Transcript Highlights:

• It showed that prices jumped again at 2.8%, well above the...
• I look forward to seeing this bill pass unanimously on the floor today as well.
• I look forward to seeing this bill pass unanimously on the floor today as well.
• As well as the leadership of Representatives Malliotakis and Sewell. Mr.
• I, as well, in the 19th Congressional District am at the edge.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, March 31, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, Mr.
• In fact, this is well known. It's been well reported.
• In fact, this is well known. It's been well reported.
• In fact, this is well known. It's been well reported.
• I sleep well. But you know what? I sleep well.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, July 22, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, exactly.
• </c><00:25:50.480><c> oh</c><00:25:50.480><c> well</c> the predators and sometime well oh well the predators
• well? well?
• </c> landfills as well? landfills as well?
• Well, thanks very much. &gt;&gt; Great. Well, thanks very much.

Committee: House Environment and Agriculture

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• &gt;&gt; Well, on here it says 2/3. I guess we &gt;&gt; Well, on here it says 2/3.
• Well, gentlemen, yield.
• Well,<04:49:18.160><c> gentlemen,</c> Well, gentlemen, Well, gentlemen, uh,<04:49:19.840><c> if</c><04
• >> Well, I'm not sure they would. >> Well, have you gotten any complaints?
• . well. well.

Keywords: MS House Floor - 10 February, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, Mr.
• Well, Mr. President, um we President. Well, Mr.
• Well, Mr. President, I'm President. Well, Mr.
• Point well taken.
• Point well taken. another reminder. Point well taken.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, she didn't.
• They have groups as well.
• They have groups as well.
• Well, well, in keep it's not effective.
• Well, it...

Committee: Senate Children and Family Law

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They've been doing it well.
• We want to be a partner with them as well. as well as all the NAACP branches around New Mexico.
• That's important for us as well.
• Counselors are unaware as well.
• Well, thank you, Madam Chair.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that your recollection as well?
• Well, it is happening.
• Well, we can talk to Senator Cantwell.
• Well, I think you've articulated the problem statement very well.
• Well, I'm encouraged by that response.

Committee: Senate Finance Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Bank, Wells Fargo, and the Irvine Foundation, as well as Cameo Network, supported the work of the center
• Community colleges are well working with other institutions, or working well with employers and governmental
• But it has been working well.
• Well, you're throwing a lot at me.
• Well, good afternoon, Chair Arambula.

Summary: The select committee on Community Economic Mobility and Investment heard testimony on how California can support inclusive economic development through coordinated workforce, education, nonprofit, and industry partnerships. Chair Arambula opened by emphasizing that rural, low-income, and historically underinvested communities often face the greatest barriers to accessing state resources, and that the hearing would focus on successful collaboration models, the role of training and higher education, and future opportunities tied to economic mobility and social determinants of health. Witnesses from the California Workforce Association, Fresno State, and NextGen Policy described local and regional workforce systems in the Central Valley and beyond. They highlighted examples such as apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs, employer-led partnerships, on-the-job training, support for women entering construction, programs for justice-involved and opportunity youth, and the need to braid federal, state, philanthropic, and private funding. Several speakers stressed that local workforce boards, community colleges, adult education, labor organizations, and community-based groups are best positioned to identify regional labor needs and that California should fund systems, not just individual grants, especially as federal workforce funding has declined and new work requirements tied to HR 1 and AI-related labor shifts create added pressure. A second panel focused on the Community Economic Mobility Initiative as a statewide model. Sierra Health Foundation and its partners said CME has helped community organizations build capacity, pursue more than $400 million in grants and contracts, and attract about $178 million back into California communities. Speakers from Siskiyou Economic Development Council, Fresno EDC, Edge Collaborative, and Líderes Campesinas gave examples of place-based projects in rural and urban regions, including business innovation centers, community-owned development, bioeconomy and restoration projects, subsidized employment, and farmworker-led cooperatives. They argued that long-term, locally driven investment produces stronger regional economies and better health outcomes, and urged the Legislature to provide durable funding and policy support rather than short-term extensions. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, send me a picture where you’re at. Well, who else is there?
• Well, thank you.
• They go, well, they didn't hit me.
• They go, well, they didn't hit me.
• Well, we've trained all our attorneys.

