Transcript Highlights:

• The free screenings that are available to all other students thus creating an unjust access gap that
• These screenings help identify dental and vision problems early, which is particularly meaningful in
• In essence all students including foster students will receive vision and dental screenings unless the
• Our mobile vision program offers screening vision exams and free glasses to those that need them.
• That's why the state stepped up to provide free dental and vision screenings for students, period.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• come to call our neighbors, friends, and loved ones are forced back to the same gang violence, exploitation
• , chaos, and violence, exploitation, chaos, and instability<04:08:45.520> that<04:08:45.840>
• And state regulators and polluters both know exactly how to exploit it, and they will.
• ><04:46:36.480> it,<04:46:36.718> and<04:46:36.878> they know exactly how to exploit
• it, and they know exactly how to exploit it, and they will.<04:46:38.000> That's<04:46:38.160

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, April 15, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• in or screen out.
• whether to screen in or screen<00:11:03.639> out<00:11:04.279> we're<00:11:04.519>
• would not be screened would not be screened out<00:16:47.800> well<00:16:48.079> so<00:
• <00:17:46.840> in child and it wouldn't be screened in child and it wouldn't be screened in
• <00:18:21.600> it lead to something besides screening it lead to something besides screening

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met on House Bill 553, which concerns the definitions of child abuse and neglect in RSA 169-C, including psychological maltreatment and the rebuttable presumption of harm. The chair and members emphasized that the bill is intended to clarify definitions rather than create punishments, and they discussed concerns that had arisen after the bill’s earlier drafting. Representative Eimon stated his view that the bill is constitutional, citing case law, and members noted that amendment 114 would restore language refined by the prior study committee and address trauma-informed wording, especially around substance use disorder and newborns. A major portion of the discussion focused on whether the bill could be read to treat ordinary parental discipline or disagreements with a child—such as grounding, taking away car keys or a phone, or refusing gender-affirming care—as abuse or neglect. DCF Deputy Director Jen Ross explained that screeners look at the nature of the allegation and whether the parent’s conduct is likely to cause serious psychological or emotional harm; she said routine discipline or prudent parenting would not be screened in, while persistent ridiculing, terrorizing, bullying, isolating, threats, or similar conduct could qualify. She also said that denial of gender-affirming care, by itself, would not be treated as neglect, but the agency would consider the full context and any resulting harm or need for mental health care. DCF General Counsel Susan Larby added that the legislature’s earlier definition of psychological maltreatment and related policy already focus on pervasive emotionally abusive behavior, and that the bill is meant to make the statute more understandable and transparent, not to change the core neglect standard. She and other speakers said the goal is to identify serious harm and provide services, not to remove children for ordinary parental decisions. Lisa Massio of the Office of the Child Advocate said the bill and related placement language are intended to preserve family unity and fill gaps where courts have interpreted neglect too narrowly or inconsistently. Members also discussed a proposed concise analysis from Representative Maral and asked about CPSW qualifications and training; DCF said staff generally have backgrounds in human services, social work, psychology, or education and receive a 12-week Core Academy on policy, law, investigations, and family engagement. No vote was taken in the portion provided, and members indicated they wanted to continue refining the amendment before sending anything to the Office of Legislative Services.

Transcript Highlights:

• When we review a screening decision that does not comply with policies governing where grievances are
• Eight of the positions requested in our BCP are for the purpose of expanding the volume of screening
• It doesn't have to be screened by anybody; all the layers are gone.
• a centralized screening team and improving the investigations process by establishing the allegation
• The revisions to the Allegation Decision Index were implemented to provide the centralized screening

