Transcript Highlights:

• H.R. 7831 reauthorizes the APD fee program.
• H.R. 7831 reauthorizes the APD fee program.
• H.R. 7831 reauthorizes the APD fee program.
• Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 7831, the License to Drill Act, H.R. 1687, the Clean Act, and
• I rise in support of H.R. 7250.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, June 2, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• With H.R. 1, it's a gaping wound. Thank you.
• Now we come to the impacts of H.R. 1 in particular.
• So we're already losing our co-workers to H.R. 1.
• . 1 from the H.R. 1 cuts.
• .1 from the H.R.1 cuts.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chris Bauer, H.R. 360 by Martinez Half, H.R. 363 by Curry, Midway ISD, H.R. 374 by Simmons, Jack Yates
• Overstreet, H.R. 15 by Raymond, Peggy Jean Newman, H.R. 19 by Cole, William Matthew Begar, H.R. 23 by
• Overstreet, H.R. 15 by Raymond, Peggy Jean Newman, H.R. 19 by Cole, William Matthew Begar, H.R. 23 by
• the committee on local and consent calendars HR 425 H.R. 428 and H.R. 432, H.R. 429 by Hicklin, H.R.
• 430 by Orr, H.R. 431 by Wally, H.R. 434 by Meyer, H.R. 435 by Troxler, H.R. 438 by Lujan.

Bills: HCR21, HCR22, HCR23, HCR24, HCR25, HCR26, HCR27, HCR31, HCR41, HCR42, HCR43, HCR44, HCR45, HCR52, HCR53, HCR66, HCR67, HCR73, HR8, HR10, HR13, HR20, HR21, HR50, HR59, HR61, HR71, HR74, HR79, HR84, HR86, HR90, HR91, HR102, HR103, HR107, HR113, HR125, HR126, HR132, HR142, HR145, HR149, HR150, HR152, HR167, HR179, HR181, HR183, HR186, HR192, HR196, HR199, HR207, HR211, HR212, HR213, HR216, HR249, HR256, HR259, HR261, HR263, HR272, HR281, HR285, HR294, HR295, HR300, HR305, HR311, HR313, HR315, HR316, HR323, HR331, HR339, HR340, HR346, HR349, HR352, HR357, HR358, HR360, HR363, HR374, HR377, HCR20, HCR28, HCR30, HCR32, HCR49, HR14, HR15, HR19, HR23, HR24, HR25, HR26, HR27, HR29, HR47, HR48, HR55, HR56, HR66, HR85, HR92, HR93, HR95, HR96, HR140, HR155, HR164, HR204, HR241, HR242, HR250, HR253, HR260, HR262, HR265, HR279, HR310, HR312, HR328, HR332, HR359, HR362, HR367

Keywords: recognition, award, petroleum industry, leadership, community service, HCR 22, House Concurrent Resolution, Texas Legislature, commendation, honorary resolution, Dr. James Olson, James Olson, University of Texas Permian Basin, UT Permian Basin, psychology professor, 50 years of service, faculty recognition, academic award, Piper Professor Award, Regents' Outstanding Teaching Award