Summary: The committee met to discuss domestic violence with a focus on teen dating violence, healthy relationships, and the impact of technology on abuse. Chair Blanca Rubio opened by describing the urgency of the issue, including a recent teen murder in her district tied to domestic violence, and emphasized that restraining orders alone do not prevent abuse. The first panel featured Janica Morin Pasquale and Taylor Stone Mill, who described warning signs in teens such as constant monitoring through phones and social media, isolation from friends, jealousy normalized by online content, and control through gifts, food delivery, and access to passwords or tracking apps. They stressed that many teens do not tell parents, that parents often miss the signs, and that prevention should begin early and be reinforced in schools, homes, and youth activities. They also cited resources such as Love Is Respect, One Love, and Take It Down, and urged consistent funding and implementation of the California Healthy Youth Act rather than one-time lessons. The second panel shifted to the effects of domestic violence on children and the systems that respond to them. Joyce Blue of the Sacramento Regional Family Justice Center described the center’s wraparound services, including forensic interviews, legal help, housing support, child therapy, and high-risk response, and highlighted the prevalence and danger of strangulation, including cases with no visible injury. She explained that domestic violence is about power and control, that children often normalize abuse, and that safety planning must accompany restraining orders. Susie Flores of Inner Circle Children’s Advocacy Center explained the multidisciplinary forensic interview model used for child abuse cases, gave examples of severe abuse involving children exposed to domestic violence, and noted that many centers are overwhelmed by caseloads. She stressed the need for immediate trauma-informed services and more front-end intervention rather than waiting until long-term harm develops. Dr. Pamela Tate of Black Women Revolt Against Domestic Violence and other members discussed the need to support not only victims but also the systems and educators who are expected to respond. Several members shared personal experiences with domestic violence, sexual assault, and family trauma, and raised concerns about school implementation, immigrant families’ fear of reporting, and the need to address abusers’ behavior and trauma as well. The discussion also touched on statute of limitations issues, with panelists saying memory and trauma can delay disclosure for years and that rigid deadlines can prevent justice. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and ended with members expressing support for continued collaboration, prevention funding, and stronger implementation of existing law.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, Mr.
• Well, let me show you.
• Well, Mr.
• Well, great, let’s do it.
• It works pretty well.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, January 22, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• “Well, I appreciate that.
• Well, let me just continue.
• Well, I get that, but. "Right, right to the Constitution. Well, I get that, but how so?
• Well, I don't know.
• Well, Mr.

Committee: All ALC-CLAIMS REVIEW/LITIGATION REPORTS OVERSIGHT

Summary: The committee first reviewed litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing involving wage claims brought under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. Members questioned the department’s authority, jurisdiction, use of attorney fees and costs, and whether defendants had to be licensed. The department explained it has long enforced wage and overtime laws, that the claims were small-dollar cases handled by investigators and counsel, and that one case had been paid and dismissed while others were unresolved or had service issues. The committee voted to review or batch-file the labor cases after discussion. The University of Arkansas System then reported three pending lawsuits: an age- and race-discrimination claim by a tenured professor that was resolved early; an ADA/FMLA retaliation claim by a former employee that survived in part on a motion to dismiss and was moving into discovery; and a Section 1983 claim against a UAMS sergeant arising from a parking-ticket dispute, with the university explaining that only punitive damages could create personal exposure for the officer. The committee reviewed each report and voted to accept them. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000 and waiving interest and penalties, which the committee approved for review. The Claims Commission then presented several claims: an unpaid salary differential for a Department of Health employee, reissued warrants, unpaid DHS bills, and multiple negotiated settlements involving ATRS, UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT. Members approved or affirmed most of these items, including a $65,000 settlement in the Tetronics/ATRS matter, a $150,000 medical-negligence settlement, and several vehicle-accident settlements. The most extended debate involved a tax-delinquent property sale claim by Sharon Greer and relatives. The claimant argued they were not properly notified and sought the $4,200 excess from the 2009 sale. Land Commissioner counsel explained the excess had escheated to the county after the statutory claim period expired, while members debated sovereign immunity, standing, heirs, and whether the committee could or should award money anyway. The committee ultimately chose to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session rather than decide it immediately. The committee also heard appeals from dismissed claims, including a UAMS medical-negligence claim, a land-sale notice claim, a pothole claim against ARDOT, and a judicial-immunity claim against the Court of Appeals; most dismissals were affirmed, and the Simpson matter was held over for additional review after the claimant testified.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, I take two things away from that, Senator.
• For starters, competition can work really well.
• competition works well in the the global stage as well ma'am so long as we don't lose and right now
• Well thank you both for being here today. Mr.
• Okay, well thank you both very much.

