Transcript Highlights:

• Every entity of the state must be governed by the laws of the state.
• Every entity of the state must be governed by the laws of the state.
• Every entity of the state must be governed by the laws of the state.
• Every entity of the state must be governed by the laws of the state.
• And House File 3477 whether the state we as the state of whether the state we as the state of Minnesota

Transcript Highlights:

• And I'm also the author of a book called Counting Like a State, which focuses on what state and local
• Now, one question I think that arises for state policymakers and the public is: why should state and
• Nevertheless, in some state cities and counties, really sophisticated state data centers and planning
• As I noted before, state investments in census outreach ranged widely across states.
• and states,...

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on the Census

Summary: The hearing focused on census data privacy, administrative data sharing, and the role of state and local governments in improving census accuracy, especially for the 2030 census. Dr. Philip Rocco testified first, arguing that the census is increasingly intergovernmental and that state and local investments in address list work, outreach, and complete count commissions can materially improve self-response and reduce undercounts. He emphasized that hard-to-count communities are most affected when states delay planning, politicize census work, or lack capacity, and he pointed to examples such as LUCA participation, outreach funding, and group quarters review as important tools. He also warned that recent federal actions and a broader climate of distrust could threaten 2030 operations, and urged Massachusetts to begin readiness planning now. Members then questioned Dr. Rocco about the use of administrative data such as DMV, TANF, SNAP, and WIC records, and about group quarters enumeration. He explained that those data-sharing efforts were voluntary agreements with the Census Bureau, unlike group quarters data, which are often provided by facility administrators and sometimes state agencies. He said the Trump-era effort to use DMV and other records was tied to Executive Order 13880 and was widely resisted because states had confidentiality and legal concerns, and because the stated purpose appeared to shift toward citizenship-related uses. On group quarters, he described e-response, paper response, in-person enumeration, and administrator-provided directory information, noting that privacy issues arise mainly from FERPA limits on university data and from missing demographic details in administrative records. A second panel, Beth Giroz and Amy O'Hara, then explained how administrative data are used by the Census Bureau and why data quality and privacy concerns matter. They described administrative data as records collected for operational purposes, useful for frame-building, nonresponse follow-up, enumeration, and post-enumeration evaluation, but often incomplete or mismatched on key census variables such as race, ethnicity, household relationships, and residence timing. They highlighted that some sources, like IRS, Medicare, USPS, SSA, and Bureau of Prisons records, are especially valuable, while others such as SNAP, TANF, WIC, Medicaid, CHIP, foster care, and driver’s license data vary in completeness and sharing. They stressed that privacy means collecting only what is needed, and that the Bureau typically uses limited header or roster data rather than full records. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing, and the committee recessed briefly before continuing testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, if we go on to the lake, we have to have a state ID, our state license to fish.
• Who monitors it at the state? As I've seen, nobody monitors it at the state.
• From the state. Thank you.
• You can't take them into state court because the state doesn't have authority.
• There's 34 pending across 27 states. States are doing this every single day.

Committee: Joint Tribal and State Relations Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• State assets in response, state assets have responded to 693 fires since January 1st.
• in the state.
• Chief Kidd flew on a, on a state plane, um, by state-employed pilots.
• Those are state assets.
• Um, the state of Oregon is about the same size as the state of Washington.

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• to practice within the member state, but only a home state may take adverse action against a regulated
• social workers' multi-state license.
• to practice within the member state, but only a home state may take adverse action against a regulated
• As stated already by Diana, we are representing about 2,800 dietitians across the state of Washington
• This includes states such as Montana, Utah, and Nebraska, with additional states expected to introduce

Bills: HB2088

Committee: House Postsecondary Education & Workforce

Keywords: nutritional health, dietetic professionals, licensure compact, interstate practice, healthcare regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• and state tax.
• about your state than we know about your state.
• about your state than we know about your state than we know about your state.
• The state, it is optional whether the state implements them.
• resource states.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative-Executive Committee on Budget Transparency and Fiscal Sustainability

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm happy to answer any questions and also to provide a state-by-state breakdown.
• I'm happy to answer any questions and also to provide a state-by-state breakdown.
• There's 50, I'm happy to answer any questions, and also to provide a state-by-state breakdown.
• Board of Nursing to approve in-state and out-of-state distance learning programs.
• profession in Washington State.

