electricity and it does it on the backs of working washingtonians what that what what that mean what I mean by that is it allows uh one utility in particular to expedite the write off of certain assets and what that means for the UTC is they allow them to to to move that right off on to the the rate payers and will result in significant increases in uh natural gas bills for folks who use one of the one of the main main utilities that's you know we shouldn't be doing that this is not necessary to make the transition we're doing we're doing fine and to do this when they're already dealing with high gas PR prices as a result of the climate commitment act high energy cost costs are all already because of the climate commitment act to to accelerate the process in a way that drives up cost even more just seems wrong-headed it's what I you've heard referred to as a luxury belief you know the folks who really want this they can afford to pay an extra 50 or 100% for their natural gas bill or they can afford electric car but most of washingtonians can't they can't afford it and we're we're piling on it's it's wrong for Washington it's wrong uh for for rate payers it's wrong for folks who are just trying to make their way in Washington uh the other one we're we're working pretty hard to stop is a bill I think is just fundamentally unfair that would allow uh for unemployment insurance benefits for folks to go on strike uh now I'm not in any way opposing folks right and ability to organize and the right to strike that is well well uh it's well def you know defended allow under current law but the idea that we're going to make everybody else pay for it seems wrongheaded we don't do this in any other place where there's a contract where there's a dispute or a negotiation in contract put our hand so heavily on one side and we shouldn't do it in this case it's unfair all the other people who are not going to uh be able to get that benefit to have to pay the bill and and so we'll see how that goes those are two I think really bad bills there's some other uh bills that are um that we focused on I think beyond that though the top issue is getting uh as many of these initiatives heard and to a vote as possible we're making progress on three of them I'd still like to see progress on the other three uh but we'll see what happens over the next week and I think uh over over in the house again while there's uh I think several bills that our members will have some concern with uh and and that will probably take Washington in the wrong direction uh the the biggest one that comes to my mind is a bill dealing with uh murders and Acquisitions uh of hospitals um the the intent of the bill appears to be to ensure that uh um patients have adequate access to the care they need and that is uh uh a a wonderful and lootable goal and and a goal that Republicans share uh unfortunately the the way the bill is written it would make the problem worse not better um part of an unfortunate Trend where uh this is not the only Bill we've seen in this session where uh the majority identify as a problem that uh is worth being solved but uh their proposed solution would would make the problem worse not better um in this case uh it would be devastating to access to health care in rural areas uh we heard testimony in the Appropriations Committee of uh about a half a dozen uh small rural hospitals who uh were only able to stay open and continue providing care to patients because uh of murgers or affiliations with larger Hospital systems and had those mergers or affiliations been uh denied or or put on pause that these rural hospitals would have shut down and and then provided Health Care access to nobody at all um the bill uh has not been worked uh we have heard from provider Group after provider group who have said that uh the Bill's proponents and sponsors have not worked with them uh the bill has now had about three or four versions in the last two weeks uh there was a version that passed the Senate there is a strike ER that passed the Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee there was a different Striker that passed the Appropriations Committee uh and it appears that there might be a different Striker entirely uh that has run on the house floor uh and that is not a way to do complicated policy uh to have four different versions in appear in about two weeks uh after provider groups have been left out in the cold and uh not negotiated or discussed with uh for years um and and probably most concerning of all the bill never actually went to the healthcare committee uh the one committee that has expertise over uh how care gets delivered in rural areas and has been doing great bipartisan work in trying to ensure access to care in rural areas that committee never saw this bill so um very very concerning uh very frustrating that uh a goal of solving the problem uh is is going to be taken up in a way that's only going to make the problem worse uh but that's that's probably the thorniest one uh and worst Bill we have on our radar over here in the house Drew did you have a follow-up question well I just I'd love to know and uh representative stokesbury made it sound like those votes on the initiatives are are expected next week uh leadership has not publicly told us uh on the on the Democratic side uh what's going to happen after the committee votes tomorrow uh do you see a scenario where those don't go to the floor or or are you prepared uh for those to to to actually Hit the Floor next week before before Sun die yeah yeah uh just let me be a little clear here I I I was not attempting to sort of announce anything or say anything with certainty just looking at the schedule the fact that um they they're still in committee uh the fact that we've got House of origin cut off so we've got some internal deadlines coming up uh that these initiatives are are not subject to I think just the the likely scenario here is that they they would probably come to the floor next week um I think it'd be too soon for them to come to the floor this week um