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'll continue to report on that now that the H.R. 1 provisions...
• Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the impacts of H.R. 1.
• under the pre-H.R. 1 rules.
• H.R. 1's work requirements jeopardize this progress.
• We know it will complement the process for the H.R. 1 work.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the impacts of H.R. 1.
• under the pre-H.R. 1 rules.
• under the pre-H.R. 1 rules.
• H.R. 1's work requirements jeopardize this progress.
• We know it will complement the process for the H.R. 1 work.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on how H.R. 1’s new federal work and community engagement rules will affect Medi-Cal and CalFresh, especially for Californians with behavioral health needs, people experiencing homelessness, and justice-involved individuals. The Legislative Analyst’s Office outlined the scope of the changes, including Medi-Cal work requirements beginning in January 2027 and CalFresh changes beginning in June 2026, and estimated large potential coverage losses if people cannot document exemptions or comply with reporting rules. State departments said they are still awaiting some federal guidance but are already building implementation plans, data matching, outreach campaigns, and system changes to reduce disruption and automatically identify exemptions where possible. Department of Health Care Services and Department of Social Services officials described efforts to use existing data, CalSAWS, and cross-program coordination to streamline exemption screening, including for medical frailty, serious mental illness, substance use disorders, and student status. They said outreach will include text messaging, webinars, county training, and community-based partners, while also acknowledging that many people will still need direct worker contact. County representatives stressed that the new rules will create major administrative burdens, require significant new staffing, and could lead to coverage loss if counties are not adequately funded. They urged the Legislature to release the $20 million in current-year General Fund for CalFresh implementation and to consider a much larger county augmentation next year. Assembly members pressed the administration on outreach strategy, county funding, consistency across counties, and how to avoid harming eligible people through overly aggressive implementation. They also asked about coordination with universities, CDCR, and community-based organizations, and about how exemptions would be documented for mental health and substance use conditions. Department officials said they are working with counties, education institutions, and correctional agencies, and that they are trying to align Medi-Cal and CalFresh rules where possible, but not all federal definitions match. Public commenters from legal aid, counties, labor, and public hospitals warned that work requirements do not increase employment, will worsen food insecurity and health outcomes, and will strain county systems unless the state provides more funding and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. from the H.R. 1 impacts to California.
• We're going to do the H.R. 1 impacts on the Medi-Cal program first.
• This provision was effective upon enactment of H.R. 1.
• So we're currently going through H.R. 1 and the MCO...
• But unfortunately, that progress is now at risk under H.R. 1.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s Medi-Cal program and on community health effects from recent immigration enforcement actions. Committee leaders said H.R. 1 would sharply reduce federal funding, increase administrative burdens, and worsen access to care, especially for Medi-Cal enrollees, immigrant families, rural communities, and reproductive health patients. The second half of the hearing examined how ICE raids and related federal actions are creating fear, reducing clinic and emergency department use, and disrupting children’s access to schools and early childhood education. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined the main H.R. 1 provisions affecting Medi-Cal: work requirements, semiannual eligibility redeterminations, shorter retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal support for emergency and lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for prohibited abortion providers. She estimated millions could lose coverage, with tens of billions of dollars in federal funding at risk. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warned the defunding provision could force clinic closures, service reductions, and loss of access to family planning, STI testing, and cancer screenings. The California Hospital Association said the financing changes could cut hospital revenue by tens of billions over 10 years and threaten access, especially for rural and safety-net hospitals. The Western Center on Law and Poverty argued the law would increase churn, paperwork, and uninsured rates, disproportionately harming working adults and people experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation timelines, notification systems, administrative costs, the effect on immigrant eligibility, and whether California could delay or mitigate some provisions. Bass said the state was still assessing federal guidance, planning county and provider outreach, and exploring a possible delay for work requirements and a transition period for provider-tax changes. Members also discussed how state budget actions may need to be revisited in light of H.R. 1, and how California might preserve access through state-only funding or other policy changes. In the second panel, CHIRLA, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Children’s Partnership described the health consequences of immigration enforcement. Speakers said raids and data-sharing fears are causing anxiety, trauma, and avoidance of care, with Los Angeles County reporting declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits after enforcement actions. The Children’s Partnership said school and early childhood absences are rising in some communities and that enforcement is undermining children’s emotional well-being and access to education. Members asked for more data and discussed possible state protections, telehealth, mobile care, and legal and policy responses to reduce fear and preserve access to health and education services.

Transcript Highlights:

• H.R. 1 also reduces retroactive coverage for Medi-Cal.
• Without adequate resources, H.R. 1, Without adequate resources, H.R. 1 will increase staff workload,
• These decreases are primarily due to changes under H.R. 1.
• This budget year is even more drastic, especially with H.R. 1.
• It's kind of everything but H.R. 1.

Summary: The subcommittee heard an extended briefing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on Medi-Cal and CalFresh, followed by testimony from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and county officials. DHCS described major Medi-Cal changes in H.R. 1, including work/community engagement requirements, six-month redeterminations, reduced federal matching for some emergency services, narrower immigrant eligibility, reduced retroactive coverage, and limits on provider taxes and directed payments. CDSS outlined CalFresh changes, especially the expanded able-bodied adults without dependents time limit, reduced exemptions and waivers, and the new federal-state-county administrative cost split. Both departments emphasized implementation plans, automation, outreach, and county coordination, while acknowledging significant expected coverage losses and administrative burden. The LAO and an independent policy expert discussed how H.R. 1 could increase demand on county indigent care systems and public hospitals as people lose Medi-Cal. They reviewed the history of county indigent care, 1991 realignment, and AB 85, explaining that counties already rely on a patchwork of funding and that current realignment revenues are often used for public health rather than indigent care. They warned that counties may face large increases in uninsured residents, with wide variation in how counties respond, and raised concerns about equity, financing, and whether a more standardized state-county program should be created. Committee members pressed witnesses on county funding, exemptions, homelessness, older adults, undocumented residents, and the effect of administrative burden versus true ineligibility. County representatives from Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Tulare, and San Bernardino described the expected local impacts and asked for additional state support. They said H.R. 1 would drive major losses in Medi-Cal and CalFresh enrollment, increase uncompensated care, strain eligibility staff, and worsen homelessness and food insecurity. Several counties urged the Legislature to fund eligibility workers, preserve enrollment, and consider a CalFresh match waiver; Santa Clara and San Bernardino also cited local tax measures and staffing reductions already underway. No formal vote or committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• That resolution comes as H.R. 308.
• H.R. 301 by Rep.
• H.R. 260 by Representative J.
• Without objection, H.R. 179 is called up. H.R. 179 by Representative Marcelle.
• H.R. 315.