Summary: The hearing focused first on sexual abuse, harassment, and retaliation in California’s women’s prisons, with testimony from CDCR wardens, the Office of Inspector General, advocacy groups, and formerly incarcerated survivors. Legislators and witnesses described a pattern of staff misconduct, fear of retaliation, gaps in reporting, and the need for stronger accountability, better investigations, and more outside access for survivor support organizations. CDCR said it has expanded training, body-worn and stationary cameras, outside partnerships, and PREA-related response procedures, while the Inspector General requested additional funding and staff to monitor more grievances and staff sexual misconduct cases under SB 1069. Members pressed CDCR on why accused staff are not always placed on leave, how cases are referred to prosecutors, and whether current protections are enough; several members argued the state should aim to investigate all complaints and do more to prevent retaliation and repeat abuse. The second issue was rehabilitative and reentry programming in women’s prisons. CDCR’s Division of Rehabilitative Programs and the wardens highlighted education, vocational training, substance use treatment, peer support, and community reentry programs, citing increased enrollment and recent graduates earning diplomas, degrees, and certifications. They said these programs are intended to reduce recidivism and improve public safety. Formerly incarcerated advocates and community providers argued that current offerings are still too limited, outdated, and not aligned with today’s job market, especially around digital literacy and transferable credentials, and they urged more funding for community-based, trauma-informed, gender-responsive programming. A coalition representative asked for a $20 million continuation and expansion of the Wright Grant program, and members discussed additional budget requests for reentry and related women’s services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Other states have put in limits on screen time?
• called SurveyMonkey, where I would have surveys laid out or we would do a Kahoot, and those are all screen
• But I did hold an interim study on screen usage for our youngest, and we're in elementary school.
• So, most classrooms now have smart boards, that's screen time.
• We have a technology screen time problem in our schools.

Bills: HB1782, HB2293, HB3176, HB3544, HB3546, HB3619, HB4358

Keywords: artificial intelligence, education reform, innovation, funding, advisory council, broadband, Oklahoma Broadband Office, broadband access, statewide broadband plan, internet connectivity, grant programs, expansion council, termination plan, Oklahoma, Gas Hub, national laboratory, public-private partnerships, aerospace, high-performance computing, economic development

Transcript Highlights:

• And they are even more prevalent and thus likely to be screened or diagnosed in the patient population
• So rates of ailments are higher, and screening, diagnosis, and treatment are lower.
• New mothers often leave the hospital with little follow-up and no routine mental health screening.
• If Cindy had been properly screened, If Cindy had been properly screened and monitored during her birth
• We also offer outpatient screening and consultations.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary heard testimony on a wide range of bills, with much of the discussion focused on housing stability and maternal mental health. On H. 1924/S. 1171, supporters including Sen. Joan Lovely, Rep. Jim O’Day, physicians, advocates, and people with lived experience urged the committee to create legal protections and treatment pathways for defendants who experienced postpartum psychosis or other perinatal mood disorders within 12 months of giving birth. Testimony emphasized that these conditions are rare but severe, often treatable, and can lead to tragic outcomes if criminalized rather than addressed through screening, expert evaluation, treatment, and, in some cases, resentencing or mitigation. Committee members asked about diagnosis years after the fact and how the Illinois law has worked; witnesses said retrospective diagnosis is possible and that the Illinois model has led to some successful resentencing petitions and broader awareness. Housing-related bills drew substantial testimony. On H. 1983/S. 1071, witnesses described “zombie” subordinate mortgages that were sold years after borrowers believed they had been resolved, then resurfaced with large balances and foreclosure threats. Supporters said the bill would require disclosures and court review to prevent unlawful servicing and foreclosure practices. On H. 1952, advocates from the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, tenants, and legal services providers backed a permanent statewide right to counsel in eviction cases, citing data showing strong tenant outcomes and the importance of quality control, multilingual outreach, and full representation. On H. 1895/S. 1184, testimony supported codifying a two-tier summary process in eviction court and prohibiting defaults at the initial case-management stage. On H. 1883, a small property owner supported rent escrow as a way to protect landlords from bad-faith nonpayment while preserving tenant rights. The committee also heard testimony on bills addressing discriminatory housing covenants, tenant oversight, and homelessness. On H. 1762/S. 1080, a housing advocate supported removing void restrictive covenants from deeds, describing the Dirty Deeds Project and the lingering harm of racist language in property records. On H. 1814, tenants and advocates described harassment, retaliation, security problems, and lack of accountability in subsidized housing, arguing for an Office of the Tenant Advocate within the Attorney General’s Office. On S. 1120, multiple witnesses supported a bill of rights for people experiencing homelessness, saying it would affirm the right to rest and seek shelter, reduce criminalization, and extend anti-discrimination protections. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and questions on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the point of entry screening I think kind of reiterates and supports those rules of decorum
• And then the point of entry screening I think kind of reiterates and supports those rules of decorum
• And then the point of entry screening I think kind of reiterates and supports those rules of decorum
• And then the point of entry screening I think kind of reiterates and supports those rules of decorum
• And then the point of entry screening I think kind of reiterates and supports those rules of decorum

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It is where they go for cancer screenings, birth control, STI testing and treatment, annual exams, and
• It does not make people stop needing cancer screenings or birth control or STI treatment.
• , cervical cancer screenings, screenings for STIs that lead to cancer and increased harm to their bodies
• These health centers provide the basics people depend on: cancer screenings, STI testing, treatment,
• We're talking about the fact that they did 100,000 cancer screenings.