but I think if there was no intent by the majority to bring them to the floor uh they wouldn't have held the hearings uh there is a oped in the stle times today by the speaker and the Senate majority floor leader discussing uh why they're going to support one of the initiatives so um you know don't know for sure what will happen uh the majority uh unfortunately controls the floor uh so you know they'll be the ones that will have to uh either put up the votes to bring something to the floor to not bring something to the floor um but uh my my current assumption is these three initiatives that have have had hearings will get brought to the floor for a vote um you know but of course anything could change and uh that's our job as a minority is to keep the majority honest and um try to do our best to holdes on these things yeah I I would just say add add to that if I may drew the um they haven't said specifically but every every conversation I've had uh with the Democratic Senate leadership uh has indicated they expect the all three of them to come for a vote early next week so so I I think anything can happen they still have to make it through their caucus but there's clearly a will to move uh the three that they heard uh out of the legislature and improve them and can we assume that all of your caucus members uh are are going to vote in favor of all three of those initiatives has that caucus been held or those discussions our our caucus J can speak for his but um our caucus fully supports all six of them I expect you know this is from our perspective uh you know we could pick at little things here and there but the reality is this is something that people state of Washington have long demanded and this would be a gigantic win so we'll fully support yeah we we haven't done any sort of vote count or anything like that but uh as far as I know our caucus is supportive as well all right thank you for your Indulgence there I'll let others ask questions I have a question that was submitted by Laurel from the Washington state standard what are your thoughts on the long-term care changes this year specifically adding portability looks like it passed last night in the Senate on party lines just wondering if that opposition is because of the policy itself the ties to the initiative or some other reason yeah so um that opposition is not about about the idea of portability this is something Republicans have been uh screaming for for years literally almost five years since we first passed this bill we said one of the major problems with this bill is it's not portable uh there's two two points of opposition to the bill that passed out of the Senate last night one is that uh there's a lot of concern that it is not um that it might be construed as an alternative uh to the initiative uh we all support the initiative and we don't want to confuse the voters by also supporting something that might be an alternative uh maybe more pragmatically the solution they come up with to allow portability is is uh very clunky I'll put it that way the uh uh it requires essentially self-reporting from individuals individuals on their income once they move out of state uh it's just Frau with ways that this could be uh either uh not done properly or maybe not done at all and folks will inadvertently lose their portability because they couldn't follow the very uh challenging bureaucratic process to maintain uh their eligibility if they move out of state so it's a uh solution with a good intention an intention Republicans have supported for a long time but it's not a great solution once again in the program itself the people voted against it over 60% in the state of Washington I mean if you're you're fixing a program that the people don't want and also penalizes uh anybody who gets out of the market to have a child um the the whole program itself uh the state of Washington the people have spoken great thank you very much would uh Senator Bron would you like to talk a little more about the three initiatives that have not gotten hearings and um any kind of a call to the majority to Grant hearings for those the uh actually Kim before you do that I see John sting is on does he have questions John did you have a question oh that's right we don't have your voice we all right least he smiling about it today that's good uh yeah I would be happy to talk about the the so we've been pushing pretty hard on all six initiatives for the entire session I think that's true from both the house and Republicans um and we're very I I'm I think we're pretty pleased even if some of the hearings didn't go were not conducted in a way that we liked uh it's good that we had a hearing it's good that we we have the opportunity to bring it to the floor potentially next week for the three that they're moving but we're still uh frustrated that we're not getting that kind of action on the other three those those other three also came with hundreds of thousands of votes from the people of state of Washington the Constitution is still very clear this should be our priority and yet the Democratic majorities are refusing to Grant even a hearing let alone a vote on the remaining three initiatives and that they they're doing that uh by their own words because they think they know better than the people of the state of Washington they've decided that these will be uh have unacceptable uh uh impact on the state of Washington Without Really listening or understanding the impact the current law is having on citizens around the state of Washington whether it's on the climate commitment act that has driven up fuel prices for people and make it hard for them to get to and from work get their kids to and from school uh whether it's the uh the capital gains income tax which is driving more and more investment out of our state people are deeply worried that it's it's a small statutory change from the current uh capital gains tax to one that includes real estate that will affect nearly everyone in the state as they buy and sell homes or if they if if rental properties are purchased