Transcript Highlights:

• These are papers that ASU signs off on. These are... Authored papers.
• These are papers that ASU signs off on.
• But we wrote a paper on it with China. Without an export license.
• Why are you needing to do this as a ballot referral? Mr.
• I think I'd probably not vote to put this on the ballot.

Bills: SB1003, SB1060, SB1134, SB1275, SB1327, SB1429, SB1618, SB1634, SB1654, SB1803, SCR1002, SCR1005, SCR1023, SCR1027

Keywords: election, canvass, certification, ballot tabulation, write-in candidates, registration, voting procedures, voter registration, temporary absence, absentee voting, residency, military voters, overseas voters, election law, Arizona Revised Statutes, political signs, campaign materials, public safety, municipal regulation, veterans

Transcript Highlights:

• So Senator Orte has put in a good provision here for provisional balloting.
• Even if that barrier is eliminated through the provisional ballot.
• Do you continue to receive your ballot at the last address? Okay.
• We need to get paper ballots to our soldiers better, faster, and in an easier way.
• We need to get paper ballots to our soldiers better, faster, and in an easier way.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Elections Committee held its final meeting of the session, with Chair Senator Gonzalez thanking members and staff for their work. The committee considered several election-related bills, including a voter ID proposal, protections against voter challenges and purging, a measure to address election disruptions, sample ballot posting, absentee ballot deadline notices for students, military and overseas voting changes, and notice requirements for expired address confidentiality protections. Senate Bill 2574, requiring government-issued photo ID to vote, drew opposition from Senators Walczyk and Myrie, who argued it would create barriers to voting and that there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud; the bill was reported from committee with opposition. Senate Bill 3233A, dealing with illegal voter purging and challenges, prompted extended discussion about citizenship verification, privacy of citizenship data, and whether information should be shared publicly; it was reported to the floor with Senators Borrello and Walczyk voting no. Senate Bill 4602A, on remedies for election disruptions, was discussed in terms of county and state board roles and bipartisan decision-making, and it was reported to the Finance Committee with a no vote from one member. The remaining bills were advanced with little or no substantive debate: Senate Bill 6253A on posting sample ballots, Senate Bill 6259 on notifying students of absentee ballot deadlines, Senate Bill 6995 on voting by mail, Senate Bill 7689B on overseas military and special federal voters, and Senate Bill 9857 on notice when address confidentiality protections expire. Most were reported either to the floor or to the Finance Committee, and the meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is just the ballot language.
• It just removes 'up to' from the ballot language, so now the ballot language will read: Do you support
• And they sign a piece of paper, and you can't say anything.
• Remember, we're doing the ballot language. I know. I just... I know.
• Yeah, I know it's a ballot language, but the ballot language is real broad, and I don't know if it includes

Summary: The Civil Law Committee met on May 5, 2026, and first considered House Bill 165 by Representative Abear, a constitutional amendment to dedicate $500,000 annually from lottery proceeds to a veterans service grant fund. The committee adopted a technical amendment removing “up to,” approved the 6.8A report, and reported the bill with amendments without objection. The committee then heard Senate Bill 185 by Senator Presley, which would make nondisclosure agreements in civil settlements involving child sexual abuse victims against public policy and unenforceable. Senator Presley and Elizabeth Phillips testified in support, describing the bill as part of the “Trey’s Law” movement to prevent survivors from being silenced. Additional supportive testimony came from Gillian Edwards Coburn, and committee members discussed how NDAs work in civil cases and the need to protect children’s ability to speak. The bill was reported favorably without objection. Next, the committee considered Senate Bill 77 by Senator Miller, a Law Institute measure on the effects of leases of movable property. Testimony explained that the bill is intended to protect good-faith lessees of items such as heavy equipment when a merchant leasing the property lacks authority to do so. The bill was reported favorably without objection. The committee also heard Senate Bill 140 by Senator Miller, which clarifies that multiple successions may be handled in the same proceeding when jurisdiction is proper. Members discussed the cost and efficiency benefits for families, and the bill was reported favorably without objection. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 603 by Representative Wright, a constitutional amendment authorizing state investment in digital assets and precious metals. Members questioned whether the language could include Bitcoin and how such investments would be monitored, with the sponsor saying implementation would be handled later by statute and public officials. The committee adopted the 6.8A report and then voted 5-3 to report the bill favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is just the ballot language.
• It just removes 'up to' from the ballot language, so now the ballot language will read: Do you support
• And they sign a piece of paper, and you can't say anything.
• Remember, we're doing the ballot language. I know. I just... I know.
• Yeah, I know it's a ballot language, but the ballot language is real broad, and I don't know if it includes