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, completed the roll, and opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several guest introductions recognizing visitors, students, and a long-serving committee secretary, Tabitha Volga-Sang, who was honored for 32 years of service. Members also took up a procedural motion by Assembly Member DeMaio to immediately consider ACA 14, the Taxpayer Protection Act, without reference to file; that motion failed on a 14-44 vote. The main policy debate centered on SB 106 by Senator Laird, a budget appropriation to provide $90 million in one-time funding for Planned Parenthood and related women’s health and family planning services after federal cuts. Assembly Member Tangipa offered amendments arguing the money should be directed more broadly to women’s health and hospitals, but the Assembly voted 41-13 to lay the amendments on the table. Supporters, including Gabriel, Sharp-Collins, Gibson, Krell, Bonta, and others, said the bill was needed to preserve access to cancer screenings, contraception, STI testing, and reproductive care, especially in rural and underserved communities, and to offset the effects of federal defunding. Opponents, including Johnson, DeMaio, Patterson, and Tangipa, criticized the bill as lacking transparency, favoring a politically connected organization, and diverting attention from hospital funding and other health needs. After extended floor debate, SB 106 passed the Assembly 55-10 and was transmitted immediately to the Senate. The chamber then took up H.R. 84, a resolution condemning racism after President Trump circulated racist imagery depicting former President Obama and Michelle Obama. Members from the Black, LGBTQ, Latino, AAPI, Jewish, Native American, and other caucuses spoke in support, saying the post normalized dehumanization and had real-world consequences; Assembly Member Tangipa also stated the post was wrong and apologized on the record. The transcript ends during continued debate on H.R. 84, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, mandatory depression screenings require that each inmate who is pregnant or has given birth in the
• preceding year be screened for depression at specific intervals.
• In the screening timeline, it, it establishes a comprehensive screening schedule once each trimester
• Screening and treatment also support a healthier transition back into society and more stable family
• This screen doesn't show you registered, but OK, we got it now.

Transcript Highlights:

• HAS BILL 975 ESTABLISHES BACKGROUND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS FOR NEARLY ALL OF OUR HEALTHCARE PRACTITIONERS
• THE PORTAL HAS BEEN DEVELOPED AND INCLUDE SEARCH FUNCTIONALITY TO IDENTIFY SCREENINGS DOWN TO THE ZIP
• THAT. >> SENATE BILL 168 REQUIRES ALL HOSPITALS THAT PROVIDE NEONATAL INTENSIVE CARE SERVICES TO SCREEN
• THE DEPARTMENT NEWBORN HEARING SCREENING PROGRAM UPDATED THE SCREENING GUIDELINES AND THE DATA SYSTEM
• THEY GET BACKGROUND SCREEN. OVER 700 FOLKS ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE AND WE TURN OVER QUICKLY.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• screening issues would be if they have a history...
• Screening issues would be if they have a history of problem gambling or are self-excluded.
• I mean, I think it's best suited for the tribe because this is what the tribe is going to pre-screen
• This is the tribe; this is what the tribe is going to pre-screen for.
• But I don't have, and we do not have, the details for how that screening process would be occurring at

Summary: The joint House and Senate committee meeting heard public testimony on tentative tribal-state gaming compact amendments for the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe. Staff from the Washington State Gambling Commission explained the compacting process, the role of ex officio legislative members, and that the amendments would next go to the Gambling Commission for a January 8, 2026 vote before possible governor review. The Port Gamble S'Klallam presentation emphasized how gaming revenue supports tribal government services, health care, housing, education, language revitalization, natural resources work, and community investment projects in Kitsap County. For Port Gamble S'Klallam, the proposed changes include expanded credit and wager limits, more gaming stations and player terminals, language for a second facility, and adoption of an electronic table games appendix similar to other tribes. Members asked about pre-screening for high-limit tables, including how the tribe would define problem gambling and self-exclusion; tribal counsel said internal minimum control standards were still being developed and more detail would follow. A question about green crab removal in Port Gamble Bay was deferred for follow-up because the natural resources director was not present. The Upper Skagit Indian Tribe described its history, sovereignty, gaming operations, and how gaming revenue supports member programs such as nutrition assistance, education aid, homeownership down payment help, and charitable giving in Skagit County. Its amendment would allow electronic table games after the tribe removed traditional table games due to staffing and cost pressures, with the goal of remaining competitive. Committee members also asked about air quality and smoking-related provisions in the compact; the tribe said it maintains separate smoking and non-smoking areas and supports smoking cessation efforts. Chairs from both chambers closed by thanking the tribes for their contributions to members, local communities, and natural resource protection.

