Video & Transcript Research : 'testimonials'
Page 118 of 500
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- the hearing after our initial witnesses finish their testimony.
- Thank you, Senator West. just to offer public testimony.
- If not, we'll go on to our invited testimony. Thank you.
- We'll go on to our invited testimony. Thank you.
- You have five minutes for your testimony.
Bills:
SB 2
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure
Transcript Highlights:
- Well, thank you, Senator Feeney, for your testimony.
- And thank you so much for your testimony. Appreciate it. Thank you, Chair Chan.
- I'm pleased to offer testimony in support of this bill, legislation that would allow cash transactions
- on, it's a, Of which I've provided some written testimony on.
- Skandowski, for your testimony. I couldn't swear that was pork, not chicken, for some reason.
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure held a public hearing on two bills: House Bill 5138, concerning consumer protections for cash transactions amid penny scarcity, and House Bill 5036, concerning consumer information related to tariffs. Chairs Tackey Chan and Senator Payano opened the hearing, noted the committee’s one-year anniversary, reviewed procedures, and explained that the Senate and House were both in session, with Senator Payano prepared to take over if needed. The committee heard from several industry and legislative witnesses, and the hearing was eventually closed by motion and voice vote.
Supporters of H. 5138, including Senator Paul Feeney, the Massachusetts Package Stores Association, the Massachusetts Restaurant Association, and the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association, said the bill would create a clear statewide rounding standard for cash transactions if pennies become scarce. They argued it would improve operational efficiency, reduce confusion, provide legal clarity, and protect businesses and consumers by requiring notice and limiting the rule to cash payments. The Retailers Association of Massachusetts also supported the concept but suggested amendments, including changing mandatory rounding language to allow flexibility and clarifying that taxes and fees would not be affected.
Witnesses were largely opposed to H. 5036. The Retailers Association, the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association, and the Massachusetts State Auto Dealers Association said tariff-related shelf or price disclosures would be difficult or impossible to implement because tariff costs change frequently and are hard to trace through complex supply chains. Auto dealers emphasized the challenge of calculating tariff impacts across thousands of vehicle parts and models, while retailers said the proposal would add burdens and could increase costs. No votes on the bills were taken during the hearing; the only formal action was adjournment of the hearing after testimony concluded.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Appropriations Committee Apr 9th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Please know that any written testimony submitted to the committee is considered public comment and may
- Testimony on any such bill will be limited to a statement of name, organization, if any, and position
- The committee will allow no more than 40 minutes of testimony in total.
- Appreciate the testimonies today.
- Appreciate the testimony today. That bill is out of committee on a B-roll call.
Summary:
The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on April 9, 2025, with a large regular-order agenda and a consent calendar. The committee first approved a set of unanimous consent bills, then heard and acted on several measures, generally with authors describing them as having minor or absorbable fiscal effects. Bills discussed included AB 439 on Coastal Act streamlining, AB 322 on school-based health and mental health reimbursement participation, AB 679 on state park land acquisition exemptions, AB 482 updating the California Table Grape Commission law, AB 681 increasing the Dream Loan Program cap, AB 40 clarifying emergency services include reproductive health care, AB 454 making the California Migratory Bird Protection Act permanent, AB 572 creating protections for families of people killed or seriously injured by peace officers, and AB 639 narrowing the definition of dams to avoid extra regulation for certain water operators.
Testimony was largely in support of the bills. Supporters included representatives from the University of California, the California Table Grape Commission, Audubon California, Sempervirens Fund, emergency physicians, health equity groups, water districts, and several impacted family members and advocacy organizations on AB 572. AB 572 drew especially emotional testimony from family members describing police-involved deaths and the need for transparency and protection from coercive questioning. No organized opposition was raised on most of the bills heard in committee, though AB 439 drew no-votes from some Republicans, and AB 572 and other measures were framed as low-cost or cost-neutral.
The committee reported the bills out on roll calls after motions and seconds, with several measures passing on B-roll calls and AB 482 passing on an A-roll call. After the hearing on presented bills, the committee also approved the suspense calendar and accepted brief public comment on bills not heard that day, including opposition to AB 339 and support for AB 335. The meeting then adjourned.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- At this time, we'll open up public testimony on Senate Bill 1197.
- Public testimony is closed. Senate Bill 1271 will be left pending. I'll swap you.
- And frankly, it was touched on with some earlier testimony a moment ago.
- And frankly, it was touched on with some earlier testimony a moment ago.
- Hearing none, public testimony is now closed. Senate Bill 390 will be left pending.
