Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I particularly appreciate some of the clarifications that have been made.
• And just for<04:05:13.520> clarification<04:05:14.000> as<04:05:14.160> far<04:05
• The current law needs definitive clarification. We need enforcement.
• The current law needs definitive clarification. We need enforcement.
• <05:44:34.160> We clarification. We need enforcement. We clarification.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Hovis, do you have some clarification there?

Summary: The committee first called the roll and established a quorum with nine members present and seven absent. It then moved into executive session and took up House Committee Resolution 29, which was approved do pass by a 9-0 vote. Next, House Bill 2414 was considered and also approved do pass, by a vote of 6 ayes and 3 noes. The committee then took up Senate Bill 945, beginning with a House Committee Substitute ending in 0.04C that included cleanup language and a fee-related change. Two amendments were offered and adopted: Amendment No. 1 ending in 0.02H, which revised language related to the City of St. Louis sheriff’s office attorney funding, and Amendment No. 2 ending in 0.03H, which authorized treatment court administrator provisions and reimbursement language for circuits with treatment court divisions. After rolling the amendments into a new substitute, the committee voted House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 945 do pass by a vote of 9 ayes and 1 no. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• and we will, as counsel said, we will raise those concerns with the sponsor and hopefully get clarification

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Codes met with Chair Senator Zellnor Myrie presiding and noted that several majority members were absent due to blizzard-related travel disruptions, though quorum was established through submitted votes. The committee took up a series of bills, mostly criminal justice and public safety measures, including Senate Prints 205, 362, 490, 630, 1192, 1285A, 2491, 3909, 4757, and 6121. Senator Murray participated in moving bills while making clear that his seconding did not necessarily indicate support, and Senator Salazar joined partway through the meeting. Several bills drew discussion or opposition. Senator Murray strongly opposed Senate Print 362, warning that its added waiting period for firearm-related approval could endanger people seeking protection from domestic violence or stalking. On Senate Print 490, counsel and members discussed whether the bill’s language required an additional incident after age 13, and Murray ultimately voted without recommendation pending clarification. Senate Print 2491, addressing peremptory challenges, was described as important because of the racial history of such challenges, though Murray voted in the negative. Senate Print 3909, the Phoenix Act relating to domestic violence responses, also drew criticism from Murray over language he viewed as overly racial and political, though the committee advanced it. The committee also highlighted support for Senate Print 4757, which would codify the SNUG violence-prevention program in law; members praised its success in communities and noted it would reduce reliance on annual budget negotiations. Actions taken included reporting several bills, referring Senate Print 1192 and 4757 to finance, and reporting Senate Print 6121 with Senator Murray recorded without recommendation. The meeting concluded after all agenda items were addressed.

Transcript Highlights:

• I did want to, I guess, follow up with you on the clarification on the impact on the pending litigation

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met with a quorum present and took up a single bill, HB 167, dealing with former phosphate-mined land. Chair McClure explained that the bill revises a strict liability provision if the current property owner records the prior phosphate-mining use with the county or municipality and the Department of Health completes a survey. Members asked about whether the lands would be treated as hazardous or Brownfield properties, how the bill would affect disclosure and recorded notice, and whether it would apply to pending litigation. McClure said the bill is intended to create more public assessment data and that the language requires the conditions to be met at the time of litigation, though he was open to further clarifying language if needed. During debate, Ranking Member Gottlieb said he would support the bill because Florida is a buyer-beware state and the recording requirement plus the Department of Health study should provide purchasers with needed information. Representative Joseph also supported the bill, citing the transparency and recording provisions, while noting he still wanted clarification on pending litigation. In closing, McClure said the bill reflects a middle ground after prior discussions and noted that environmental assessments are typically part of transactions involving these properties. The committee then voted unanimously to report HB 167 favorably, with 21 ayes and no nays. The meeting adjourned after the bill passed and no further business remained.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just for clarification, Chairman, did you mention 7-OH as a banned substance?