Transcript Highlights:

• The biggest part of that is our newborn screening program, which is the largest newborn. screening lab
• When we say screening and treatment, I really want to focus in on the screening because I think that's
• CANS and the ANZA, those child adolescent screening tools and adult screening tools, we do use those
• I don't know that it's specifically screens for that though.
• So my dad went and got screened and had polyps removed. to do this.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And another aspect is to partner to increase access to oral health screenings and dental sealants through

Bills: HB20, HB276, HB644, HB812, HB816, HB916, HB1131, HB1247, HB1518, HB1525, HB1537, HB1541, HB1546, HB1553, HB1562, HB1565, HB1566, HB1576, HB1577, HB1591, HB1605, HB1612, HB1613, HB1614, HB1618, HB1620, HB1650, HB1656, HB1658, HB1661, HB1664, HB1668, HB1676, HB1707, HB1711, HB1713, HB1715, HB1718, HB1727, HB1749, HB1756, HB1774, HB1776, HB1801, HB1802, HB1805, HB1813, HB1815, HB1831, HB1838, HB1853, HB1854, HB1859, HB1863, HB1871, HB1872, HB1918, HB1920, HB1952, HB1965, HB1966, HB1967, HB1969, HB1972, HB1973, HB1974, HB1975, HB1980, HB1985, HB2005, HB2023, HB2031, HB2033, HB2062, HB2113, HB2114, HB2116, HB2138, HB2139, HB2156, HB2158, HB2159, HB2171, HB2208, HB2268, HB2270, HB2272, HB2273, HB2276, HB2289, HB2310, HB2315, HB2335, HB2338, HB2339, HB2340, HB2343, HB2361, HB2384, HB2387, SB2338, SB2431, SB2438, SB2593, SB2907, SB2671, SB2321, SB3084, SB2401, SB3033, SB2972, SB3032, SB2806, SB3014, SB2108, SB2981, SB2973, SB2423, SB2078, SB2322, SB2397, SB2896, SB2088, SB2347, SB2408, SB2970, SB2851, SB2713, SB2697, SB2312, SB2192, SB2363, SB2530, SB3028, SB2024, SB3007, SB2599, SB2596, SB2662, SB2930, SB3334, SB2378, SB3019, SB3231, SB2240, SB2372, SB2175, SB2046, SB2298, SB2922, SB2835, SB3263, SB2174, SB2128, SB2006, SB2489, SB3134, SB2982, SB2425, SB2849, SB2797, SB2795, SB2575, SB2521, SB2765, SB2386, SB2852, SB2022, SB2117, SB2277, SB2387, SB2688, SB2885, SB3132, SB3219, SB2169, SB2591, SB2090, SB2983, SB888, SB3249, SB2611, SB2429, SB2463, SB3154, SB3131, SB3152, SB3315, SB2448, SB2054, SB2140, SB2520, SB2377, SB2986, SB2010, SB2189, SB2026, SB3010, SB2818, SB2002

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, condominiums, annual report, filing fee, real estate, developer, residency, property regime, PFAS, single-use plastics, environmental health, food ware, pollution reduction, local produce, agriculture, Hawaii Revised Statutes