Keywords:
veteran-owned businesses, state contracting, historically underutilized business, economic opportunity, small business, economic development, veterans, certification, Texas legislation, unmanned aircraft, spaceport, criminal offense, aviation regulations, airspace safety, military installations, concurrent jurisdiction, governor's approval, state agency, land acquisition, 1185
Summary:
The Committee on Veteran Affairs heard several bills related to military installations, veterans, and contracting opportunities. Senator Birdwell presented SB 1197, which would extend existing drone restrictions over military bases and airports to spaceports, with exceptions for authorized users; no public testimony was offered at the first hearing, and the bill was left pending before later being reported favorably. Chairman Hancock presented SB 1271, which would allow Texas to accept concurrent jurisdiction over military installations so state and local authorities could handle certain juvenile offenses and provide more rehabilitative options; a committee substitute was explained, but the bill was left pending after no initial witnesses appeared.
The committee also considered SB 390, which would expand the state historically underutilized business definition to include SBA-certified veteran-owned businesses regardless of disability rating. Supporters from the Houston Regional Veterans Chamber of Commerce and other veterans argued the change would improve access to state contracting, strengthen the economy, and better recognize veterans’ contributions. Senator Eckhardt raised concerns that broadening the category to all veterans might not satisfy the disparity-study basis typically used for HUB classifications, and Jim Brennan echoed that concern while suggesting a separate category might be more workable.
During the pending-legislation portion, the committee voted on several bills. SB 651 and SB 897 were each substituted and reported favorably to the full Senate, with both also recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. SB 1814 was likewise reported favorably and sent to the local and uncontested calendar. SB 1197 was reported favorably and recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. SB 1271 was left pending after a motion to report the committee substitute favorably, and SB 390 was left pending after testimony concluded. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- A public testimony, any questions before we go?
- At this time, we'll open a public testimony on Senate Bill 897.
- Hearing none, public testimony is now closed. 1814 will be left pending here in committee.
- Okay, we'll move on now to opening up public testimony.
- Public testimony is now closed. SB 1818 will now be left pending.
Keywords:
SB 651, Texas Government Code, Section 434.032, veterans county service office, county veterans services, commissioners court, county executive official, county administration, local government, veterans affairs, veterans benefits, county oversight, reporting structure, public administration, large counties, population 200,000 or more, mental health, veterans, community support, grant program
FL
Transcript Highlights:
- Seeing none, is there public testimony on the amendment? No public testimony.
- Seeing none, is there public testimony on the amendment? Dr.
- Is there public testimony on the bill? Yes, there is.
- Seeing none, is there public testimony on the amendment?
- Seeing none, is there public testimony on the amendment? No public testimony.
Summary:
The Education Employment Committee held its first meeting and heard three bills. Chair Kennedy opened with remarks about the committee’s work and the goal of moving Florida from “excellent to eminent.” The committee first considered PCS for CS for HB 151 on private school participation in interscholastic sports and extracurricular activities. Representative Abbott explained that the bill would let private school students participate in sports at FHSAA member schools when their own school does not offer that sport, clarify treatment of single-sex versus co-ed teams, adjust FHSAA board appointment authority, require appeals panels to include a majority of member-school representatives, set timelines for eligibility appeals, and post appeals decisions online. An amendment by Representative McFarland added FHSAA board decisions to the transparency requirement. The bill drew supportive public testimony and was reported favorably as amended by a 19-0 vote.
The committee then took up HB 549 on the “Gulf of America.” Representative Porras said the bill would align Florida’s geographic materials and academic standards with the federal designation replacing the Gulf of Mexico, with a later amendment to phase in the change only for materials adopted or acquired on or after July 1, 2025. Members questioned the timing, costs, and impact on instructional materials; the ranking member and others argued the bill was unnecessary and could burden districts, while supporters said Florida should lead in adopting the federal terminology. Public testimony included support from Florida Citizens Alliance and opposition from a speaker who called the bill a waste of time. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably with committee substitute by a 16-2 vote.
Finally, the committee considered CS/HB 85 on hazardous walking conditions. Representative Kendall described the bill as addressing elementary students who live within the two-mile walk zone but must cross interstates, freeways, highways, or ramps, and said the measure would provide bus service in those hazardous situations. An amendment clarified the language by tying it to the statutory definition of a limited access facility. Members from both parties described local safety concerns and personal experiences, while one member noted the likely added cost to districts. Public testimony listed opponents, but the chair later clarified they had submitted cards with the wrong bill number. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably with committee substitute by a 20-0 vote, then adjourned.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- The testimony certainly from Tanya and Director Martin, I certainly value your testimony and your questions
- If not at this time, a divided testimony is open.
- You know, and so thank you for being here and for your testimony.
- If not, the chair closes by the testimony and opens public testimony.
- There is no one signed up for public testimony. Chair closes public testimony.