Summary: The Postsecondary Education & Workforce Committee held courtesy hearings on three bills before moving to executive session. House Bill 2443 would create an Armed Forces Reserve post-secondary education grant for members of the Armed Forces Reserve and their spouses or dependents, with repayment required unless the reservist serves one year for each year of benefit received. The prime sponsor said the bill is intended to extend educational support similar to what Washington National Guard members already receive. Testimony was generally supportive, emphasizing military readiness, recruitment, and fairness to reservists; one clarification was made that the bill applies to Armed Forces Reserve members broadly, not just the Army Reserve. House Bill 2567 would restore Washington College Grant and College Bound Scholarship award amounts for students attending four-year private, not-for-profit institutions. The sponsor and many students, school leaders, and private college representatives argued the 2025 cuts were inequitable, harmed low-income and first-generation students, and limited student choice. Supporters said the state’s dedicated financial aid account has grown and that the cuts disproportionately affected students at private institutions. Opponents, including representatives from public universities, argued state dollars should prioritize public institutions and questioned whether aid should be shifted away from state schools. Testimony was mixed but heavily pro, with sign-ins reported at 1,584 total, including 1,572 in support. House Bill 2498 would change nursing education oversight by limiting the Board of Nursing’s authority where programs are nationally accredited and by expediting approval for new programs. The sponsor and several community college leaders said the bill would reduce unnecessary barriers, speed program expansion, and help address the nursing shortage, especially in rural areas. The Board of Nursing, nursing educators, employers, and professional associations opposed the bill, arguing that state oversight is needed for public safety, Washington-specific workforce needs, and consistent standards, and that the board is already revising its rules through an open process. The committee then took executive action on two other bills: it passed Second Substitute House Bill 2363, allowing supervised music therapy practice for up to six months while exam results are verified, with an amendment delaying implementation to January 1, 2028; and it passed Substitute House Bill 2422, shifting private security guard license fees from applicants to employers and delaying implementation to November 1, 2026, by a 9-7 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the reasons for this is often that states that are more resource-heavy like you are, and states
• The policy changes shift more responsibility to states by requiring states to take on a greater share
• State goals with funding.
• I'm interested in that state-by-state, certainly for New Mexico.
• The state heard our cries.

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• State of Missouri. State of Missouri does.
• state some money.
• state some money.
• As of 2025, 19 states and D.C. have state-based marketplaces.
• a state.

Committee: House Government Efficiency

Summary: The committee met in executive session first and took up House Bill 2330, reconsidering a prior due-pass vote and then voting the House Committee Substitute due pass by roll call. It then considered House Bill 2291, where an amendment meant to clarify municipal building-code and zoning authority was discussed at length and ultimately withdrawn after members raised concerns that it would undercut the bill’s purpose; the bill itself then received a due-pass recommendation. House Bill 2336, dealing with state property conveyances and title issues, also drew questions about unclear title and the status of several properties, but the committee adopted the House Committee Substitute and voted the bill do pass. The committee then moved into public hearing on House Bill 3136, which would remove the state prohibition on creating a Missouri-based health insurance exchange; the sponsor and a witness argued it could save money, keep exchange fees in-state, and give Missouri more control, while several members objected that it would reverse the 2012 voter-approved prohibition and could entrench federal health-care policy. No action was taken on that bill in the hearing. The committee next heard House Bill 1833, which would let certain state employees opt out of the state health plan and receive a partial cash payout if they have other coverage. The sponsor argued it could be cost-neutral or save money and give employees more flexibility, while members and the Missouri Consolidated Health Care Plan raised concerns about fiscal impact, adverse selection, administrative burden, and whether the proposal turns a benefit into an entitlement. The witness for the plan said the fiscal note was based on about 4,112 active employees who already opt out, warned the stipend would be taxable and could create a new benefit that is hard to remove, and said proof of outside coverage would need to be maintained. The hearing then moved to House Bill 2506, which would require DESE to post QR-code placards at licensed child care facilities linking parents to existing inspection and complaint records; supporters said it would help parents make safer choices at no fiscal cost, while DESE explained the portal already exists and complaints are investigated quickly, and a witness described serious problems at one facility to illustrate why the information matters. Finally, the committee opened public hearing on House Bill 1758, a proposal to move Missouri to permanent daylight saving time once federal law allows it. The sponsor argued it would improve safety, boost economic activity, and avoid the inconvenience of changing clocks twice a year, while members raised concerns about darker mornings for schoolchildren and commuters and questioned whether the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. The hearing was still underway when the transcript ended, and no final committee action on House Bill 3136, 1833, 2506, or 1758 was recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, if we go on to the lake, we have to have a state ID, our state license to fish.
• Who monitors it at the state? As I've seen, nobody monitors it at the state.
• From the state. Thank you.
• You can't take them into state court because the state doesn't have authority.
• There's 34 pending across 27 states. States are doing this every single day.

