Transcript Highlights:

• So there's now a group that is going to be eligible to get this benefit, whereas under the old law that
• So, as a follow-up, anybody in that group would have a financial benefit because they have the option
• would have a financial in that group would have a financial benefit<03:30:09.840> because<03:
• Two, we're going to see some coming from Group One that want to reinstate their benefits?
• And for Group Two, that means you don't get the 50% auto spousal survivor benefit.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Committee of Conference on HB 1 and HB 2 met to review revenue estimates and begin working through the HB 1 detail change sheet. New Hampshire Lottery Director Charlie McIntyre reported stronger-than-expected lottery performance, raising the current-year return estimate to $27 million and the next biennium estimate to $200 million, with the increase attributed to improved scratch ticket sales and sports betting not hurting revenue as much as expected. Members questioned the assumptions behind the higher estimates, including the impact of $50 scratch tickets and whether the figures accounted for future conversion from historical horse racing (HHR) machines to video lottery terminals (VLTs). McIntyre and committee members discussed machine counts, per-day revenue assumptions, and the likelihood that VLT conversion would increase revenues over time, though the timing and pace of conversion remained an open question. The committee also discussed several gaming-related policy items in HB 2, including changes to kino hours and local option games of chance, and noted that the Senate and House differed on how gaming revenues would be allocated between charities, education, and general funds. Members emphasized that revenue projections should remain conservative because operators, not the state, would control the pace of machine conversion. Representative Sweeney noted that operators could earn more per machine under the VLT model, and McIntyre said the new facilities and expansions were largely concentrated near the Massachusetts border. The committee then moved to the HB 1 detail change sheet. It agreed to Senate position on the Department of Safety’s road toll bureau and international registration program changes, which were described as a zero-cost realignment of positions, and held the Department of Corrections section for later discussion. On the judicial side, members approved a technical footnote fix, but held a new contract counsel item for involuntary mental health admissions and deferred discussion of the public defender program increase. The committee also noted no change for the PE development authority, moved safety rest area funding from HB 2 into HB 1 with no additional cost, and flagged the tourism development fund and other judicial items as issues that may depend on overall available revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• The seven programs that Mr.
• this student group.
• Through the program, we see a lot of benefits.
• to support their programs.
• programs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm responsible for our groups that assess the public assistance programs, looking for the correctness
• Obviously, it’s not complete. benefits. We're going to talk about benefits.
• There's a list of mandatory benefits and then there's a list of optional benefits.
• There's a list of mandatory benefits and then there's a list of optional benefits.
• There's a list of mandatory benefits and then there's a list of optional benefits.

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call – 00:00:00 Introduction of Board Members – 00:02:04 Overview of the Purpose and Goals of the Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board – 00:12:46 Medicaid Legislative Update - 00:20:26 Discussion of Next Steps and Future Meeting Dates – 01:04:06 Adjournment – 01:06:37, 958, all

Summary: The first meeting of the Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board opened with Chair Ken Fleming and Co-Chair Rocky Adams welcoming members, explaining the board’s purpose, and introducing the diverse membership of legislators, providers, advocates, and state officials. Fleming said the board would meet monthly, allow public comment at the end of meetings, and operate transparently with materials posted online and distributed in advance. Both chairs emphasized that the board’s work would focus on improving Medicaid outcomes, efficiency, and oversight, while preparing for possible federal changes and avoiding premature assumptions about what Congress may do. Members then gave brief introductions describing their backgrounds in medicine, nursing, hospital administration, behavioral health, insurance, budgeting, pharmacy, and Medicaid administration. Several noted direct experience with Medicaid populations or managed care, including the Department for Medicaid Services commissioner, health plan representatives, hospital and clinic leaders, and legislators with health care backgrounds. The board also heard from Stephanie Bates of the LRC Office of Health Data Analytics, who said her office supports the General Assembly with health-related data, policy, and research and would serve as a resource to the board. Bates then began a presentation on Medicaid basics, explaining that House Bill 695 created the board and that the presentation would cover eligibility, enrollment, covered benefits, waivers, managed care, the budget, and the federal reconciliation bill. She described Medicaid eligibility as complex, noted that Kentucky had more than 1.4 million enrollees, and explained enrollment churn and the unwinding of pandemic-era continuous coverage. She also outlined mandatory and optional Medicaid benefits, the requirement that services be medically necessary and provided by enrolled providers, and the main waiver types used in Kentucky, including 1115, 1915(b), and 1915(c) waivers. No votes or formal actions were taken at this meeting beyond organizational setup and receiving the initial informational presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• This first slide are mandatory benefits for what is required in a Medicaid program.
• For FAP, the state fully funds both benefits and administration, as FAP is a state-only program.
• , so not the benefits, but administering the program.
• For 50 years of the program, the federal government has always paid 100% of the benefit amount that is
• Has always paid 100% of the benefit amount that is paid out for the federal program.