Keywords:
homeland security, border security, critical infrastructure, Department of Public Safety, intelligence operations, public-private partnerships, SB 2202, firearm trafficking, gun trafficking, terrorism, foreign terrorist organization, Texas-Mexico border, United Mexican States, Mexico, DPS, second-degree felony, weapons transfer, illegal firearms transfer, arms smuggling, cross-border crime
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Children and Family Law (02/18/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Is that your testimony?
Summary:
The Children and Family Law Committee opened a hearing on House Bill 285, which would add language to the parental rights and responsibilities statute directing judges to consider known mental health or medical conditions that could affect parenting. Representative Ball, the bill’s sponsor, said the intent was not to require disclosure of private records, but to give judges a reminder to ask whether anything in a parent’s condition could interfere with parenting and to help ensure children’s safety and best interests, especially in high-conflict or pro se family court cases. He said the proposal was meant as a guardrail and not as a way to reduce parenting time or take children from parents.
Committee members questioned whether the existing best-interest factors already cover parenting ability, whether the new language could invite stigma or weaponization in custody disputes, and whether judges already have authority to ask these questions. Ball responded that judges often do not ask, that family court can be difficult for unrepresented parties, and that the language would simply make the issue explicit. He also said he would be open to amendments, including language that more directly instructs judges to ask the question. One member raised concerns about whether the bill should say judges “shall” ask rather than “may,” and Ball said he was willing to work with the committee on wording.
Sarah Horn, a NAMI New Hampshire board member and parent, testified in opposition. She described her own history with OCD, ADD, PTSD, hospitalization, and recovery, and said mental illness had not harmed her ability to parent; she warned the bill could increase stigma and discourage people from seeking treatment. In response, Ball said her testimony was part of why he had considered an amendment to include physical health as well, so the bill would not single out mental health. The hearing ended without a vote in the transcript provided.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- I don't think we'll take any testimony today.
- I don't really see any reason to get into any. further witness testimony today.
- from earlier today for substantive testimony today.
- We won't be taking any further testimony. This time I'd like to invite. To our boss chair, Rep.
- And I've heard some testimony before about determinate sentences and indeterminate sentences.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you very much for your testimony, sir.
- Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony.
- With that, we'll take the testimonies.
- Thank you both very much for your testimony.
- Appreciate all the testimony today.
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
House panel hears bill proposing constitutional amendment to return surpluses to taxpayers 2/11/25
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you very much for your testimony.
- Thank you very much for your testimony.
- Thank you very much for your testimony.
- Thank you very much for your testimony.
- thank you very much for your testimony thank you very much for your testimony any<00:08:20.440><
Summary:
House File 4, as amended, was heard in committee. The bill proposes a constitutional amendment to create a Minnesota tax relief account that would capture projected general fund revenues exceeding 105% of projected expenditures and return those funds to taxpayers, primarily through property tax relief or income tax relief. The committee adopted an amendment to put the bill in the author’s preferred shape, and later adopted a technical amendment from Representative Smith to insert the word “projected” before “expenditures” on line 2.2.
Representative Johnson presented the bill as an affordability measure meant to return surplus money to the people rather than create new spending, arguing it would help homeowners and taxpayers if a surplus occurs. Ranna Lee of Americans for Prosperity supported the concept of returning surplus funds to taxpayers but also urged broader tax and budget reforms, including triggers for rate reductions and changes to budgeting practices. Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project and Eric Bernstein of We Make Minnesota opposed the proposal, warning that embedding budget and tax rules in the Constitution would reduce legislative flexibility, weaken public investment, shift costs to local governments, and make it harder to respond to recessions or emergencies.
Members raised questions about how the formula would work, who would qualify for refunds, whether corporations with property tax liability could benefit, and how the proposal would handle forecast-based calculations and unexpected events such as pandemics or federal policy changes. House research and committee staff clarified that the bill would need to go to Ways and Means and then Rules to satisfy House requirements for constitutional amendments, and that a fiscal note had been requested and was in process. The committee did not take final action on the bill in the portion of the transcript provided, but the motion before it was to recommend passage and send House File 4 to Ways and Means.
NH
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Judiciary (02/05/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- Copies of the amendment and of the testimony, because the sponsor referred to the testimony.
- Copies of the amendment and of the testimony, because the sponsor referred to the testimony.
- Copies of the amendment and of the testimony, because the sponsor referred to the testimony.
- Copies of the amendment and of the testimony, because the sponsor referred to the testimony.
- Copies of the amendment and of the testimony, because the sponsor referred to the testimony.