Bills: HB20, HB276, HB644, HB812, HB816, HB916, HB1131, HB1247, HB1518, HB1525, HB1537, HB1541, HB1546, HB1553, HB1562, HB1565, HB1566, HB1576, HB1577, HB1591, HB1605, HB1612, HB1613, HB1614, HB1618, HB1620, HB1650, HB1656, HB1658, HB1661, HB1664, HB1668, HB1676, HB1707, HB1711, HB1713, HB1715, HB1718, HB1727, HB1749, HB1756, HB1774, HB1776, HB1801, HB1802, HB1805, HB1813, HB1815, HB1831, HB1838, HB1853, HB1854, HB1859, HB1863, HB1871, HB1872, HB1918, HB1920, HB1952, HB1965, HB1966, HB1967, HB1969, HB1972, HB1973, HB1974, HB1975, HB1980, HB1985, HB2005, HB2023, HB2031, HB2033, HB2062, HB2113, HB2114, HB2116, HB2138, HB2139, HB2156, HB2158, HB2159, HB2171, HB2208, HB2268, HB2270, HB2272, HB2273, HB2276, HB2289, HB2310, HB2315, HB2335, HB2338, HB2339, HB2340, HB2343, HB2361, HB2384, HB2387, SB2338, SB2431, SB2438, SB2593, SB2907, SB2671, SB2321, SB3084, SB2401, SB3033, SB2972, SB3032, SB2806, SB3014, SB2108, SB2981, SB2973, SB2423, SB2078, SB2322, SB2397, SB2896, SB2088, SB2347, SB2408, SB2970, SB2851, SB2713, SB2697, SB2312, SB2192, SB2363, SB2530, SB3028, SB2024, SB3007, SB2599, SB2596, SB2662, SB2930, SB3334, SB2378, SB3019, SB3231, SB2240, SB2372, SB2175, SB2046, SB2298, SB2922, SB2835, SB3263, SB2174, SB2128, SB2006, SB2489, SB3134, SB2982, SB2425, SB2849, SB2797, SB2795, SB2575, SB2521, SB2765, SB2386, SB2852, SB2022, SB2117, SB2277, SB2387, SB2688, SB2885, SB3132, SB3219, SB2169, SB2591, SB2090, SB2983, SB888, SB3249, SB2611, SB2429, SB2463, SB3154, SB3131, SB3152, SB3315, SB2448, SB2054, SB2140, SB2520, SB2377, SB2986, SB2010, SB2189, SB2026, SB3010, SB2818, SB2002

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, condominiums, annual report, filing fee, real estate, developer, residency, property regime, PFAS, single-use plastics, environmental health, food ware, pollution reduction, local produce, agriculture, Hawaii Revised Statutes

Bills: HB20, HB276, HB644, HB812, HB816, HB916, HB1131, HB1247, HB1518, HB1525, HB1537, HB1541, HB1546, HB1553, HB1562, HB1565, HB1566, HB1576, HB1577, HB1591, HB1605, HB1612, HB1613, HB1614, HB1618, HB1620, HB1650, HB1656, HB1658, HB1661, HB1664, HB1668, HB1676, HB1707, HB1711, HB1713, HB1715, HB1718, HB1727, HB1749, HB1756, HB1774, HB1776, HB1801, HB1802, HB1805, HB1813, HB1815, HB1831, HB1838, HB1853, HB1854, HB1859, HB1863, HB1871, HB1872, HB1918, HB1920, HB1952, HB1965, HB1966, HB1967, HB1969, HB1972, HB1973, HB1974, HB1975, HB1980, HB1985, HB2005, HB2023, HB2031, HB2033, HB2062, HB2113, HB2114, HB2116, HB2138, HB2139, HB2156, HB2158, HB2159, HB2171, HB2208, HB2268, HB2270, HB2272, HB2273, HB2276, HB2289, HB2310, HB2315, HB2335, HB2338, HB2339, HB2340, HB2343, HB2361, HB2384, HB2387, SB2338, SB2431, SB2438, SB2593, SB2907, SB2671, SB2321, SB3084, SB2401, SB3033, SB2972, SB3032, SB2806, SB3014, SB2108, SB2981, SB2973, SB2423, SB2078, SB2322, SB2397, SB2896, SB2088, SB2347, SB2408, SB2970, SB2851, SB2713, SB2697, SB2312, SB2192, SB2363, SB2530, SB3028, SB2024, SB3007, SB2599, SB2596, SB2662, SB2930, SB3334, SB2378, SB3019, SB3231, SB2240, SB2372, SB2175, SB2046, SB2298, SB2922, SB2835, SB3263, SB2174, SB2128, SB2006, SB2489, SB3134, SB2982, SB2425, SB2849, SB2797, SB2795, SB2575, SB2521, SB2765, SB2386, SB2852, SB2022, SB2117, SB2277, SB2387, SB2688, SB2885, SB3132, SB3219, SB2169, SB2591, SB2090, SB2983, SB888, SB3249, SB2611, SB2429, SB2463, SB3154, SB3131, SB3152, SB3315, SB2448, SB2054, SB2140, SB2520, SB2377, SB2986, SB2010, SB2189, SB2026, SB3010, SB2818, SB2002

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, condominiums, annual report, filing fee, real estate, developer, residency, property regime, PFAS, single-use plastics, environmental health, food ware, pollution reduction, local produce, agriculture, Hawaii Revised Statutes

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the end of green screen.
• This is the end of green screen.
• The yellow screen blinking cursor.
• yellow screen blinking cursor. yellow screen blinking cursor.
• screen, a literal dinosaur on the desk? screen, a literal dinosaur on the desk?