Bills: HB165, HB603, SB77, SB140, SB185

Keywords: HB165, lottery proceeds, Lottery Proceeds Fund, Veterans Service Grant Fund, constitutional amendment, veterans, military veterans, veterans' benefits, veterans services, family support, state lottery, education funding, Minimum Foundation Program, problem gambling, compulsive gaming, state treasurer, ballot proposition, constitutional referendum, lottery revenue, Louisiana resident veterans

Transcript Highlights:

• secrecy of the ballot, too?
• a certain selection of ballots.
• secrecy of the ballot, too?
• </c> machines and the ballots. machines and the ballots.
• </c> the ballot style. the ballot style.

Bills: HB0085, HB0086

Keywords: elections, audit procedures, ballot integrity, political party observation, transparency, county officials, election code, misconduct, removal, government accountability, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• My name's on the ballot.
• If a ballot gets jammed in the ballot counting device, I should not touch it.
• If a ballot gets jammed on the ballot.
• </c> ballot with my name on it. I agree 100%. ballot with my name on it. I agree 100%.
• question on their ballot.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee convened for a day of public hearings on nine bills, with plans to later execute several early bills and possibly additional measures under House Rule 44. Chair Diane Pauer outlined time limits for sponsors and testimony, announced a lunch break around noon, and noted substitute members would be arriving later. The first hearing was on House Bill 1107, which would allow municipal budget committees to have one to three alternate members. Representative Valon, the prime sponsor, said the bill was intended to help towns like Epping deal with quorum problems during the compressed budget season and noted that alternates are common on other local boards. The New Hampshire Municipal Association testified in support, saying the bill would increase flexibility and help fill seats. Committee members raised concerns about whether alternates should be elected, how they would be selected, whether they would be sufficiently informed to vote, and whether the bill’s one-year term language and rescission provisions were clear. The sponsor and NHMA said the process would be consistent with other local boards, that alternates would typically be appointed after elections, and that they would follow up on possible statutory clarification. The hearing closed with six remote supporters, one paper supporter, and no opposition reported. The committee then heard House Bill 1118, sponsored by Representative Colby, which would raise the daily amount municipal employees may hold before remitting funds to the treasurer from the current $1,500 limit to $3,500. Colby said the existing thresholds are outdated, have not been updated in about 20 years, and create burdens for smaller towns that must make frequent bank deposits, sometimes far from town offices. She said the bill would improve efficiency and allow staff to focus more on serving residents, while still allowing municipalities to keep lower limits if they choose. Members asked about how the remittance process works in practice, what amounts municipalities typically collect, and whether the change reflected a broader trend of updating cash-handling thresholds. The sponsor explained that the bill only changes the dollar thresholds in the relevant statutes and does not require municipalities to adopt the higher limit. The transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 1118 is reported.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, the new voting system still maintains the paper ballot trail or will it be all electronic?
• By law, Oklahoma is required to use a system that has paper ballots that are counted by optical scan
• We’re seeing out one piece of paper instead of two.
• We’re saving on the paper costs as well as the copy costs.
• We've been doing paper checks, so that tells you that paper checks are going to be hard to give up completely