Bills: HR308, HR309, HR310, HR311, HR312, HR313, HR314, HR315, HR316, HR317, HR318, HR319, HR295, HR296, HR297, HR298, HR299, HR300, HR301, HR302, HR303, HR304, HR305, HR306, HR307, HCR115, HCR116, HCR117, SCR71, SCR72, SCR73, HR73, HR118, HR144, HR196, HR237, HR249, HR260, HR267, HR272, HR273, HR276, HR278, HCR85, HCR100, HCR105, HCR107, HCR113, HCR114, SCR5, SCR29, SCR33, SCR37, SCR63, HB255, HB378, HB509, HB1090, SB80, SB131, SB143, SB251, SB254, SB279, SB367, SB384, SB388, SB389, SB398, SB408, SB431, SB468, SB469, SB496, SB25, SB132, SB155, SB157, SB202, SB295, SB433, HR179, HR223, HR225, HR274, HCR89, HR252, HR253, HCR96, HCR103, HCR108, HCR26, HB250, HB265, HB339, HB427, HB445, HB463, HB468, HB606, HB639, HB649, HB665, HB746, HB781, HB853, HB861, HB872, HB886, HB916, HB937, HB1054, HB1068, HB1117, HB1237, HB74, HB108, HB956, HB1085, HB1137, HB62, HB193, HB210, HB220, HB246, HB364, HB420, HB475, HB584, HB622, HB772, HB784, HB949, HB953, HB1043, HB1070, HB1092, HB1134, HB1162, HB1176, HB1196, HB1214, HB1199, SB268, SB283, HB782, SB149, HR84, HB646, HB998, SB56, SB163, SB197, SB97, SB326, SB341, SB518, SB123, SB353, SB479, SB495, HB901, HR20, HR74, HR168, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB302, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, HB134, HB258, HB359, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB217, SB274, SB300, SB379, SB382, SB441, SB449

Keywords: HR 308, House Resolution 308, Pope Leo XIV, Catholic Church, Holy See, Vatican, commendation, resolution, Louisiana Catholic heritage, St. Louis Cathedral, New Orleans, South Louisiana parishes, religious recognition, ceremonial resolution, faith leadership, pontificate, spiritual solidarity, human dignity, peace, mercy

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 988.
• I rise today in support of H.R. 658, as amended.
• I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 658, AS AMENDED.
• Votes will be taken in the following order: motions to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 980 and H.R. 3123
• >> H.R. 980, A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 38, UNITED STATES CODE, H.R. 980, a bill to amend title 38,

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, February 2, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, specifically for student loans, H.R. 1 requires the U.S.
• So I don't think any of that was specified in H.R. 1.
• H.R. 1 poses serious risks to California WIC families.
• For Planned Parenthood in California, H.R. 1 is devastating.
• As we work towards implementing H.R. 1...