Bills: SB801, SB1200, SB1410, SB1717, SB1862, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB506, SB2626, SJR63

Keywords: SB 801, birth certificate, birth record, certified copy, homeless, homelessness, unhoused, vital records, state registrar, local registrar, county clerk, fee waiver, identity documents, ID access, housing insecurity, shelter, transitional housing, Health and Safety Code, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission

Summary: The Senate Committee on State Affairs met with a quorum present and considered several pending measures. On Senate Bill 1868, Senator Perry explained a committee substitute that would keep kratom in its natural state legal while continuing to ban 7-OH and other synthetic derivatives, and would also add three synthetic opioids from another bill. The substitute was adopted, and SB 1868 was reported favorably to the full Senate and certified for the local and uncontested calendar. The committee also adopted a committee substitute for Senate Joint Resolution 39, Senator Birdwell’s proposed constitutional amendment related to veto overrides after a regular session, and reported it favorably to the full Senate; members noted a floor amendment would also be offered later. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1184, relating to the age of wine authorized to be sold by a wine collection seller, and reported it favorably to the full Senate. After some procedural discussion and a revote to clarify members’ positions, SB 1184 was also certified for the local and uncontested calendar. Senate Bill 1194 was likewise certified for the local and uncontested calendar without objection, though the transcript does not include its substantive discussion. Senate Bill 1577, relating to the temporary sale of alcoholic beverages at certain racing facilities, was reported favorably to the full Senate and then certified for the local and uncontested calendar. Finally, Senate Concurrent Resolution 42, by Chairman Hughes, was reported favorably to the full Senate on an 8-1 vote. The committee then recessed until called back by the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• types of futures contracts would be illegal under our laws, which I think they are, but this is clarification
• types of futures contracts would be illegal under our laws, which I think they are, but this is clarification
• types of futures contracts would be illegal under our laws, which I think they are, but this is clarification
• maybe Senate Counsel can provide There maybe Senate Counsel can provide some<01:14:41.520> clarification
• some clarification for us. some clarification for us.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Wyoming Highway Patrol supports the proposed amendments, which add necessary exceptions and clarifications
• Wyoming Highway Patrol supports the proposed amendments, which add necessary exceptions and clarifications
• <00:57:33.920> to<00:57:34.160> preserve<00:57:34.559> critical and clarifications
• to preserve critical and clarifications to preserve critical joint<00:57:35.359> operations<00
• I just want clarification for what I think I heard.

Bills: SF0101

Keywords: Second Amendment, firearm regulation, state legislation, public safety, civil penalties, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, Chair Nash, I appreciate that clarification.
• Yeah, Chair Nash, I appreciate that clarification.
• Yeah, Chair Nash, I appreciate that clarification.
• So just for clarification, Representative, you are upping the threshold in your desired amendment?
• So just for clarification, Representative, you are upping the threshold in your desired amendment?

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up Senate File 856, a bill to create a statewide Office of Inspector General to combat fraud. Representative Norris presented a delete-everything amendment that would keep most of the Senate bill but add more emphasis on fraud prevention, fully fund the office, avoid duplicating work already done by the BCA’s financial crimes division, and preserve subject-matter expertise by keeping some existing inspectors general in their agencies. He said the amendment would retain strong investigative powers, including subpoenas, while using the BCA for arrests, and he acknowledged his original version was likely too broad, so he planned to offer smaller amendments if needed. Chair Nash and other members challenged the DE on both process and substance. Nash said the amendment had not been shared with key stakeholders, noted that the Senate author had publicly distanced herself from it, and pointed to a governor’s office document saying the administration wanted a different approach than the Senate bill. He argued the Senate bill was a bipartisan, bicameral product and said the committee should be careful about accuracy and process. Representative Davis questioned Norris about the claim that the Senate bill was underfunded and about the governor’s role in selecting the inspector general, arguing that the governor should not have broad control over the office. Norris responded that the Senate bill’s fiscal note estimated roughly $12 million for the biennium, but the bill appropriated less than that amount, and he said the Constitution requires the governor to appoint the inspector general if the office is in the executive branch. He said the DE tried to preserve independence through a bipartisan advisory commission, Senate confirmation, a five-year term, restrictions on partisan activity, and removal only for cause with a public hearing. After debate from several members, the committee held a roll call and the DE failed on a 7-7 tie, so it was not adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it would just ask for some clarification on that point. for what type of protections they feel for
• So it just would ask for<00:21:01.600> some<00:21:01.760> clarification<00:21:02.559>
• And just further clarification, you'll remember I think the good majority floor leader bought a bill
• And just further clarification,<01:42:31.119> you'll<01:42:31.440> remember<01:42:31.840
• > I<01:42:32.080> think clarification, you'll remember I think clarification, you'll remember