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to be put in the section about emergency ballots.
• That section is specific to emergency procedures, emergency ballots.
• But if that does happen, if the federal government does come and try to take our ballots, or station
• So, Madam Chair, if they were not able to publish in a paper, does that disqualify the vote?
• They may not even be able to have anything up on their website. ...paper.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a bill aimed at protecting New Mexico elections from outside interference and codifying emergency election procedures. The sponsor argued New Mexico already ranks first nationally in election administration, but said the bill was needed in response to threats of federal interference, including possible deployment of federal agents at polling places. The bill would create state prohibitions on stationing troops or armed federal personnel at polling places, interfering with election workers or voters, or changing voter qualifications or election rules contrary to state law. It would also create civil enforcement authority for the Attorney General, Secretary of State, county clerks, or affected voters, with injunctions and civil penalties, and make violations a fourth-degree felony. A second major section would allow emergency changes to polling locations and voting procedures during declared disasters such as wildfires or floods without first obtaining a court order, including use of mobile voting units and secure online ballot return options for some voters. The Secretary of State’s office said these procedures were already largely in rule and that the fiscal impact would be minimal, with existing voter education materials and law enforcement guides covering implementation. The office also said the bill would extend who may request law enforcement assistance and strengthen existing election offenses by adding “under color of law” language and a new offense for intentionally obstructing access to a polling place. Committee members raised concerns about definitions, possible effects on military personnel, police, federal officers, county clerks, tribal jurisdictions, and polling places on federal property, as well as the scope of civil penalties and how intent would be proven. Several members questioned whether the bill was rushed, whether all analyses had been received, and whether the emergency provisions could disadvantage rural communities if notice requirements could not be met during disasters. The sponsor and Secretary of State representative responded that the bill would not prevent qualified voters, including military members, from voting, that local police were treated differently from federal personnel, and that courts would determine intent and appropriate defendants. No vote was taken; the chair said the hearing was being held as a subcommittee and would reconvene later, likely the next day, for a vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• They put whatever they want on the ballot.
• Space on the ballot is at a premium.
• The longer ballot question is likely to result in a decrease in the number of ballots.
• administering ballots.
• Their ballot wasn't counted.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Under this bill, even eligible citizens could be denied full access to their ballots just because they
• lines for voters to vote in person as poll workers will need to process two different classes of ballots
• , the limited federal ballot and the full ballots for the voter selections for every ballot item count
• From an error prone paper form to a 30 day registration deadline, HB 5 5337 adds yet another barrier
• This push to force eligible Texans to show their papers is rooted in fear, not facts.

Transcript Highlights:

• SB2964 by Hughes relating to the opportunity to correct certain defects in early voting ballots voted
• HCR 136 by Heffner, HCR 137 by Hullo, HCR 138 by Leach, HR 843 by Beloff-Kaufman, HR 844 by Ballot Cop
• SB2964 by Hughes relating to the opportunity to correct certain defects in early voting ballots voted
• Did I hear the word "papers"? In your bill? I am not advised. Are you reading those papers?
• Did we play paper football? We played paper football at lunch. And so.

Bills: HJR98, HJR8, HJR133, HB23, HB33, HB144, HB 109, HB 103, HB148, HB3809, HB1686, HB2217, HB2156, HB220, HB2421, HB2363, HB3773, HB421, HB2584, HB2615, HB2455, HB3711, HB2559, HB3747, HB2775, HB2886, HB3126, HB3666, HB3595, HB3260, HB3506, HB1638, HB3376, HB3826, HB3628, HB1349, HB3770, HB1831, HB1762, HB2614, HB3113, HB267, HB322, HB431, HB869, HB 1203, HB 1201, HB 1244, HB1875, HB1950, HB2152, HB2290, HB2341, HB2436, HB2809, HB2856, HB3012, HB2954, HCR56, HCR102, HB 107, HB1587, HB3684, HB658, HJR99, HB1399, HJR5, HJR2, HJR6, HJR31, HB1971, SJR3, HB1775, HJR72, HB502, HB3109, HJR98, HJR8, HJR133, HB 118, HB388, HB 114, HB205, HB2789, HB2791, HB499, HB2960, HB3163, HB3135, HB2427, HB1618, HB1672, HB1722, HB1338, HB787, HB2618, HB879, HB 1126, HB4134, HB3513, HB718, HB1536, HB1445, HB1640, HB1893, HB1734, HB3229, HB3306, HB 1276, HB3272, HB3276, HB3516, HB4145, HB1585, HB4810, HB2989, HB2558, HB3014, HB2742, HB1695, HB23, HB33, HB144, HB 109, HB 103, HB148, HB3809, HB1686, HB2217, HB2156, HB220, HB2421, HB2363, HB3773, HB421, HB2584, HB2615, HB2455, HB3711, HB2559, HB3747, HB2775, HB2886, HB3126, HB3666, HB3595, HB3260, HB3506, HB1638, HB3376, HB3826, HB3628, HB1349, HB3770, HB1831, HB1762, HB2614, HB3113, HB267, HB322, HB431, HB869, HB 1203, HB 1201, HB 1244, HB1875, HB1950, HB2152, HB2290, HB2341, HB2436, HB2809, HB2856, HB3012, HB2954, HCR56, HCR102

Keywords: Article V, federal government, fiscal restraints, constitutional amendment, term limits, nuclear energy, electric generation, funding, Texas nuclear development fund, advanced reactors, HJR 133, Texas constitutional amendment, ad valorem tax, property tax exemption, homestead exemption, surviving spouse, veteran, veterans benefits, service-connected death, presumed service-connected condition

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeking to do in this public records reform ballot question.
• question on the ballot too.
• Well, Representative, I'm leading this ballot initiative now.
• I... the ballot question, to why this way?
• Could I draw you back to the ballot initiative at hand?