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held a work session to review how H.R. 1 (the One Big Beautiful Bill Act) could affect Washington’s Medicaid, long-term care, developmental disabilities, and food assistance programs, with a focus on implementation challenges, fiscal impacts, and likely coverage losses. Staff and agency officials explained Washington’s Medicaid financing structure, eligibility categories, caseload trends, and the role of the Health Care Authority and DSHS in administering Apple Health and related services. They also described how Medicaid expansion increased access to behavioral health services and how H.R. 1’s provisions are expected to affect the expansion population most directly. Health Care Authority and DSHS officials outlined several major H.R. 1 changes: new work and community engagement requirements for the Medicaid expansion population, six-month redeterminations instead of annual renewals, changes to immigrant eligibility, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, new cost-sharing requirements, reduced retroactive coverage, and changes affecting long-term care eligibility. They said Washington is still awaiting federal guidance on many details, but estimated that about 620,000 Apple Health expansion enrollees could be subject to work requirements, that roughly 30,000 immigrants could lose Medicaid eligibility under the new definition of qualified alien, and that some long-term care and developmental disability clients could be indirectly affected. Officials also said the state is working with other agencies to build shared verification systems and may seek a delay waiver, though they do not expect broad federal flexibility. The committee also heard that H.R. 1 immediately blocks Medicaid reimbursement for Planned Parenthood services for one year, with the state planning to backfill about $11 million to preserve access. In addition, officials warned that the law could reduce federal Medicaid revenue by billions over time and strain hospitals and emergency rooms as more people become uninsured. They noted that Washington’s rural health transformation grant application is due November 5 and could bring some funding, but not to offset coverage losses. No votes were taken; the session was informational only. The committee then heard a separate presentation on food assistance, where staff and DSHS described H.R. 1’s SNAP changes, including expanded work requirements, immigrant eligibility restrictions, higher state administrative costs, and a possible future state share of benefit costs tied to payment error rates. DSHS estimated a four-year fiscal impact of about $750 million for food assistance changes and said the state is working on system and policy changes across agencies before the new requirements take effect.

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, the work group had discussions about liability costs, program growth, and funding sources
• Additionally, the work group had discussions about liability costs, program growth, and funding sources
• I am the chief over the fiscal appeals and benefit programs within the Department of Social Services,
• These programs provide a monthly cash benefit to adults 65 and older, blind, and disabled Californians
• Additionally, there are directly provided benefits to Californians, like through the CalFresh program