Committee: Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee

Keywords: state policy, governance, legislative processes, public concerns, policy improvement

Summary: During the committee meeting, various issues surrounding state policy and governance were deliberated. Although the specifics of bills under discussion were not highlighted, comments from several committee members indicated a focus on improving legislative processes and addressing public concerns. The chairman facilitated discussions that included several points of critique as well as suggestions for enhancement of existing laws. The atmosphere remained constructive despite the complexity of the topics at hand.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, we'll we'll have the Bacon. Well, we'll we'll have the conversation.
• Well, that's $125 million.
• Well, it's pretty easy.
• Well, Well, Well, thank<02:30:36.920><c> you</c><02:30:37.040><c> all</c><02:30:37.160><c> so</c><02:
• </c> the language well. the language well.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, money is fungible.
• :36:44.000><c> an</c> that it's just well okay well this is an that it's just well okay well this is
• </c> I damn well expected to be honored. I damn well expected to be honored.
• Well done, Thank you very much. Well done, Representative<02:09:21.840><c> Kelty.
• </c> her,"Well, why would you ask that?" her,"Well, why would you ask that?"

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• “Well, and I appreciate that.
• Well, let me just continue.
• Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
• Well, I don’t know.
• Well, Mr.

Committee: All ALC-CLAIMS REVIEW/LITIGATION REPORTS OVERSIGHT

Summary: The committee first reviewed several wage-claim and labor-related litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing. Members questioned the department’s authority and jurisdiction, whether it was acting like a court, and why it sought attorney’s fees and costs. Department staff explained that the claims arose under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act and related labor statutes, that the department investigates small wage claims and can file suit when informal resolution fails, and that filing fees are waived by statute though service costs may be incurred. The committee reviewed individual cases, including one where the employer had not proven cash payments, another that had already been paid and dismissed, and a third where service could not yet be completed. The committee then voted to review or batch-file the labor items. The University of Arkansas System then reported on three pending lawsuits under the litigation-notification statute. One case involving a tenured professor alleging age and race discrimination had already been resolved and dismissed after the university re-engaged in discussions about a position. A second case involving a former employee alleging ADA and FMLA retaliation was moving forward after partial dismissal and an answer denying liability. A third case involved a former vendor employee alleging retaliation tied to a parking ticket; members asked about individual-capacity exposure for a university police sergeant, and counsel explained that punitive damages could potentially create personal exposure. The committee reviewed each report. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000, with interest and penalties waived, and the committee approved it. The Claims Commission then presented several claims and settlements, including an unpaid salary differential for the Department of Health, reissued warrants, unpaid bills for DHS, and multiple negotiated settlements involving UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT; these were generally approved or batched for approval. The most extensive discussion involved a settlement between the Teacher Retirement System and Tetronics International Limited in liquidation, arising from losses tied to the failed Blue Oak project; members questioned the company’s liquidation status, the prior investment loss, and why the matter was settling for $65,000, and the committee ultimately affirmed the settlement. The committee also heard a disputed tax-sale claim involving the Commissioner of State Lands, where a claimant argued that excess proceeds from a 2009 tax sale should have gone to her family rather than escheating to the county. After testimony from the claimant and counsel, members debated sovereign immunity, heirship, and whether the committee could or should award the $4,200 overage. The motion was amended and then replaced with a motion to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session, which passed. Finally, the committee considered an appeal by Andrew Simpson challenging dismissal of his claim against the Arkansas Court of Appeals; after Simpson and court staff explained the underlying dispute, the committee reviewed the dismissal and the matter was held over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, yeah, you're the sponsor. Do you want to... Well, thank you.
• And that was part of the issue: rehabbing some of those wells that had been abandoned or were not very
• Well, we'll give the agency an application.
• will have an impact on another well.
• index wells, the total volume of and the total number of years' worth of groundwater over... ...wells

Bills: HB2026 , HB2027 , HB2028 , HB2031 , HB2078 , HB2094 , HB2095 , HB2101 , HB2102 , HB2103 , HB2260 , HB2278 , HB2827 , HB2932 , HB2933 , HB2934 , HB2986 , HCM2009 , HCR2038