Summary: The committee met at Spirit Lake Tribe and first heard welcoming remarks and introductions from tribal leaders and program directors. Chairwoman Street and other tribal representatives outlined a range of concerns and requests for state action, including taxation of reservation lands, support for non-beneficiary students at the tribal school, homelessness funding, Indian-managed health care, gaming and e-tabs, Feather Alert improvements, industrial farming near waterways, tourism, and better state-tribal consultation. Committee members responded that the meeting was intended to improve understanding and communication, and several members suggested future legislation or resolutions could be used to advance some of the issues. The tribe also offered to provide training on treaties, IHS 638, and compact services to legislators and staff. A major portion of the discussion focused on Spirit Lake fish and wildlife jurisdiction and the lake boundary. Tribal representatives asked for an MOU or co-stewardship agreement with the state to clarify hunting and fishing rights, recognize tribal licenses, and reduce recurring disputes over “gray areas” on the reservation and lake. Committee members discussed whether to draft a bill or resolution directing the executive branch and state agencies to negotiate such an agreement, and asked that North Dakota Game and Fish be invited to a future meeting. Related concerns included aquatic nuisance species prevention, with both sides agreeing that more aggressive boat inspection and cleaning measures would be beneficial. The committee also discussed taxation and county relations. Tribal leaders raised concerns about county resistance to fee-to-trust transfers and about property and vehicle taxation affecting members living on or near reservation lands. Committee members and tribal counsel reviewed federal treaty principles and court cases, and one member noted that the committee had previously taken no formal action on similar issues. Later, Benson County’s tax equalization director explained how the county values taxable land, handles inundated land applications, and tracks land coming off the tax rolls when the tribe repurchases acreage. The discussion ended with a presentation from the president of Sisseton Wahpeton College, who described the college’s programs, economic impact, and funding needs, followed by an HHS presentation on 1115 Medicaid waivers and the IMD exclusion as the committee moved to its next topic.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, sorry, I meant at the state, in our state, right? Oh. Commerce.
• Yeah, sorry, I meant at the state, in our state, right?
• Many states have significant persons in their states. Please.
• regard another state as their home state.
• regard another state as their home state.

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on the Census

Summary: The committee held a hearing on census preparation, focusing first on testimony from U.S. Census Bureau staff James Whitehorn and Andrea Grace Johnson. They described the Bureau’s decade-long geographic and redistricting programs, including the Boundary and Annexation Survey, School District Review Program, Participant Statistical Area Program, and Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA), along with the Block Boundary Suggestion Project and voting district collection. They emphasized that Massachusetts has been a strong partner in these efforts and explained how the Bureau is using updated street data, building footprints, machine learning, and change detection to improve address lists and track new housing. Whitehorn also reviewed the 2030 redistricting data program, the legal basis for it under PL 94-171, the role of state nonpartisan liaisons, and the expected timeline for data delivery. He noted that OMB’s revised race and ethnicity standards will merge those questions into one and add a Middle Eastern/North African category. Committee members asked about the new standards, state contacts, and how boundary updates are submitted, and the witnesses said they would provide the slide deck and contact information. Wendy Underhill and Helen Brewer of NCSL then testified about why census preparation matters for states, stressing its impact on data, federal funding, and political representation. They outlined optional steps states can take before 2030, including staying in touch with Census Bureau staff, identifying state and local personnel involved in census work, supporting local participation in Bureau programs, and creating complete count committees or commissions. They cited Massachusetts’s prior complete count committee and grantmaking efforts as an example and said such efforts can improve self-response and overall accuracy. They also noted that state legislatures can act as conveners and trusted messengers, and they discussed broader issues such as privacy protections, differential privacy, budget uncertainty, and the possibility of future litigation or a citizenship question. Secretary of State William Galvin then gave extended remarks on Massachusetts’s 2020 census experience and the need to prepare early for 2030. He said the state faced major challenges in 2020 from the pandemic, litigation, and rhetoric about citizenship, and that Massachusetts relied heavily on local records, university data, and community outreach to document residents, especially students and non-native-born populations. He argued that the state should strengthen local recordkeeping now through LUCA, annual resident lists, assessors’ and zoning records, and other local data sources, and he urged support for a proposed $500,000 appropriation for census-related grants and technical assistance. Galvin said better preparation is needed because housing patterns, population shifts, and local administrative capacity have changed since 2020, and he emphasized that the goal is to improve the completeness of the records the Census Bureau will use in 2030.