Summary: The joint Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused first on long-term services and supports for older adults, especially the “forgotten/overlooked middle” who earn too much for Medi-Cal but cannot afford private long-term care. Administration witnesses from DHCS, the Department of Aging, and Social Services described Medicare’s limited long-term care coverage, Medi-Cal’s role, the elimination of the Medi-Cal asset test, and ongoing state studies and listening sessions on financing options. Testimony from advocates and researchers emphasized rising homelessness among older adults, the need for better navigation and coordination across health, aging, housing, and social service systems, and short-term policy steps such as share-of-cost reform, housing stability supports, and protecting home- and community-based services. Members highlighted the need for a coordinated, no-wrong-door approach and asked for the most impactful budget investments to address affordability and homelessness risk. The second major topic was the Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) program. CDA reported that CBAS helps participants remain in the community, that 304 centers operate statewide serving about 42,000 people, and that demand is stable but access gaps remain in some regions. DHCS explained that a 2024 rate increase authorized by SB 159 became inoperative after Proposition 35, and that a separate 10% rate change on the fee schedule was the result of a DHCS system error; the department said it would not require recoupment, though managed care plans may act under their contracts. CBAS providers and advocates warned that reimbursement rates have not kept pace with costs, that several centers have closed, and that clawbacks could trigger more closures. They requested $74.8 million ongoing General Fund to close part of the rate gap and preserve the program, while members expressed concern about closures and the cost savings of keeping people out of more expensive institutional care. The hearing then moved to In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) and statewide collective bargaining. CDSS reviewed provider recruitment and retention efforts, including electronic timesheets, direct deposit, and the now-completed IHSS Career Pathways program, which trained more than 59,000 providers. CDSS also summarized its AB 102 workgroup report on statewide versus regional bargaining, saying the final report would be sent to the Legislature soon and that statewide bargaining appeared more viable than regional bargaining, though it would require clear statutory scope and major fiscal changes. The department estimated that each $1 per hour statewide wage increase would cost at least $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion annually. Labor advocates argued that IHSS wages, benefits, and training are too inconsistent across counties and called for statewide bargaining, consumer participation, and ongoing state funding. County representatives supported stronger wages but cautioned that counties need protection from new costs and administrative burdens, and consumer advocates warned that moving bargaining to the state could weaken local consumer control and the program’s consumer-driven structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• We want patients to benefit, but this has become a nonprofit hospital markup program where they are allowed
• System, Teacher Retirement System, the Texas A&M Employees Benefits Program, and the University of Texas
• System, Teacher Retirement System, the Texas A&M Employees Benefits Program, and the University of Texas
• The employer retains the tax deductibility benefit of offering benefits.
• The employer retains the tax deductibility benefit of offering benefits.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. employer union health benefit trust fund employer union health benefit trust fund first<00
• <00:12:21.920> trust employee union health benefits trust employee union health benefits trust
• open this benefit of for group<00:14:29.399> of<00:14:29.480> employees<00:14:29.920>
• critical component to making the program critical component to making the program successful<00:
• have<00:20:39.080> a program the dating program will have a program the dating program will

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• States have been passing state benefit laws for decades to help define the benefit packages required
• health benefit benchmark plan in their state that covered these 10 essential health benefits.
• to set an essential health benefit to set an essential health benefit Benchmark<00:02:40.319>
• The benefit, the essential benefits system, has changed the dynamics in the market.
• around their benefit Benefit Plan design around their benefit Benefit Plan design around which

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Has anybody benefited?
• Schedule program.
• or a TK program, or where there is a preschool program on campus, we are supporting those programs as
• And these are not just programs. They are not social media programs.
• to fund this program.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused first on behavioral health, especially hard-to-treat serious mental illness through the lens of anosognosia, and the impact of potential federal Medi-Cal reductions under H.R. 1. A family member, Dawn Marie Anderson, described her son’s long cycle of psychosis, homelessness, arrests, jail-based stabilization, and repeated relapse when treatment ended, arguing that anosognosia is a symptom of illness rather than refusal of care. She and other witnesses urged more consistent, long-term treatment, family involvement, medication support, and stronger county and state coordination. County and provider representatives said the current system still relies too heavily on crisis response and leaves people with serious mental illness falling through gaps between managed care, county specialty care, housing, and justice systems. Testimony from the California Behavioral Health Association, Santa Barbara County Behavioral Health, and the County Behavioral Health Directors Association emphasized that people with anosognosia often cannot self-navigate care, making a “no wrong door” system essential. They said H.R. 1 could destabilize coverage and shift costs to counties, while existing private insurance coverage is inadequate for early psychosis and related services. Witnesses highlighted CalAIM, jail in-reach, assertive community treatment, mobile crisis, supportive housing, and LEAP-style family training as promising tools, but said counties still need more resources and that the state should strengthen both Medi-Cal and private insurance behavioral health coverage. A public commenter from Lake County said private insurers denied most claims, especially for unlicensed staff providing case management and mobile crisis services. The committee then heard an update on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, including the virtual services platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna and the CYBHI fee schedule program. DHCS reported strong growth in app registrations, coaching sessions, referrals, and positive user outcomes, and said the platforms are serving children and youth statewide, including many who had never previously accessed care. For the fee schedule, DHCS said 72% of school districts and 50 of 58 county offices of education are participating across six cohorts, with $9.6 million reimbursed to date and 41,556 students represented in claims. Members pressed the department on the program’s roughly $69.3 million administrative cost, the slow pace of reimbursement relative to the investment, and the late delivery of requested data. DHCS responded that many claims are still being submitted, most denials are correctable, and local implementation is still scaling up through technical assistance and capacity grants.