and sold and there's an additional tax it drives up rental rates uh so they're concerned that yet yet another tax uh in this case a very volatile tax it's hard to predict uh is going to once again drive up their cost of cost of living and they're concerned as we just discussed about the impact of the long-term payroll tax that it's costing them money and they know that very few of them you know even the FIS one admits less than half will actually see any benefit at all and the ones that do s see a benefit uh get a fairly minimal benefit when you look at the the true cost of long-term care it's a problem a real problem and this is a real bad solution and they recognize that and they want the ability to opt out and find a better solution you know we've uh we've heard this before representative Cory was on with us a week ago and I think he put it best if the long-term care program was a privately offered program two things one the insurance commissioner would never approve it and two people would never buy it because it's a bad deal it's as simple as that so these are three initiatives the people of the state of Washington uh are very frustrated about they deserve a hearing and ultimately they deserve a vote uh the good thing about this is they will get a vote one way or the other if we refuse to act as we should in the legislature the people of the state of Washington will ultimately get their vote in November yeah I I I I will Echo that uh that as well I mean when it comes to long-term care I I mentioned a minute ago that the speaker and the Senate majority floor leader had a oped in the stle times this morning uh it was mostly talking about uh the the parental rights initiative but uh they did have a line about the long-term care initiative where they acknowledge that it would allow individuals to opt out uh which is what Republicans have been saying all along is that it is fine uh and good to uh try to figure out ways and strategies to provide long-term care coverage for those who want it but we don't think it should be a requirement for those who don't want it um just flies in the face of of basic tenants of freedom of choice here in Washington if you don't want to buy a product you shouldn't have to buy a product um and so uh the initiative would just allow folks the ability to say we don't want to participate uh would that require further further iterations to to uh help help uh ensure a liquid and and available market for those that do want coverage yes but um you know this is something that we screwed up from the day we decided this was the route we wanted to go uh it needs to be fixed one way or the other uh and so if uh if the legislature does not take up this initiative and it goes to the ballot I I hope that people pass it and I hope that uh the legislature finally gets gets it right uh next session and figures out a way to provide affordable coverage for those who want it without mandating coverage for those who don't uh when it comes to the climate commitment act uh it it is a choice uh Washington Washington uh voters and and drivers and residents will have a choice between paying 50 cents to a dollar to um show leadership and hope that places like China and India follow suit or acknowledge that this is not a problem we can solve on our own uh and we should not be taxing workingclass people to uh make a rhetorical point I think it's unfair to ask uh my workingclass neighbors to pay an extra 50 cents to a dollar in gas uh Democrats appear to disagree uh I I wish we were able to pass the initiative this year but if we don't uh the people will have a say and uh I I my my sense is that folks will not want to pay uh an extra 50 cents or a dollar in gas just to prove a rhetorical Point uh and then uh the the the last of these dealing with capital gains repeal again as Senator Brown alluded to we've seen uh income taxes in one form or another including an income tax on high earners uh fail at The Ballot Box uh you know while yes of course only a small minority of washingtonians would pay the capital gains tax in the current iteration uh the concern that Republicans have that uh the 400,000 people who signed the initiative have uh is not that they'll have to pay the tax but that eventually this tax will get expanded uh the the the exemption will shrink and shrink and Shrink until ordinary folks who are just trying to save a little bit of money in a pension or 401K are hit by the tax and uh you know eventually it will go from a excise tax on capital gains to a excise tax on earnings or an excise tax on payroll um Olympia never seems to have an appetite to cut taxes only to increase taxes and so this initiative is necessary to uh to ensure that there is not another Avenue for uh the majority party to go out and and tax workingclass washingtonians so it I I hope that we have a hearing and I hope that we bring it to the floor but uh if not I'm very glad that people will have a say come November great thank you and I just had uh a reporter send in a question for representative stokesberry which is that all the House Republicans voted against the house Democrat version of the supplemental operating budget uh would you like to weigh in on that budget and um and the opposition yeah you know I I I think we have several concerns um it uh it is not a very sustainable budget uh it spends all of the state's reserves that were tucked away in the in the Warped account Washington recovery plan transition account or or something like that uh this this was money that several years ago uh when the economic growth rate was and employment rate employment growth rate was small enough uh Democrats were able to move that money out of the rainy day fund uh on a simple majority vote they didn't spend it they just put it away in a different account that did not have constitutional protections uh they spent every last dollar of it it is not necessary uh as the Senate uh Democrat budget shows uh they did not spend any of that so I think Republicans are concerned that we were concerned when that money was swept out