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held its fifth hearing of the year to examine the newly enacted federal H.R. 1 and its effects on California. Members and the chair described the law as a major threat to state health, food, education, and climate programs, and emphasized that California would not be able to fully backfill the federal cuts. Several members also highlighted the bill’s tax provisions, including temporary deductions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, while warning that the largest benefits flow to higher-income taxpayers and that major cuts to Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and clean-energy incentives are delayed or phased in over time. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance presented detailed overviews of the bill’s likely impacts and implementation timelines. They identified the main affected areas as health care coverage and financing, food assistance, higher education, personal income taxes, and clean-energy/electric-vehicle credits. They explained that H.R. 1 limits provider taxes used to finance Medi-Cal, adds work and redetermination requirements, restricts CalFresh eligibility and increases state costs, changes student loan and Pell Grant rules, extends and modifies federal tax provisions, and phases out many clean-energy credits. Finance also noted major rescissions of Inflation Reduction Act funds, new border and immigration enforcement spending, and the possibility of PAYGO sequestration if Congress does not act to offset the deficit increase. During member questions, the committee focused on likely enrollment losses, administrative burdens, and fiscal exposure for the state and counties. Witnesses said many details still depend on federal guidance, but they estimated significant impacts on Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and graduate/professional student borrowing, and noted that California’s high CalFresh error rate could increase state costs. UC testified that the elimination of Graduate PLUS loans would affect thousands of professional students, especially in health, law, and other high-cost programs. Members asked for follow-up data on county, health, and tax impacts, and staff agreed to provide additional tables and estimates as implementation guidance becomes clearer. Public commenters from counties, early childhood advocates, health coalitions, disability rights groups, immigrant-rights organizations, and other stakeholders urged the Legislature to mitigate the law’s effects. They warned of higher county costs, reduced access to health care and food assistance, increased administrative burdens, and harm to children, immigrants, people with disabilities, and low-income families. Several urged new state revenue solutions and stronger protections for Medi-Cal, CalFresh, child care, and home- and community-based services. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with a commitment to continue monitoring federal guidance and to work on state responses in the budget process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1325.
• The House suspends the rules and passes H.R. 1325.
• Let's make this a reality with H.R. 1326.
• Votes will be taken in the following order: motions to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 359 and H.R. 1326
• Babin, to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 1326.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, March 24, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And H.R. 1 devastates three out of those four pillars. And so, we have a lot of work to do.
• So specifically for student loans, H.R. 1 requires the U.S.
• H.R. 1 threatens the foundation of California's safety net systems.
• And H.R. 1 poses serious risks to California WIC families.
• And for Planned Parenthood in California, H.R. 1 is devastating.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><03:21:29.880><c> H.R.
• Under<03:31:42.920><c> H.R.
• Union Calendar No. 385, H.R. 4386. Union Calendar No. 385, H.R. 4386.
• Under<05:15:10.040><c> H.R.
• But<05:15:45.440><c> H.R.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, March 3, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In closing, I'll say the changes to CalFresh under H.R. 1...
• Without adequate resources, H.R. 1, Without adequate resources, H.R. 1 will increase staff workload,
• These decreases are primarily due to changes under H.R. 1.
• These decreases are primarily due to changes under H.R. 1.
• It's kind of everything but H.R. 1.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on Health and Human Services heard an overview of the expected California budget and program impacts from H.R. 1, including changes to Medi-Cal and CalFresh eligibility, redeterminations, work requirements, immigration-related coverage rules, retroactive coverage limits, and reductions in federal matching for certain services and provider financing mechanisms. DHCS and CDSS described implementation plans focused on automation, data matching, clearer communications, county training, and outreach, while noting that many federal details are still pending. The Legislative Analyst’s Office also reviewed how H.R. 1 could increase pressure on county indigent care systems, explaining the history of county responsibility under Section 17000, 1991 realignment, and AB 85, and warning that counties may face large increases in uninsured residents seeking care without corresponding funding flexibility. An independent policy expert urged consideration of a more standardized statewide approach to indigent care and raised questions about governance, benefits, and financing. Department witnesses estimated substantial coverage losses and fiscal effects: DHCS projected major Medi-Cal disenrollment tied to work requirements, six-month renewals, narrowed immigrant eligibility, and reduced retroactive coverage, while CDSS estimated large CalFresh benefit losses and a significant increase in administrative workload and payment accuracy pressure. Members questioned how exemptions would work for older adults, people experiencing homelessness, undocumented residents, and cash workers, and asked about the effect on the CalFresh Minimum Nutrition Benefit Pilot and on county administrative funding. Officials said they would use available data and self-attestation where possible, but acknowledged that many cases would require manual screening and that the county workload estimates remain in dispute. They also said the state is still evaluating the impact of H.R. 1 on provider taxes and state-directed payments, which could create additional budget pressure. County representatives from Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Tulare, and San Bernardino described major local consequences if H.R. 1 is implemented as written. They warned of higher uninsured rates, more strain on emergency rooms and public hospitals, increased homelessness and food insecurity, and a likely need to rebuild or expand county indigent care programs that were largely scaled back after the ACA. Counties said they are already freezing hiring, cutting positions, reducing overtime, deferring spending, and launching outreach and coordination efforts with managed care plans and community partners, but argued that these steps are not enough without additional state support. Several counties backed the California County Welfare Directors Association’s request for $373 million in General Fund support for eligibility work and asked for a CalFresh match waiver to soften the new county share of administrative costs; Los Angeles and Santa Clara also emphasized that their local revenue measures would not close the projected gaps. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So for the first time under H.R. 1, prior to the enactment of H.R. 1, the National Revenue States and
• So H.R. 1 preserves that language.
• But with any requirement by H.R. 1 or, frankly, prior to H.R. 1 with respect to SNAP benefits and assisting
• For example, for SNAP, H.R. 1 sets the minimum...
• H.R. 1 does not require that.