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so Representative Manny and I just wanted to ask a point of clarification.
• Yeah, a total of five states, 10 percent of the union. >> Thank you for that clarification. on the amendment
• 00:29:52.640> of and I just wanted to ask a point of and I just wanted to ask a point of clarification
• So the way that I've clarification.
• Yeah. >> Thank you for the clarification.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Through the President, for clarification, are you talking about that same group of neuro survivors who
• Thank you, Senator Martin, for the clarification.
• The claim itself has not been filed and would not be filed until, just for clarification, the effective
• Thank you, Senator Harrell, for the clarification question. It does.
• Senator, just for clarification, so I can understand where we are: the bill that was heard in committee

Bills: HCR35, SJR59, SJR84, SCR30, SB127, SB317, SB324, SB457, SB506, SB511, SB529, SB547, SB584, SB619, SB636, SB646, SB659, SB715, SB732, SB735, SB771, SB784, SB800, SB801, SB904, SB1026, SB1049, SB1065, SB1181, SB1224, SB1250, SB1383, SB1467, SB1524, SB1528, SB1531, SB1568, SB1585, SB1640, SB1681, SB1754, SB1757, SB1777, SB1972, SB1980, SB2007, SB2041, SB2046, SB2050, SB2055, SB2069, SB2080, SB2119, SB2138, SB2139, SB2154, SB2201, SB2225, SB2268, SB2306, SB2308, SB2310, SB2330, SB2366, SB2375, SB2392, SB2401, SB2422, SB2480, SB2514, SB2530, SB2533, SB2543, SB2544, SB2589, SB2610, SB2615, SB2623, SB2660, SB2662, SB2693, SB2695, SB2707, SB2722, SB2742, SB2753, SB2807, SB2843, SB2844, SB2858, SB2880, SB2885, SB2891, SB2925, SB2938, SB2986, SJR3, SJR18, SB5, SB914, SB963, SB1197, SB1415, SB1437, SB1786, SB326, SB767, SB769, SB783, SB1035, SB1271, SB1619, SB1637, SB1806, SB1, SB260, HB135, HB 1109, HCR35, HCR64, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR48, SCR19, SCR30, SCR3, SB2023, SB619, SB2742, SB646, SB1026, SB2880, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB529, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB584, SB1085, SB2046, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB1524, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1845, SB1863, SB2681, SB2200, SB2199, SB1757, SB2050, SB2458, SB2201, SB2660, SB2662, SB1065, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB1721, SB2366, SB1013, SB2797, SB2383, SB1754, SB2119, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB2392, SB2076, SB2786, SB2876, SB2284, SB2225, SB1540, SB2929, SB1972, SB2540, SB2595, SB2217, SB715, SB2330, SB1383, SB500, SB1640, SB2001, SB2080, SB506, SB2514, SB2753, SB2398, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB1449, SB2529, SB1531, SB2846, SB2476, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB1359, SB2386, SB771, SB2844, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB2807, SB410, SB659, SB2776, SB2693, SB2580, SB1980, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB456, SB127, SB1666, SB2843, SB2801, SB800, SB2055, SB784, SB2986, SB735, SB1012, SB324, SB2926, SB2938, SB2007, SB2138, SB1242, SB2615, SB1049, SB2310, SB1224, SB2972, SB1568, SB2841, SB2885, SB3016, SB2858, SB2610, SB2139, SB1856, SB2035, SB2308, SB2306, SB2041, SB1528, SB1681, SB1141, SB2401, SB2530, SB2375, SB547, SB1266, SB1373, SB1467, SB2069, SB2269, SB2480, SB2544, SB672, SB904, SB2695, SB2891, SB2422, SB2543, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB2925, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB457, SB2357, SB2721, SB243, SB1285, SB2568, SB1959, SB1442, SB1454, SB2520, SB2541, SB1708, SB1237, SB1844, SB1586, HB1392, HB22, SB1551, SB3039, SB2819, SB66, SB629, SB1015, SB2342, SB2903, SB2933, SB1965, SB2477, SB3029, SB2605, SB2419, SB1957, SB375, SB250, SB777, SB628, SB2523, SB2367, SB2703, SB2608, SB2778, SB3044, SB2965, SB2521, SB865, SB127, SB506, SB529, SB584, SB659, SB735, SB771, SB784, SB800, SB1049, SB1383, SB1531, SB1568, SB1681, SB1972, SB1980, SB2007, SB2041, SB2046, SB2050, SB2080, SB2225, SB2306, SB2308, SB2366, SB2392, SB2544, SB2610, SB2660, SB2662, SB2807, SB2843, SB2844, SB2885, SB2938, SB2986, SB324, SB1065, SB1754, SB2330, SB2693, SB2858, SR448, SR463, HCR35, SB324, SB619, SB646, SB1026, SB1065, SB1754, SB2330, SB2693, SB2742, SB2858, SB2880, SB3063, HJR5, HJR98, HB 109, HB 114, HB388, HB421, HB431, HB879, HB 1244, HB1399, HB1445, HB1672, HB1695, HB1734, HB1875, HB1893, HB1950, HB2152, HB2217, HB2558, HB2559, HB2775, HB2789, HB2809, HB2856, HB3012, HB3126, HB3135, HB3163, HB3229, HB3306, HB3513, HB3770, HB4134, HCR56, HCR102, SB3063, HJR5, HJR98, HB 109, HB 114, HB388, HB421, HB431, HB879, HB 1244, HB1399, HB1445, HB1672, HB1695, HB1734, HB1875, HB1893, HB1950, HB2152, HB2217, HB2558, HB2559, HB2775, HB2789, HB2809, HB2856, HB3012, HB3126, HB3135, HB3163, HB3229, HB3306, HB3513, HB3770, HB4134, HCR56, HCR102