Transcript Highlights:

• and labor groups.
• Not a single company will get any benefit, not a penny of benefit, from moving out of the state just
• In that ruling, they clarified that family leave benefits, right now 100% on worker, family leave benefits
• This is the benefit.
• ...of this program.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a public hearing on H. 4975, Governor Healey’s bill to manage the impact of the federal “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OB3) on Massachusetts tax law and state revenues. Administration officials, led by Secretary of Administration and Finance Matt Gorowitz, said OB3 would otherwise reduce FY26 revenue by about $442 million and argued for a phased-in conformity approach that would preserve the current-year budget while still adopting selected federal business tax provisions over time. The proposal would phase in the research and experimental expenditure deduction first, delay other major corporate provisions for two years, extend the pass-through entity excise to income subject to the 4% surtax, add a one-year delay mechanism for future federal tax changes over $20 million, limit opportunity zone benefits to Massachusetts investments, and make smaller technical changes to DFML contributions and casino reporting thresholds. Committee members questioned the rationale for phasing in rather than fully decoupling, the effect on the budget if the bill did not pass, and the treatment of opportunity zones, the surtax, and future federal tax changes. Public testimony was split. MassBudget, Progressive Massachusetts, and several labor and public-sector groups urged the committee to permanently decouple from the federal corporate tax changes rather than delay them, arguing that the bill would still send state revenue to corporate tax breaks, often for investments outside Massachusetts, and that the state should protect funding for schools, health care, human services, and other public services. The Massachusetts Society of CPAs supported the administration’s timing and the research-and-development provisions, citing filing deadlines and the importance of certainty for businesses and startups. Business and tax experts also testified that rushed conformity can create revenue losses and that the governor’s review-and-delay framework was a prudent improvement, though some said decoupling should be the default if the Legislature does not act. Unite Here Local 26 testified against sections 3 and 4, which would raise the slot-machine jackpot reporting threshold from $1,200 to $2,000, arguing the current threshold helps with problem-gambling intervention, preserves slot attendant jobs, and generates revenue. Several union leaders, including the Massachusetts Teachers Association, AFT Massachusetts, SEIU 509, the Massachusetts Building Trades, the AFL-CIO, and 1199 SEIU, urged permanent decoupling, warning that OB3’s federal tax cuts and related spending reductions would worsen budget pressures, harm public services, and shift costs onto workers, patients, and schools. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, an upgrade doesn't benefit the grid; it benefits...
• As you may know, the program has multiple benefits, and Director Stare touched on some of them, but I'll
• just mention that it's a program that helps low-income and marginalized families enjoy the benefits
• You know, the SEED program in particular and the Community Benefit Fund both really empower New Mexicans
• So that can also be one of the main benefits of this study group: pre-season coordination meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• But these are expensive programs.
• Has anybody benefited? Do we even know anybody effectiveness. Has anybody benefited?
• or a TK program, or where there is a preschool program on campus, we are supporting those programs as
• And these are not just programs. They are not social media programs.
• an optional Medi-Cal benefit with... ...the TBL will continue the benefit as an optional Medi-Cal benefit

Summary: The hearing focused first on behavioral health, especially serious mental illness and anosognosia, a condition described by witnesses as a neurological symptom that prevents people from recognizing they are ill. The chair framed the issue around families cycling through emergency rooms, jails, conservatorships, and short-term stabilization without lasting treatment, and warned that federal changes under H.R. 1 could reduce Medi-Cal funding and worsen access. Dawn Marie Anderson gave a personal account of her son’s long history of psychosis, homelessness, arrests, repeated jail and state hospital stays, and eventual stability when he received sustained medication and coordinated support. She argued that the system often treats the problem as criminal rather than medical and that voluntary programs and short-term services are not enough for people who lack insight into their illness. Other panelists, including representatives from the California Behavioral Health Association, Santa Barbara County Behavioral Health, and the County Behavioral Health Directors Association, agreed that anosognosia is not denial or noncompliance and said the system needs long-term, coordinated care, including assertive community treatment, mobile crisis, supportive housing, medication support, and stronger handoffs between county and managed care systems. They said CalAIM and other reforms have improved some coordination, but significant gaps remain, especially for people with serious mental illness, for those in jail or locked settings, and for people with private insurance, which witnesses said often offers little meaningful coverage for early psychosis or intensive behavioral health services. Several witnesses urged the Legislature to protect Medi-Cal, shore up county safety-net services, and invest in training and family engagement. The committee then turned to the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, with a focus on the virtual services platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna and the CYBHI fee schedule. DHCS reported strong growth in app registrations, coaching sessions, referrals, and positive user outcomes, saying the platforms provide free, culturally responsive, early-intervention support statewide and help connect users to higher levels of care when needed. On the fee schedule, DHCS said more than 500 LEAs, colleges, universities, and school-linked providers are participating, 181 LEAs have submitted claims, and $9.6 million has been reimbursed to date, with 41,556 students represented in claims. The chair and several members criticized the pace of implementation and the amount of money spent relative to reimbursement levels, saying the Legislature had requested data earlier and that the return on investment still appeared low. DHCS responded that many claims are still being submitted, that 70% of denials are correctable, that $400 million in capacity grants has been distributed locally, and that reimbursement is increasing rapidly as more districts come online. Public comment included a rural county behavioral health director who said private insurance denials leave counties with significant uncompensated work, especially for unlicensed staff providing case management and mobile crisis services.