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate File 334, a bill to modernize Minnesota’s county-administered human services technology systems, including those used for Medicaid, SNAP, and related programs. The author described the current systems as outdated “green screen” platforms from the late 1980s and early 1990s that are cumbersome for county workers, slow service delivery, and make it harder to retain staff. The bill would create an integration layer over legacy systems, establish a long-term technology modernization fund with about $90 million in spending over time and a $50 million cap, and place MNIT in charge of holding and disbursing funds. It also creates governance structures, including an interagency group with county representation and a legislative working group, and includes a $15 million fund for the Office of the Inspector General’s technology needs. Several members spoke in strong support, emphasizing that modernization would improve efficiency, help counties serve residents better, and strengthen fraud detection and data sharing. Representatives from Winona, Washington, Olmsted, Stearns, Hennepin, and others cited local experiences with hacked county systems, obsolete software, and the difficulty of recruiting workers to outdated systems. One member urged that the effort be made enterprise-wide and suggested adding the Office of Legislative Auditor to oversight. Another noted the bill’s potential to improve identity verification tools and support broader agency collaboration. No amendments were offered. After third reading and debate, the clerk called the roll and the House passed the bill with 134 ayes and 0 nays; the title was agreed to.

Transcript Highlights:

• Of course, at any time I can go back to the previous screens to edit the information.
• As a quick follow-up, on, I think it was the main screen for the student personal information, there
• What about any background screening? Is that supplied along with that?
• No, we do not do background screenings. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for the question.
• No, we do not do background screenings. Okay. Thank you.

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee met to continue reviewing how Family Empowerment Scholarship students are funded through the FEFP and the role of scholarship funding organizations. Staff gave a statutory overview of parent, SFO, and Department of Education responsibilities, including application deadlines, eligibility verification, quarterly payment timing, cross-checks to prevent duplicate funding, and the 99% district FEFP limitation for certain awards. The committee then heard demonstrations from Step Up for Students and AAA Scholarship Foundation showing their parent portals, application workflows, reimbursement systems, school enrollment/invoice processes, and marketplace tools for tuition, tutoring, and approved goods and services. Step Up reported major growth since HB 1, saying its scholarship population expanded from about 260,000 to more than 440,000 students, with application processing averaging about 10 days. It also highlighted faster tuition, provider, and reimbursement payments, multilingual support in English and Spanish, and resources such as videos and a call center. Members asked about support for Creole speakers, optional Florida ID numbers, student identifiers, marketplace pricing, tutor qualifications, background screening, and how awards differ from funded status. Step Up said it does not currently support Creole, does not do background screenings for tutors, sets no marketplace prices itself, and uses a unique internal student ID separate from the state ID. AAA demonstrated its revised software for the 2025-26 school year, including an eligibility screener, household and student application steps, messaging with staff, reimbursement requests, and administrative review and payment batching. AAA said the new system is custom-built, more transparent about award value versus available balance, and designed to better handle quarterly funding for UA students. Members questioned AAA and Step Up about student ID numbers, public-school cross-checks, fraud controls, school fee schedules, whether schools must participate, and reimbursement timing. Both organizations said they report quarterly to DOE, receive public-school cross-checks, and recover funds when students return to public school; AAA said its average reimbursement turnaround is about 14 business days, while Step Up said its reimbursement approvals have improved significantly. The committee also requested follow-up information, including one-pagers, data on income levels and demographics, and additional details on forecasting and system costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• lucodistrophe to the conditions screened lucodistrophe to the conditions screened for<00:23:58.799
• under the newborn screening for under the newborn screening program.<00:24:02.000> Sections<00
• <00:24:31.200> advisory newborn hearing screening advisory newborn hearing screening advisory
• data the the knowledge around screen data the the knowledge around screen time<01:20:38.239>
• <01:20:39.679> time time and the dangers of screen time time and the dangers of screen time

Bills: HF2435

Keywords: healthcare, dementia services, public health funding, opioid prevention, women's health, community health boards, mental health, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• , colon cancer screening, tobacco use screening, screening for clinical depression, diabetes care, controlling
• hypertension, statin therapy for patients with cardiovascular disease, BMI screening and follow-up,
• cancer screening, colon cancer screening,<00:10:29.040> tobacco<00:10:29.519> use,<00:
• 10:29.839> screening<00:10:30.160> for screening, tobacco use, screening for screening,
• for depression and visits, u screening for depression and obesity<00:10:47.040> care.