Transcript Highlights:

• 31 other states.
• As I stated at the start, as state leaders, you have a choice.
• What did the state do?
• They lower state revenues, and they raise the need for state spending. Okay?
• What did the state do?

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state’s tax collection cap/62F process so it would be based on prior-year collections plus wage growth and include surtax revenue. The committee chair and House co-chair outlined the hearing process, and the first witness was Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, who testified as the committee’s subject-matter expert on both measures. He said the income tax proposal would lower taxes broadly but would reduce state revenue by about $5.4 billion when fully implemented, with an estimated $800 million hit in FY27, and he discussed possible effects on competitiveness, taxpayer savings, and public finances. On the 62F proposal, he said the revised cap would make refunds more likely, could have produced several large refunds in recent years, and would reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions. Committee members questioned Howgate about competitiveness, outmigration, prior tax ballot measures, spending growth, MassHealth, and the interaction between the income tax and surtax. He emphasized that taxes are only one part of the state’s overall competitiveness and that housing, public services, and other factors also matter. He also noted that the surtax is constitutionally restricted but can still support ongoing spending choices. After his testimony, the committee moved to the proponents’ panel. Proponents of both initiatives, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that the measures would improve affordability, help retain residents and businesses, and support job growth. They cited polling support, outmigration, small-business reinvestment, and comparisons to lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, said her model showed smaller revenue losses than critics claim and projected that the revised revenue cap would not create additional annual revenue losses while producing more regular taxpayer refunds. Committee members pressed the panel on competitiveness, prior ballot initiative implementation, and whether the measures would actually address broader affordability pressures; the hearing ended with the committee continuing to take questions from the proponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• State address.
• This morning state of the state is not just a preview of the year ahead.
• This morning's State of the State is not just a preview of the year ahead.
• state of California.
• State vision is realized locally. Thank you. State vision is realized locally.

Summary: The Assembly met, initially lacking a quorum, and the Clerk called the roll until a quorum was established. The chamber then proceeded through routine opening business, including prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, recognition of Native lands, approval of procedural motions, and several unanimous-consent actions to re-refer bills and allow committees to notice bills pending re-referral. The Assembly also recessed regular session to convene a joint convention for the Governor’s State of the State address. In the joint convention, Governor Gavin Newsom delivered his final State of the State speech, focusing on California’s economic performance, education investments, housing reforms, public safety, homelessness, climate policy, insurance issues, and the state’s response to federal actions. He highlighted budget plans, including a proposed $248.3 billion general fund, increased reserves, major education funding, child care and after-school investments, housing and affordability measures, mental health and homelessness funding, infrastructure projects, clean energy goals, and wildfire recovery efforts. He also praised legislative collaboration on AI regulation, tax credits, and other policy areas while criticizing federal policies and calling for continued state action. After the address, the Governor’s speech was ordered printed in the journal, the joint convention adjourned sine die, and the Assembly returned to regular session. The Speaker announced the desk would remain open for introduction of the budget bill, noted the next floor session would be Monday, January 12 at 1 p.m., and the House adjourned on motion of the Majority Leader.

Transcript Highlights:

• State address.
• This morning state of the state is not just a preview of the year ahead.
• This morning's State of the State is not just a preview of the year ahead.
• No state, simply no state in America, contributes more to America's greatness.
• state of California.

Transcript Highlights:

• Many of our peer states and many states all across the country have a dedicated economic development
• How do we simultaneously have a state structure where there's an integrated state economic development
• In the many states we looked at, for example, when I was at Cy Quantum, the utilities joined the state
• or non-union states.
• Can we help you stay in the state of California and grow in the state of California?