Transcript Highlights:

• The seven programs that Mr.
• So we see a lot of benefit.
• to support their program.
• fire work group.
• , student support programs.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held a hearing focused on California Community College budget proposals. Chair Alvarez opened by emphasizing the system’s role in access, transfer, workforce training, and serving more than 2 million students, while also noting persistent challenges in enrollment, persistence, transfer, and graduation. Public commenters and system representatives broadly supported COLA, enrollment growth funding, deferred maintenance, student support block grants, and additional flexibility for districts facing uncertainty. The first major panel covered the student-centered funding formula, COLA, and enrollment growth. The Department of Finance said the Governor proposes a 2.43% COLA ($230.4 million) and 0.5% enrollment growth funding ($30.4 million). The LAO said the COLA was reasonable and recommended funding at least the proposed growth amount, citing uneven enrollment recovery and regional differences. The Chancellor’s Office supported both proposals and asked for additional changes, including using the greater of current-year or three-year average for apportionments and lifting the 10% local enrollment cap, arguing these would better fund growing districts. Members questioned how the formula works, whether SCFF is improving outcomes, and how much additional funding would be needed under different growth scenarios. The committee then reviewed categorical program COLAs, Rising Scholars, career education proposals, IT proposals, and student housing. The Governor proposed a 2.43% COLA for selected categorical programs ($31.9 million). For Rising Scholars, the Governor proposed $30 million ongoing and removal of the cap on participating colleges; the LAO urged waiting for outcome data before doubling funding, while the Chancellor’s Office said the program is serving more students and supports equity for justice-impacted students. On career education, the Governor proposed $50 million for credit for prior learning and $50 million for a career passport; the LAO supported more reporting on credit for prior learning but recommended rejecting the career passport as too undefined, while the Chancellor’s Office supported both. On technology, the Governor proposed $162.5 million for a common cloud data platform and $168 million for a common ERP system; the LAO said both were premature or lacked sufficient planning and recommended rejection, while the Chancellor’s Office argued they would improve real-time data, security, and systemwide efficiency. The committee also heard an update on student housing: the administration said the 2024 shift to a lease-revenue bond model remains in progress for 13 approved projects, with 11 still active, and members asked about withdrawn projects and possible use of any returned funds. No votes were taken, and several items were held open for further discussion and May Revision updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• Mass Save, though, benefits all customers, not just those in the program.
• contractors all benefit from the Mass Save program.
• this program and many other participant benefits, utility benefits, and societal benefits, including
• Lawrence wanted to move out of the program because the program was not delivering benefits to the city
• Lawrence wanted to move out of the program because the program was not delivering benefits to the city