Bills: H5004

Keywords: public records, public records law, transparency, open government, government accountability, legislature, general court, governor's office, executive records, legislative records, constituent communications, policy drafts, deliberative process, freedom of information, FOIA, records access, Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 66, Chapter 4, veterans services records, initiative petition

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-14, H 5-004, “an act to improve access to public records.” Chairs Cindy Friedman and Alice Peisch outlined the Article 48 process and explained that the committee was hearing expert testimony, then proponents, then opponents, before any public testimony. The first expert, Will Clark of the National Conference of State Legislatures, gave a general overview of public records laws across the states, emphasizing that all states have some form of open-records law but that exemptions, timelines, fees, and coverage of legislatures vary widely. He discussed legislative exemptions, legislative privilege, and court cases showing that outcomes often turn on the exact language of state constitutions, statutes, and chamber rules. Rebecca Murray, General Counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth, testified about Massachusetts public records administration, saying requests and appeals have risen sharply since the 2017 law update, with state agency requests increasing from 22,572 in 2017 to 47,776 in 2025 and appeals reaching a record 4,051 cases in 2025. She said the initiative would extend the law to the General Court and the Governor’s office and add exemptions for those branches, while warning that the volume and complexity of requests could require more resources. The proponents, led by Jesse Littlewood of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy, Scotia Hila of Act on Mass, and Auditor Diana DiZoglio, argued that Massachusetts is an outlier for exempting the legislature and governor from public records law and that the proposal would create needed accountability without exposing personal constituent communications or internal deliberations. They said the measure would make records such as committee votes, final bill drafts, amendments, expenditures, attendance records, minutes, and public testimony available, while preserving exemptions for constituent services, draft legislation, internal staff communications, and policy development discussions. DiZoglio emphasized that the initiative is aimed at basic administrative and financial records, citing her own difficulty obtaining receipts, contracts, and procurement documents, and said the public should be able to see how taxpayer dollars are spent. Committee members questioned the witnesses extensively about the scope of exemptions, constituent privacy, legislative privilege, and whether the measure could reach communications with nonprofits or lobbying-type interactions; proponents responded that privacy and constituent-service exemptions were intended to remain in place, though some members pressed for clearer statutory language. The hearing also included a contentious exchange over whether the initiative could affect legislative communications and whether the Senate had already taken a position against the measure. Some members raised concerns about separation of powers, legislative privilege, and the possibility of exposing constituent communications or internal deliberations, while proponents argued that the initiative was narrowly tailored and that any legal disputes could be resolved in court. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing. The committee concluded the testimony portion after hearing from the proponents and their questions, with the matter left pending for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now many of you are aware that State Question 832 is on the ballot next year, and it does contain some
• So there, as I mentioned, there was this ballot measure that passed in 2024 that we're still kind of
• So there, as I mentioned, there was this ballot measure that passed in 2024 that we're still kind of
• So we know this is going to be on our ballot, or potentially on our ballot if it gets enough signatures
• And then, from a research perspective, the papers tend to focus on young workers.