Keywords: spaceports, tax-exempt bonds, aerospace investment, Texas space economy, Federal legislation, education funding, Texas State Technical College System, capital projects, infrastructure, higher education, tax exemption, property tax, homestead, fire damage, constitutional amendment, Birding Capital, Matagorda County, wildlife, conservation, Texas Legislature

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for the clarification. Thank you.
• thank<00:18:47.600> you<00:18:47.760> for<00:18:47.919> the<00:18:48.080> clarification
• thank you for the clarification. thank you for the clarification. Thank<00:18:49.919> you.
• Clarification, something said, I think I really think this is important. Sure, but be very brief.
• Mr.<01:47:13.400> Clarification.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we'll go back to Senator Weber and see if he wants any clarification, additional questioning,
• I think we'll go back to Senator Weber and see if he wants any clarification, additional questioning,
• I think we'll go back to Senator Weber and see if he wants any clarification, additional questioning,
• see if he go back to Senator Weber and see if he wants<01:06:49.200> any<01:06:49.520> clarification
• ,<01:06:50.400> additional wants any clarification, additional wants any clarification, additional

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, thank you for the clarification. said they didn't have the expertise to said they didn't have the
• c><00:53:51.280> you<00:53:51.359> for<00:53:51.520> the<00:53:51.680> clarification
• So, just for clarification, current statute does not allow the sale of any rabbits, even under homesteading
• So<02:01:50.480> just<02:01:50.719> for<02:01:50.880> clarification,<02:01:51.760
• > current So just for clarification, current So just for clarification, current statute<02:01:

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If there are improvements with amendments and clarifications, I'm fine with that.
• If there are improvements with amendments and clarifications, I'm fine with that.
• If there are improvements with amendments and clarifications, I'm fine with that.
• c><00:13:31.680> and improvements with amendments and improvements with amendments and clarifications
• I'm fine with that right clarifications I'm fine with that right now<00:13:36.839> we've<00:13

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• First, just a point of clarification: are we here for the public hearing on Amendment 0807S that was
• No, did you need clarification in the three days?
• No, did you need clarification in the three days?
• <01:48:28.440> in<01:48:28.560> the no did you need clarification in the no did you
• need clarification in the three<01:48:28.920> days<01:48:29.960> Days<01:48:30.960>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Other bills, including some clarifications around registration enforcement of the policy bill as well
• Other bills, including some clarifications around registration enforcement of the policy bill as well
• Members will find our written testimony, in which we provided perspective, requested clarification, and
• Further, the amendment... perspective requested clarification and perspective requested clarification
• Just for clarification, I think a lot of the questions have gotten answered, so thank you.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I didn't get a clarification on that. Mr.
• Clarification: the $1.7 billion is a four-year total, not a biennium total, correct?
• Clarification: the $1.7 billion is a four-year total, not a biennium total, correct?
• Clarification: the $1.7 billion is a four-year total, not a biennium total, correct?
• Clarification: the $1.7 billion is a four-year total, not a biennium total, correct?