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on the value of Mass Save, with opening remarks emphasizing that despite past criticisms the program has delivered major energy, cost, climate, and equity benefits. The chair cited large avoided system costs, strong benefit-cost ratios, and recent legislative changes that set emissions goals, restricted fossil-fuel equipment incentives, and increased focus on low- and moderate-income households. Department of Energy Resources Commissioner Elizabeth Mahoney testified that Mass Save has weatherized hundreds of thousands of homes, reduced bills, avoided emissions, and that the current plan includes budget controls after the DPU ordered $500 million removed from the approved budget. She said the governor’s proposal to have only electric utilities administer the program was intended to reduce administrative costs and align with current implementation trends. Members questioned Mahoney about what counts as marketing and administration, and she said the category includes traditional advertising as well as community-based outreach, customer resource centers, and other customer engagement work, much of it in low- and moderate-income communities. She said administrative and marketing costs are under 5% of the budget, while more than 80% goes to incentives and direct program delivery. Several witnesses then focused on workforce and contractor impacts. Dave Betcher of Abode Energy Management and Rick Taglienti of Rogers Insulation said Mass Save sustains small businesses, creates careers, and supports thousands of jobs; both warned that budget cuts would reduce hiring, training, and work in homes and businesses. They also described a broad ecosystem of suppliers, trainers, and service providers that depends on stable program funding. Other witnesses addressed cost-effectiveness, affordability, and emissions. Anna Johnson of ACEEE said Massachusetts remains a national leader, with Mass Save returning about $2.80 per dollar invested, reducing peak demand, and lowering bills for participants, especially through weatherization and heat pumps. Kyle Murray of Acadia Center said the program is statutorily required to be cost-effective and has avoided billions in supply and infrastructure costs for all ratepayers, including nonparticipants, by lowering overall demand and peak prices. Amy Boyd-Rabin of the Environmental League of Massachusetts argued that efficiency is the cheapest way to meet climate targets and that cutting the budget would force more expensive power generation. The hearing also featured testimony on equity and housing: Mary Wampo described historic under-service to renter-heavy and lower-income communities and said recent reforms, including designated equity communities and performance incentives tied to equity, are helping correct that imbalance; Brian Biot and James Collins of LEAN/ABCD described low-income delivery systems and wraparound services; Barney Heath and John Nannari said Mass Save incentives are essential to affordable housing, passive house construction, and keeping projects on time and on budget. The final witnesses highlighted Connected Solutions and electrification: Sunrun’s Bronte Payne said the virtual power plant program saved more than it cost and helps avoid peaker plants and grid upgrades, and Highland Electric Fleets’ Ben Sondaga said electric school buses can provide similar grid benefits while lowering transportation costs for districts.

Transcript Highlights:

• or social services social benefits or social services benefits<00:04:48.560> like<00:04:48.880
• <00:35:51.200> Feist the target student groups. Rep. Feist the target student groups.
• And um if if we can get a working group And um if if we can get a working group in<00:43:43.599>
• These this is a group achievement.
• This is a group of political is.

Bills: HF1048, HF1049, HF745, HF2210

Keywords: charter schools, education funding, revenue calculation, general education revenue, special education, school library aid, education finance, school districts, funding eligibility, compensatory revenue, task force, free meals, school funding, education equity, HF2210, school unemployment aid, Minnesota Department of Education, general fund appropriation, unemployment insurance, unemployment claims

Transcript Highlights:

• Those children overlap with other groups, and then there are other enrollees with a partial benefit.
• There are two different programs; it's got two different groups that they're serving.
• Public benefit to not include most educational programs, because of a Supreme Court case called Plyler
• The federal government is also saying that an early childhood program that provides benefits similar
• They're saying that under their new interpretation of what constitutes a federal public benefit, a program

Transcript Highlights:

• So there's now a group that is now going to be eligible to get this benefit, whereas under the old law
• So, so as a follow-up, anybody in that group would have a financial benefit because they have the option
• would have a financial in that group would have a financial benefit<03:30:09.840> because<03:
• coming from Group One that want to reinstate their benefits?
• And for Group Two, that means you don't get the 50% auto spousal survivor benefit.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference on HB 1 and HB 2 met to review revenue estimates and begin working through a side-by-side of the budget. New Hampshire Lottery Director Charlie McIntyre testified that lottery revenues are outperforming prior estimates, projecting a $27 million return to the state this year, up $7 million, and $200 million per year in the next biennium, up $6.5 million per year. He attributed the increase to stronger scratch ticket sales, no negative impact from Massachusetts sports betting, and overall better performance. Members questioned the assumptions behind the higher numbers, including the proposed $50 scratch tickets, the effect of inflation, and whether the projections were conservative enough. McIntyre said the $50 ticket could produce modest growth and that the estimates were intentionally cautious. The discussion also covered gaming revenue assumptions for historical horse racing and video lottery terminals, with McIntyre saying the state market is not yet saturated and that future conversions from HHR to VLTs should be net positive for the state. Members also discussed differences between House and Senate revenue numbers for gaming, including machine counts, daily revenue assumptions, and the tax split. The Senate version used higher machine counts and a 31.25% tax rate, with a quarter-point reserved for responsible gaming and the remainder split between charities and the state. The House had used a 30% rate with a different distribution. McIntyre and committee members also reviewed House Bill 2 items affecting Kino hours and local option games of chance, with McIntyre explaining that the bill would expand playing hours and shift towns to an opt-out model. No votes were taken during the lottery discussion, but the committee indicated it would continue refining the revenue model and circulate the spreadsheet used for the estimates. The committee then moved through the HB 1 detail change sheet, accepting several Senate positions and holding others for later. It agreed to a zero-cost realignment in the Department of Safety moving the international fuel tax agreement function from administration to motor vehicles, and it restored eight passenger motor vehicle inspection positions for later discussion in HB 2. The Department of Corrections reorganization was set aside for a later, more detailed discussion. The committee also accepted no-change positions for the Department of Employment Security and agreed to a technical footnote fix in the Judicial Council section. It discussed a new HB 2 item moving contract counsel for involuntary mental health admissions from the judicial branch to the Judicial Council, funded at $100,000 per year, and noted that the public defender funding issue would be revisited when the overall budget picture is clearer. The meeting ended with the committee continuing its review of the remaining pages of the detail change sheet.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:24:43.120> might benefit from this program $100,000 might benefit from this program $100,000
• program.
• program ends up.
• by who benefits from them.
• Who benefits from these programs is of critical importance, a critical lens by which we should measure

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 80% for individuals, 85% for groups. So it's both. Well, small groups is 80%. 80%.
• . ...a PPO-type program, a lower-cost program.
• Blaze Duran, Director of the Group Benefits Division at ERS. I'm also... All right.
• Blaze Duran, Director of our Group Benefits Division at ERS. I'm also a health care actuary.
• And then we self-fund the pharmacy benefits, the Medicare Part D benefits.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To take a deeper dive here into these programs, the inpatient program is small, five beds.
• and Food Assistance Program.
• Such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Food Assistance Program.
• state program.
• group as well.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on the effects of H.R. 1 on Washington’s Medicaid, developmental disability, long-term care, and food assistance systems, followed by a separate discussion of juvenile rehabilitation caseloads and placement capacity. DSHS officials said HR1 could affect home equity rules, immigration-related eligibility, work requirements for some expansion-population enrollees, and provider taxes, while also creating a future opportunity for a new 1915(c) waiver. Advocates and providers warned that any state response that cuts home and community-based services would worsen already thin provider networks, increase waiting lists, push more people into hospitals or out-of-state placements, and strain families and workers. A pediatric behavioral health expert and a supported living provider said Medicaid reimbursement is already too low and further reductions would threaten outpatient, residential, and inpatient services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and severe behavioral needs. The committee then turned to SNAP and the state food assistance program. DSHS said HR1 would tighten work requirements and exemptions, end some immigrant eligibility for the federal program, eliminate the SNAP education program, raise state administrative costs, and eventually require Washington to share in benefit costs based on its error rate. Officials estimated large numbers of residents could lose or see reduced benefits, with significant added state costs. Anti-hunger advocates, a food bank director, and a SNAP recipient described the program as essential for low-income families, seniors, and people with disabilities, and said the changes would increase paperwork, reduce benefits, and worsen food insecurity while also harming local food economies. Testimony emphasized that food banks cannot replace SNAP and that work requirements may be difficult to meet for caregivers, people with disabilities, and those facing child care or transportation barriers. In the juvenile justice portion, the Caseload Forecast Council presented the JR forecast, which is currently mostly flat through the end of the biennium but expected to grow modestly over the longer term. Members discussed how policy choices, including the 2019 JR-25 law, have increased lengths of stay for adult-sentenced youth in JR, while diversion and other reforms have affected regular JR trends. A court researcher explained the data available to help forecast admissions and noted ongoing efforts to improve data sharing with JR, AOC, and county systems, though staffing and system-lag issues limit how quickly data can be produced. Juvenile court administrators and DCYF officials described the community-based juvenile justice continuum, rising complexity in the JR population, overcrowding at Green Hill and placement constraints at Echo Glen and Harbor Heights, and the need for more flexible community transition and mental health capacity. No votes were taken.