Committee: House Natural Resources, Energy & Water

Keywords: assured water supply, groundwater, commingling, commingled water, water supply, Arizona Department of Water Resources, ADWR, active management area, AMA, subdivision plat, development approval, water rights, municipal provider, private water company, certificate of assured water supply, written commitment of water service, groundwater savings credits, gray water reuse, replenishment district, Central Arizona Project

Transcript Highlights:

• The amendment is lacking as well.
• Local taxing jurisdictions as well.
• Well, it's not always the case. Well, Ledge Council wrote it. How's that?
• Well, I mean, number two is...
• Well, I asked a new question. Well, I don't understand your question.

Bills: HB18 , SB 54 , SB 10 , HR 76 , HR 77 , HR 78 , HR 82 , HR 83 , HR 88 , HR 89 , HR 93 , HR 94 , HR 95 , HR 98 , HR 101 , HR 102 , HR 104 , HR 105 , HR 107 , HR 108 , HR 109 , HR 110 , HR 111 , HR 112 , HR 113 , HR 123 , HR 125 , HR 79 , HR 80 , HR 81 , HR 84 , HR 85 , HR 86 , HR 87 , HR 90 , HR 91 , HR 92 , HR 96 , HR 97 , HR 100 , HR 103 , HR 106 , HR 114 , HR 115 , HR 116 , HR 117 , HR 118 , HR 119 , HR 120 , HR 121 , HR 122 , HR 124 , HB 18 , SB 54 , SB 10 , HB 8

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, how bad do you want it? Yeah, I think Go Bulls is in order. Very good. Well done.
• That vision is alive and well at TSC.
• I have well over 100,000 followers.
• Well, I just want to comment that I appreciate your work with what Well, I just want to comment that
• Well, I appreciate it. Well, I appreciate you letting us do a Zoom meeting.

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Higher Education

Summary: The committee heard and voted on two higher education bills before moving to a long series of university and college board appointment confirmations. CS/SB 742 would let charter schools directly access the Workforce Development Capitalization Incentive Grant Program for career and technical education programs tied to industry certifications, and would expand the money-back guarantee requirement from three to six programs at career centers and Florida College System institutions. A question was raised about whether the charter school access could reduce district funding or grant availability; the sponsor said it could, depending on available funds. The bill was supported by one appearance form and was reported favorably. The committee also heard SB 892, which codifies the Florida State University Election Law Center so it can continue and receive recurring funding. The sponsor and FSU witnesses said the center is nonpartisan and focused on evidence-based research, especially on election administration issues related to natural disasters and public confidence in elections. After testimony and questions, including about the center’s scope and funding, the bill was reported favorably. The remainder of the meeting consisted of testimony from numerous appointees to boards of trustees for state colleges and universities, including Tallahassee State College, Valencia College, New College, Pensacola State College, Florida Gulf Coast University, University of North Florida, St. Johns River State College, Palm Beach State College, Santa Fe College, Daytona State College, and Florida Atlantic University. Most nominees emphasized their personal ties to the institutions, support for workforce education, student success, and local economic development. Several highlighted priorities such as keeping tuition affordable, expanding internships and career pathways, strengthening nursing and other workforce programs, and improving graduation and retention rates. Some appointees also described campus-specific goals, including research growth at FAU and Harbor Branch, community engagement at New College, and continued support for health care workforce partnerships at FGCU. The most notable exchange came during testimony from Dr. Joel Rudman for the Pensacola State College board, where Senator Leek questioned him extensively about prior public comments that appeared to reference threats and drug testing legislators. Rudman said his remarks were aimed at Florida House members and not the Senate, denied any knowledge of illicit drug use by current or former senators, and said he was speaking candidly as a private citizen. Public testimony on his nomination included both support and strong opposition, with one speaker praising his community service and another warning about his alleged disruptive behavior and social media posts. The committee also heard from several supporters and appointees who were not questioned further, and the meeting ended with plans to vote on the appointments after all testimony was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well.
• Well, thank you.
• Well, perhaps maybe if we looked into...
• Well, it seems to me...
• Well, Chief Garrison, thanks for having me.

Bills: HB4806

Committee: House Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence

Keywords: civil action, damages, health care services, noneconomic damages, negligence, legal standards, 1184, house, all