Summary: The committee held a study on the potential effects of living wage or minimum wage laws in Oklahoma, with the chair emphasizing that the discussion was not intended to advocate for or against State Question 832. The first panel focused on economic and workforce impacts. An Oklahoma Department of Commerce representative argued that living wage calculations vary by region and household type, that Oklahoma’s average wages are already near or above many living-wage estimates, and that higher mandated wages could lead employers to cut hours, reduce hiring, automate, or avoid expansion, especially in rural areas where childcare, healthcare, broadband, and infrastructure constraints also affect labor participation. Committee members asked about wage distributions, rural cost differences, training pathways, and whether higher wages might draw workers or businesses out of state; the witness said many low-wage workers move up over time and that Oklahoma has seen net in-migration. A State Chamber Research Foundation witness then testified that a $15 statewide wage floor would raise payroll costs substantially, especially for small rural employers, and cited examples from California and Seattle to argue that higher wages can reduce hours, jobs, and benefits while increasing consumer prices. She suggested alternatives such as expanding the state earned income tax credit and promoting upskilling through existing education and training programs. A Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry representative described Missouri’s recent voter-approved minimum wage increase to $13.75, rising to $15, along with paid sick leave provisions. She said the chamber opposed the measure because it would raise business costs, hurt rural communities and youth employment, and force some employers to cut hours, reduce hiring, or close. She cited examples from Missouri businesses facing significant added costs and warned that a future ballot initiative could create a patchwork of local minimum wages. In response to questions, she said Missouri’s law did not distinguish by age or industry, that businesses had raised concerns about union contracts and compliance, and that the chamber viewed the measure as harmful to competitiveness. Peter Hansen of NFIB presented the final major testimony, summarizing an NFIB study projecting that a higher Oklahoma minimum wage would produce some short-term GDP gains but longer-term losses, with GDP turning negative by the early 2030s and job losses growing over time. He said businesses respond to higher wage mandates by raising prices, trimming jobs, converting full-time positions to part-time, reducing benefits, and shifting investment toward automation or other capital. He argued that the burden falls most heavily on vulnerable workers such as young or marginal employees, who are less likely to be hired when labor costs rise. In questioning, he acknowledged that higher wages can improve pay for some workers and may have some short-term positive effects, but maintained that the long-term employment and investment effects are negative. No votes or formal actions were taken in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• reading of the bill: An act authorizing the select board of the town of Arlington to place upon a town ballot
• Paper from the House: The House bill relative to teacher preparation and student literacy, House No.
• Paper from the House. Okay. The House bill, relative to teacher preparation and should.
• Papers from the House: The House petition of James K. Hawkins and Paul R.
• Papers from the House. The House petition of James K. Hawley. Papers from the House.

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The Senate took up several local and special legislation matters, including House No. 4815 for Arlington, which authorizes the town’s select board to place a ballot question on increasing licenses for off-premises alcohol sales. That bill was ordered to a third reading and later passed to be enacted. The Senate also passed to be engrossed bills concerning Brookfield land conveyance, Beckett conservation commission membership, and Swampscott’s authority to establish a fall annual town meeting, with one Brookfield measure amended by substituting a new draft. The chamber adopted resolutions congratulating Owen Kirby and Jonathan Rothwell on earning Eagle Scout rank. It also suspended Joint Rule 12 to refer several Senate petitions, including an Attleboro petition concerning manufactured housing community accommodations, to the Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government. In addition, the Senate accepted a third-reading committee report on Senate No. 1915, clarifying call firefighter rights, which substituted a new draft before the bill was passed to be engrossed. On House No. 4683, relative to teacher preparation and student literacy, the House and Senate remained in disagreement over a Senate amendment, and the Senate insisted on its amendment while agreeing to a conference committee. The Senate also recognized two Scituate High School students, William Hine and Izzy May Adams, who had advocated for financial literacy education. At final passage, the Senate enacted House No. 438, amending Agawam’s charter, and House No. 4815, and then adopted an order to adjourn until Thursday at 11 a.m. with no printed calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under this bill, even eligible citizens could be denied full access to their ballots just because they
• for voters to vote in person as poll... ...workers will need to process two different classes of ballots
• : the limited federal ballot and the full ballots for the voter selections for every ballot item.
• From an error-prone paper form to a 30-day registration deadline, HB 5337 adds yet another barrier and
• This push to force eligible Texans to show their papers is rooted in fear, not facts.

Keywords: legislation, public policy, testimony, committee meeting, debates

Summary: The committee meeting involved various discussions pertaining to legislative initiatives and public policy concerns. Members engaged in debates around significant topics, highlighting their diverse perspectives. The atmosphere was lively with members presenting arguments for and against certain measures. Testimonies from the public were also a key feature, shedding light on community sentiments related to proposed bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• and separate ballot separate ballots and separate ballot boxes<00:13:59.759><c> it's</c><00:13:59.920
• </c><00:31:44.000><c> for</c> ballot we are counting that ballot for ballot we are counting that ballot
• This law hasn't been changed since 1981, when we had, you know, several colors of paper ballots, several
• This law hasn't been changed since 1981, when we had, you know, several colors of paper ballots, several
• must mail those ballots out and must receive those ballots back.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Brief explanation: it adds duplicated ballots, test ballots, ballots used for logic and accuracy testing
• Lengthy election results processing, and yet adding more ballot referrals to the ballot will only do
• We love the mail-in ballot.
• you, that's what we saw in 2024 when we had so many ballot referrals that we had to have two ballot
• We love the mail-in ballot.