of the Ry day fund several years ago and we're concerned that it's being spent now in a way that uh isn't necessary uh there are very few reserves left in the house Democrat proposal uh the the Democratic State Treasurer represents the reserve level of around 10% that will help ensure the state uh maintains the best credit rating and um Can Finance its capital projects and transportation projects at uh as low an interest rate as possible uh the house Democrat budget reserves would end up at the end of the four-year budget period at around four or 5% um and then uh you know just fundamentally uh House Republicans uh remain concerned about the the single party process that uh house Democrats take that Senate Democrats do not take uh Senate Democrats uh work closely with Senate Republicans and and Senators uh Wilson and gildon in crafting their budget uh and there's plenty of things that uh that Senate Republicans disliking the budget but they were included they got to have conversations they were in the room discussing each item uh and and the merits and the way to structure different programs uh house Democrats don't have that same collaborative attitude and it's it's unfortunate House Republicans represent um about uh three million washingtonians about 40% of the State uh yet 99.9% of the budget decisions are made by by one party that only represents 60% of the State uh we think that's fundamentally unfair it is not necessary the Senate the last two years has shown that uh there is a way to include the minority party and still come up with the budget that uh maintains Democratic priorities uh that's a much better and more collaborative way of doing things uh we do it with the capital budget and transportation budget uh virtually every year uh but house Democrats and their operating budget remain a significant outlier and I think the people of Washington are much worse off for it thank you very much and I think we'll wrap up for today Senator Braun would you like to give closing comments sure thank you thanks uh for being here um we as I said at the beginning we got a week left uh we have some big uh uh debates in front of us I will repeat uh the the couple bills we're focused on uh here in the Senate the one that would allow striking workers to access unemployment insurance and let everybody else pay for it that's a fundamentally unfair Bill and then the bill that will you know essentially allows the state's largest utility to take all the costs of complying with the climate commitment act and pass them on to the consumers now that's not necessarily illogical uh uh position uh but the fact of the matter is it's going to by their own estimate it's going to push you know seven s to 10 billion dollars of expense uh onto the the rate payers the the citizens of the state of Washington that rely on these util this utility uh to heat their homes to to you know provide energy for their home so this is this is a big deal it's a big deal that's going to make Washington more expensive for regular washingtonians who are already struggling with food gas uh housing uh Child Care Health Care uh we're going to make it a that much worse for those same folks it's the wrong answer uh we need to rethink where we're going if we're going to get it right for the people of state of Washington uh so a lot going on in the next two weeks so we've talked about a lot this morning uh we'll stay at it right up until the end and I want to thank you all again for being here I do want to mention uh piggyback sorry uh Senator that we have a house bill uh the linkage Bill the CCA linkage bill that is coming to the floor that we have grave concerns with um it does not direct the department of ecology to put the people's of state of Washington interests in mind instead of international Elites determining how much we will spend on uh these policies and uh we have grave concerns for the people um for their food bill and house bill just like uh uh the senator said that the people of state of Washington cannot cannot sustain uh this cost and that increases everything from your energy to your fuel to your food costs and once again this linkage for CCA May uh devastate us and it doesn't even direct the people that are have our best interest in mind to make sure the people of Wasington Washington are protected so we will be fighting that bill this week I I would just add that I don't have much faith in the department of ecology and the governor who reminded us uh that there was only going to be pennies only pennies that it was going to go up and in my area what it has done is sent a lot of people over to purchase gasoline in the state of Idaho uh where it is 50 Cents cheaper or more so uh uh they're very questionable as far as their predictions of what the Market's going to do yeah I I will E I will Echo that uh you know that the proponent say it will help stabilize prices I think our concern is that uh if that happens it will only stabilize prices uh at a uh at a high point uh rather than you know yes I'm I'm sure stable stable high prices are better than wildly volatile high prices but uh Republicans don't want high gas prices at all we want uh gas is as cheap as possible uh so that our constituents don't have to pay uh unnecessarily to get to and from their jobs and uh uh their kids soccer practices and and things like that um but beyond that bail like I said we got a few others we're looking at in the house uh like a a hospital merger bill that will uh impair Access to Health Care in rural areas um and a few other bills beyond that and but we are excited that uh it looks like there's a good chance at least three of the initiatives uh will will pass the legislature and uh if the other three don't uh we trust that voters uh will will agree with House Republicans and Senate Republicans position uh on those issues come November uh but with that we got about seven days left so plenty of work to do and uh thank you all for for being here thank you very much everyone and we will see you next week for our final media Avail of the session