Transcript Highlights:

• The question is, will the House suspend the rules and pass the bill H.R. 7401? H.R. 7401?
• Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 915, H.R. 915, the Small Business Technological Act of 2025.
• So H.R. 8880... federal efforts. So H.R. 8880 takes a practical approach.
• H.R. 8880... agencies' expertise. H.R. 8880 would direct the U.S.
• And I'm talking about H.R. 8291.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it'll be two areas for public comment, one for H.R. 1 impacts.
• H.R. 1 also reduces retroactive coverage for Medi-Cal.
• In closing, I'll say the changes to CalFresh under H.R. 1...
• Without adequate resources, H.R. 1, Without adequate resources, H.R. 1 will increase staff workload,
• These decreases are primarily due to changes under H.R. 1.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• these program requirements pursuant to H.R. 1.
• You also asked about our outreach strategy for H.R. 1.
• And then if you see policy change... ...the new H.R. 1.
• It relates to H.R. 1 Medi-Cal implementation.
• As a reminder, you have one minute, and we are talking about H.R. 1 and the impacts of H.R. 1 on Medi-Cal

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 and related federal actions on Covered California, Medi-Cal, and immigrant access to care. The chair framed the discussion around three main issues: expected losses in marketplace coverage as enhanced federal premium subsidies expire, new federal work and renewal requirements that would add administrative burden to Medi-Cal, and the loss of eligibility for certain lawfully present immigrants. Covered California testified that H.R. 1 and new federal rules, combined with the end of enhanced premium tax credits, are driving higher premiums, lower new enrollment, and more cancellations, especially among middle-income, Latino, and Black enrollees. The agency said California’s $190 million state subsidy program is helping lower-income enrollees but cannot replace the lost federal assistance, and it noted that roughly 120,000 lawfully present immigrants in Covered California will lose federal tax credits in 2027. On Medi-Cal, the Department of Health Care Services said H.R. 1 will require work and community engagement verification, six-month renewals for certain adults, and other changes that the department expects will reduce enrollment substantially. DHCS estimated 233,000 members could lose coverage by June 2027 from the work requirement and 289,000 from six-month renewals, with losses rising much higher by 2028; it also said it is using automation, outreach, clinic navigators, coverage ambassadors, community health workers, and street medicine providers to reduce procedural disenrollments. The department described a two-phase outreach plan and said it is working with counties on implementation, while the Department of Finance said the Governor’s budget maintains $190 million for the state subsidy program and does not propose additional changes at this time. The LAO said its independent forecast is somewhat higher than the administration’s, estimating about 2.1 million fewer Medi-Cal enrollees by June 2028, and urged the Legislature to review county administrative workload and readiness. Public testimony and member comments focused on the human and fiscal consequences of coverage losses. A representative from the Sacramento Native American Health Center warned that reduced reimbursement and coverage losses would destabilize community health centers, increase uncompensated care, and worsen outcomes by pushing patients into emergency care. Members raised concerns about paperwork burdens, county capacity, outreach effectiveness, and whether the state should do more to preserve coverage, including possible modeling of additional H-CARF spending and support for middle-income consumers and immigrant enrollees. The hearing did not take any votes or formal actions, but it ended with public comment and continued discussion of implementation and budget options.

Transcript Highlights:

• I rise in support of H.R. 7257, the Secure Grid Act, which I of H.R. 7257, the Secure Grid Act, which
• H.R. 7258, the Energy...
• H.R. 7258 addresses this directly.
• H.R. 7266, a bill to amend the H.R. 7266, a bill to amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
• Votes will be taken in the following order: H.R. 7757 and H.R. 7128.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, June 29, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Union Calendar Number 387, H.R. 4467. Union Calendar Number 387, H.R. 4467.
• </c> and pass the bill H.R. 1665. and pass the bill H.R. 1665.
• &gt;&gt; H.R.<04:39:30.119><c> 2294,</c> &gt;&gt; H.R. 2294, &gt;&gt; H.R. 2294, a<04:39:32.000><c> bill
• Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R.<04:40:11.080><c> 2294</c> H.R. 2294 H.R. 2294 to<04:40:12.760
• H.R. 2294 communities.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, March 16, 2026, 1012, house, all