Transcript Highlights:

• of tuition and in terms of state funds.
• and affiliated with an institution operating in another state must meet to participate in state financial
• Unlike all other state agencies where the state fully funds collective bargaining agreements, the state
• there are new state dollars.
• increased state responsibility over time.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on House Bill 2070, which would create state funding parity for Western Washington University by tying appropriations to a per-student funding ratio. The prime sponsor and Western officials said Western has long been the lowest-funded public four-year institution on a per-student basis, leading to budget cuts, reduced student services, and delayed graduation. Students, faculty, and university leaders testified in support, while some members questioned whether the bill should instead address a broader higher-education funding formula for all institutions. Central Washington University also supported the bill but suggested a broader approach. No vote was taken on HB 2070. The committee then heard House Bill 2671, which would expand eligibility for state financial aid to certain nonprofit out-of-state branch campuses operating in Washington if they meet specified accreditation, duration, and authorization requirements. Rep. Timmons said the bill is intended to help students in an accelerated nursing program at Northeastern University in Seattle access aid and support workforce needs. Northeastern’s dean testified in support, saying the bill would align financial aid law with prior changes to degree-granting statutes and would not increase state spending. The hearing on HB 2671 was then closed. House Bill 2617, dealing with the higher-education “fund split,” drew extensive testimony. The bill would gradually shift more of employee compensation increases and central services costs to state funding, and would require a study of essential student services. The sponsor and many university, faculty, staff, and student witnesses argued that the current funding practice shifts costs to tuition, contributes to layoffs, program cuts, larger classes, and reduced student support, and creates instability across public higher education. Community and technical college representatives also said underfunding COLAs harms operations and students. The committee then moved to executive session on Senate Bill 6258, which would authorize the Washington Medical Commission to create a non-disciplinary pathway for voluntary license relinquishment; the committee approved it 14-0 with a due-pass recommendation, with three members excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• the same in other states.
• They will, if they have a multi-state license from another state when they're stationed in Texas, not
• collect... can essentially put a state in default and there's kind of a proceeding to get that state
• They move from state to state.
• I could work in that state.

Bills: HB589 , HB705 , HB1842 , HB1874 , HB2349 , HB2614 , HB2827 , HB3012 , HB3214 , HB3308 , HB3385 , HB3529

Committee: House Licensing & Administrative Procedures

Transcript Highlights:

• After she went on to the State Personnel Board, the State Personnel Director she actually understands
• , state employee compensation.
• Lange of the State Personnel Office and Lindsey Bachman of the Secretary of State Office.
• I've talked to the state auditor.
• As a former state employee, Ms.

Bills: SM13 , SM14

Committee: Senate Senate Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• I work for a state agency. Okay, yeah. I represent a state agency.
• He thinks the state needs that.
• But the employees are not state employees. You don't go through the state HR office.
• State actions moving forward.
• its states and developers.

Summary: The meeting focused on finalizing recommendations from the Delaware Nuclear Energy Task Force, with most of the discussion centered on how the state should organize itself to evaluate and potentially pursue nuclear power. Public commenters strongly supported nuclear energy, emphasizing energy reliability, economic competitiveness, data center demand, and the need for Delaware to act quickly. Several speakers argued that Delaware is falling behind neighboring states and should not delay if it wants to attract developers and preserve access to federal tax incentives. Members then worked through revisions to the recommendations, especially the section on state actions moving forward. There was broad agreement that Delaware needs a clearly empowered leadership structure, but disagreement over the best form: a cabinet-level energy agency, an expanded existing agency such as DENREC, a dedicated coordinator, an expanded Sustainable Energy Utility, or a separate quasi-independent authority. Some members favored a nimble, one-off entity with bonding and financing authority; others cautioned against creating a new body outside state government and stressed the need for coordination with existing agencies, public oversight, and cost discipline. The group also discussed adding responsibilities such as site identification, public engagement, coordination with PJM and federal agencies, and financing tools, while removing or folding in items that seemed duplicative or too broad. The committee also revised earlier modules to broaden the focus from small modular reactors to nuclear power more generally, while keeping the task force’s original SMR work in view. Members agreed to keep recommendations on state and local regulatory readiness, financial mechanisms, permitting coordination, and public engagement, and to add a recommendation for Delaware to participate as an observer in the Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative through NASEO and NARUC. The committee approved the revised Module Four recommendations by vote, with one abstention from Tom Noyes. Minutes from the prior meeting were also approved with minor corrections.

Transcript Highlights:

• of State.
• a registered voter of this state, you know, a resident of our state, at the very least.
• outside the state.
• Dinoff, state public advocate.
• of another state in check.

Committee: House Elections