Summary: The Senate met in multiple Committee of the Whole sessions and later took third-reading votes on several measures, with the day dominated by election administration bills, immigration-related bills, public safety measures, and a series of bills affecting transgender youth and health care. The chamber also heard ceremonial remarks recognizing Lutheran Day at the Capitol, introduced the Doctor of the Day, and handled routine appointments, messages, and committee reports. Several bills were retained on the calendar, including SB 1431 and SCR 1005. Among the major policy items, senators debated and advanced SB 1049 on spousal maintenance, SB 1053 on concealed weapons permits, SB 1415 on insurance adjuster license eligibility, SB 1015 on health care actions related to gender transition procedures and provider liability, SB 1095 on gender transition care for minors, and SCR 1006 on school-related sex and privacy requirements. Members opposing the transgender-related bills argued they were discriminatory, harmful to youth, and an intrusion into family and medical decisions; supporters said the measures protected children, parental rights, privacy, and medical judgment. The chamber also considered election and campaign finance measures including SB 1003, SB 1006, SB 1037, SB 1040, SB 1057, SB 1168, SB 1237, SCR 1002, SCR 1010, SCR 1013, and SCR 1014, with debate centering on transparency, ballot procedures, voter registration, and disclosure thresholds. Additional bills addressed immigration enforcement and foreign influence concerns, including SB 1055, SB 1058, SB 1093, SB 1152, SB 1289, and SB 1308. Supporters framed these as public safety, election integrity, or enforcement measures, while opponents warned they would chill reporting to police, harm asylum seekers and immigrants, or expand punitive government power. The Senate adopted Committee of the Whole reports and assigned bills accordingly throughout the day, and several measures later received third-reading passage votes, including SB 1049, SB 1053, SB 1415, SB 1015, and SB 1095, with recorded roll-call outcomes and transmission of passed bills to the House.

Transcript Highlights:

• If there be no objection, the clerk will dispense with reading the paper.
• If there be no objection, the clerk will dispense with reading the paper.
• If there be no objection, the clerk will dispense with reading the paper.
• Now, let's remember, getting a question on the ballot is not an easy thing.
• And the clerk will dispense with reading the paper. The Chair has none.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House first took up House Bill 58, a fiscal year 2025 supplemental appropriations bill. The chamber adopted a further amendment offered by Rep. Michael Witts of Boston, then concurred with the Senate as amended after a roll call vote of 128-23. The House then moved to the orders of the day and considered the proposed permanent joint rules for the 2025-2026 session (House No. 2026 / Senate No. 18), with Rep. Moran of Brighton presenting the package as a set of transparency and process reforms, including joint committee procedures, a 60-day reporting deadline, public posting of summaries and testimony, and revised formal session timing. A series of minority amendments offered largely by Rep. Jones of North Reading and others were debated and repeatedly rejected, including proposals to require roll call votes for post-July 31 formal business, require two weeks’ notice for such sessions, publish State Auditor audits on the legislative website, require SJC advisory opinions on constitutional disputes, extend poll windows to two hours, require advance notice of electronic polls, and lengthen amendment filing deadlines. Supporters argued these changes would improve transparency, accountability, and member access; opponents said they would slow the legislative process and reduce flexibility. Most of these amendments failed on roll call votes by margins of 128-23 or similar, while a technical amendment from Rep. Galvin was adopted. The House then adopted the joint rules package by roll call, 128-23. The chamber also adopted the House rules package for the 2025-2026 session (House No. 2024) after debate led by Rep. Galvin of Canton, who emphasized modernization, online transparency, in-person participation, and an outside audit and EEO officer. Additional minority amendments on committee reporting, timing of formal business, and poll procedures were debated and defeated, while one technical amendment was adopted. The House later returned to the issue of legislative audits, rejecting an amendment to require House audits by the State Auditor after a lengthy debate over Question 1, separation of powers, and the scope of the auditor’s authority. The session ended with a memorial tribute to former Rep. Carol Doherty and an order to adjourn until the next day at 11 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> attention to the amsd position paper attention to the amsd position paper that<00:57:11.319><c>
• and as the senator stated um in paper and as the senator stated um in recent<00:58:33.400><c> years<
• or would it appear in the ballot or would it appear in the information<01:10:41.640><c> that</c><01:
• 11:32.920><c> there's</c> appears on the ballot and then there's appears on the ballot and then there's
• The required ballot language would be the text at lines 3 and 4 of the amendment.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• value. um waste too much paper.
• I will send you um waste too much paper.
• </c> realize this paper value. realize this paper value.
• And I would the citizens on a ballot.
• </c> to vote no which now goes on the ballot to vote no which now goes on the ballot that<02:55:36.960

Keywords: 1189, house, all