Bills: HF5

Keywords: tax modification, transportation funding, electric vehicle tax, Social Security subtraction, retail delivery fee, motor vehicle registration, state budget, transportation policy, 1183, house

Summary: The committee began with member and staff introductions, then heard an overview of the governor’s transportation budget recommendations from fiscal staff Andy Lee. He explained that the spreadsheet showed only proposed changes, not base spending, and highlighted General Fund and trunk highway adjustments for MnDOT and the Department of Public Safety, including operating changes, extensions of prior appropriations, increased state road construction and Blatnik Bridge authority tied to anticipated federal funds, State Patrol hiring and a metro headquarters item, aeronautics changes, and revenue adjustments in the Driver and Vehicle Services special revenue account. The main testimony came from Metropolitan Council Chair Charlie Zelle, who outlined three budget-related items: advancing funds to MnDOT to help coordinate a highway reconstruction with a transitway project, making Metro Mobility riders eligible for free fixed-route transit, and reducing the Metro Transit general fund appropriation by $32.454 million annually. He said the advance would speed delivery and reduce disruption, the free-fare pilot had been successful and could save money if even a small share of Metro Mobility trips shifted to fixed-route service, and the general fund reduction was manageable in the near term because of new revenue streams but could constrain future expansion and capital maintenance. Members questioned the long-term effects of the proposed reduction, possible impacts on safety, service expansion, and capital maintenance, and whether federal funding uncertainty could affect operations and bus procurement. Zelle said the cuts would not affect immediate operations but could limit future BRT, microtransit, and transitway expansion, while also noting that capital maintenance needs include platform rebuilds, track work, rolling stock, and station repairs. He also said the 2023 funding package had accelerated projects and that the council was opening three transit lines this year. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We believe further clarification needs to be added as to how the liability could potentially apply to
• and with the committee, we're optimistic about being able to resolve that concern with a narrow clarification
• They apply to active undercover operations instead of just undercover operations, with no clarification
• With the clarification of the acceptance of the amendments, CPDA, California Public Defenders Association

Summary: The committee heard several public safety bills and took testimony on each, with members often noting amendments and continuing negotiations. SB 1009 by Senator Becker would require juvenile courts to find that less restrictive alternatives are unsuitable before ordering detention, and would require periodic review of continued detention and consideration of alternatives at disposition. Supporters argued it would reduce unnecessary youth detention and improve transparency; probation, judges, and police groups opposed it as an undue limit on judicial discretion and potentially unsafe in serious cases. The chair said he would recommend an aye with amendments, but the bill was held pending quorum and later remained on call. SB 1130 by Senator Gomez Reyes would update privacy law for wearable recording devices such as smart glasses, requiring consent before recording in places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy and banning devices or accessories designed to defeat recording indicators. Supporters said the bill addresses secret recording and invasive surveillance; opponents from tech and hospitality groups sought clarification to avoid unintended liability for businesses and exempt workplace communication devices. Members discussed those exemptions, and the chair recommended an aye, but the measure also remained on call. Senator Blake Spear presented SB 99, which would let courts consider military protective orders in domestic violence proceedings and require better communication between civilian law enforcement and military authorities. Supporters from the Department of Defense, local officials, and military representatives said it would close protection gaps for military families; the ACLU opposed it on due process grounds because MPOs are issued without judicial process. The chair and author emphasized that the bill only allows consideration of MPOs and does not require civilian enforcement of them. The bill passed out on a vote, though it remained on call for additional members. The committee also heard SB 937 by Senator Gonzalez, restricting flashbang use for crowd control and banning flashbangs and explosive breaching charges in immigration enforcement, and SB 1022, creating a statewide anti-trafficking task force. SB 937 drew support from civil rights and community groups and opposition from police and sheriffs over the use-of-force standard and limits on tactics; it passed out on a vote but remained on call. SB 1022 was supported by survivor and faith groups and opposed by public defenders and sex worker advocates who raised concerns about racial disparities and enforcement harms; it also passed out on a vote. Later, SB 1395, extending criminal protective orders for certain felony sex offenses against minors up to 20 years, and SB 1230, increasing penalties for repeat illegal dumping, were both heard with mixed testimony and were held on call after committee votes. The committee also adopted a consent calendar and several bills were moved forward with amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just one clarification: you said MassHealth was 40% of the budget.
• Just a point of clarification on the sales tax—sorry, the income tax question.
• Just a point of clarification on the sales tax—sorry, the income tax question.
• I have a couple of questions, particularly related to the impact. just a point of clarification on the

Keywords: 995, all

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.