Keywords: 00:00:00 - Call to Order/Roll Call 00:01:25 - Discussion of 26RS HB 689 00:15:15 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 689 00:17:02 - Discussion of 26RS HB 407 00:45:40 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 407 00:49:25 - Discussion of 26RS HB 713 00:55:50 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 713 00:56:54 - Discussion of 26RS HB 676 01:06:42 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 676 01:08:43 - Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 689, which would authorize Kentucky to seek federal approval for a Medicaid state-directed payment program for physician and non-physician professional services delivered through qualifying hospital-affiliated groups, beginning in 2026. Rep. Amy Neighbors and witnesses from Owensboro Health and St. Elizabeth Healthcare said the bill would bring in about $29 million in new federal Medicaid dollars without using general fund money, help retain physicians, support rural and underserved access, and tie payments to quality metrics. Witnesses described staffing shortages, rising costs, and the need to sustain services such as OB care, primary care, and preventive outpatient services. After questions about how the funding would work and whether private practices were included, the committee voted on the bill and passed it with favorable expression. The committee then moved to House Bill 407, as substituted, which would streamline Kentucky’s certificate-of-need process. Rep. Marianne Proctor and supporters from the Pacific Legal Foundation and the Institute for Justice said the bill would not repeal CON but would modernize a system they described as outdated and overly restrictive, citing national trends toward reform and arguing that Kentucky’s process has changed little since the 1970s. They said the substitute added language requiring the cabinet to contact a dominant provider when needed for data to make CON determinations. Mark Gilfoil, speaking in opposition for St. Elizabeth Healthcare, argued that CON is not a barrier to care in Northern Kentucky and said the bill would weaken the process by limiting who can request hearings, present evidence, and appeal decisions, effectively giving applicants control and making approvals nearly automatic. He said St. Elizabeth serves as a safety-net hospital for low-income and publicly insured patients and warned the bill could harm that role. Members questioned both sides about the appeal process, the definition of safety-net hospitals, and whether the bill could increase facilities and create waste or abuse. The discussion was still ongoing when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:30:51.120> extra screening districts don't receive extra screening districts don't receive
• But so what I mean >> screen.
• school to do dyslexia screenings, right? school to do dyslexia screenings, right?
• , doing the screenings, doing the screenings, you<00:33:53.519> know,<00:33:53.919> because
• come in and do that screening. come in and do that screening. >> Okay. >> Okay.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the October 15 minutes and a brief discussion of the committee’s report process, including the likelihood of a minority report and a deadline of November 1 for any separate report. Members then heard from Jod Adams of the New Hampshire Alliance for Public Charter Schools, who gave an overview of charter schools in the state: there are 37 charter schools, with 6,034 students last year, and schools are formed by certified teachers, parents, or nonprofit organizations. She said charter schools receive about $9,180 per pupil in adequacy aid and charter school grant funding, must fundraise for additional money, and are governed by their own boards under their charters and bylaws. Members asked about admissions, governance, transportation, and special education. Adams said charter schools are open enrollment, not geographically based, and may use lotteries when applications exceed available seats. She explained that districts and charter schools coordinate on special education and busing, with the sending district responsible for special education coordination and certain transportation obligations depending on where the student lives and attends. She also said charter schools are public schools, not selective, and that each school’s board operates independently of the local district school board, though some schools may have special arrangements. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on funding and statutory obligations. Adams and members discussed how special education aid follows the student, while charter schools do not receive some district-level aid such as catastrophic aid; free and reduced lunch funding and Title funds can go to charter schools. Members also raised concerns that some state laws and administrative rules do not clearly specify whether they apply to charter schools, creating confusion and, in some cases, causing districts to perform services such as dyslexia screening for charter students without additional funding. Adams agreed that clearer statutory language would help and noted that charter schools are subject to many state requirements, including testing and reporting, even though not every public-school rule applies to them.