Summary:
The committee heard testimony on House Bill 232 from prime sponsor Representative Mark Pearson, who said the bill is intended to protect conscience rights for health care professionals and students, especially in relation to abortion and sterilization-related procedures. He argued that protecting ethical objections would help retain and recruit medical workers in New Hampshire, reduce moral injury, and preserve patient access to care. Pearson said the bill is not meant to allow discrimination based on protected characteristics and emphasized that it is limited to objections to specific procedures, with an amendment added to address concerns raised by Chairman Lynn.
Members questioned Pearson closely about the scope of the bill and amendment, including whether it could apply to non-physician staff such as schedulers or receptionists, whether a provider could refuse emergency care, and who would determine when an emergency exists. Pearson said the bill does not apply to emergency situations or to treatment after an abortion has already occurred, and he stated that emergency triage would control in obvious emergencies. He also said the intent was not to allow a person to take a job and then unexpectedly refuse duties, and he suggested the amendment could be tweaked to clarify its application to facilities and staff.
Additional questions focused on whether the bill should be broader than the procedures listed, how it would interact with federal conscience protections, and whether it could affect contraception-related services, including pharmacies. Pearson responded that the bill addresses the specific issues raised by people he and his wife had spoken with, and he was open to revising the amendment to reduce ambiguity. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Criminal Justice and Public Safety (10/22/2025)
Criminal Justice and Public Safety
Transcript Highlights:
- Um, we heard testimony, more protection.
- I've brought you my testimony here in the past, so I'm not going to go through and read the whole testimony
- Their testimony is that we do these, but we don't do it that quickly.
- I >> And I did submit um written testimony.
- I think the officer from Newport was very helpful in his testimony.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Walker, um, for your, uh, testimony.
- Cohen's testimony, just heartbreaking, gut-wrenching testimony this morning.
- I appreciate your testimony, Mr. Adams.
- I appreciate the testimony.
- OK. um, invited testimony is, uh, is closed. Testimony on the bill is closed.
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
Committee on Environment, Climate and Legacy - 04/04/25
Environment, Climate, and Legacy
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
HF3030, the 'Minnesota Miners Relief Act,' heard in committee 4/2/25
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you very much for your testimony.
- Thank you very much for your testimony.
- Thank you very much for your testimony.
- Thank you very much for your testimony today. Mr. Aralast, thank you for your testimony today.
- thank you very much for your testimony thank you very much for your testimony today<00:53:51.119
Summary:
House File 3030 was taken up for discussion and amended with the A1 author’s amendment before moving forward. The bill was presented as an Iron Range package with three parts: a 26-week unemployment insurance extension for workers laid off by Cleveland-Cliffs, and two mining-related provisions dealing with safe storage of reactive mine waste and a site-specific sulfite standard. The authors said the bill was intended both to help laid-off workers immediately and to support the long-term future of mining jobs in the region.
Testimony was overwhelmingly supportive of the unemployment extension and the broader goal of preserving Iron Range jobs and communities. Representatives of affected workers, union leaders, a county commissioner, a tribal elder, and RAMS all described the layoffs as potentially long-term and warned of broader economic harm to families, local businesses, schools, and the region if mining jobs continue to decline. Several testifiers emphasized that mining is central to the Iron Range economy and argued that the bill would give workers time and hope while also helping keep people in the region.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency testified that it generally supported the bill’s intent but raised concerns about the environmental rulemaking language in Article 2, Section 2. MPCA said the provision would amount to a new major rulemaking, would require significant time and resources, and should be reviewed by the Environment, Natural Resources, Finance and Policy Committee. During member questions, one legislator said there was strong support for the UI extension in Article 1 but expressed concern about the environmental issues in Article 2 and asked why those provisions were not being reviewed by the environment committee. The meeting ended with public testimony closed and member questions beginning; no final vote was taken in the portion provided.
MN
ND
North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session
Joint Appropriations Jan 21st, 2026 at 12:30 pm
Appropriations
Transcript Highlights:
- My testimony is uploaded to laws as well. in Richardson. My testimony is uploaded to laws as well.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Seeing none, is there any testimony in opposition of Senate Bill 2403? Any opposition testimony?
- Further testimony. Thank you, Derek. Thank you. Further testimony in support of 2404.
- Any testimony in opposition to Senate Bill 24-04? Any testimony neutral to Senate Bill 24-04?
Bills:
HB1623
Keywords:
HB 1623, North Dakota, rural health, rural health transformation program, medical facility infrastructure loan fund, medical facility infrastructure loan program, rural health loan program, Bank of North Dakota, Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, federal grant, health care infrastructure, rural hospitals, critical access hospitals, nonprofit health care providers, gap financing, loan fund, public health funding, healthcare financing, Medicaid
Summary:
The committee first heard House Bill 1624, the “Universal Lunch Bill,” from Rep. Mike Nathie. He argued the proposal should be placed in Century Code rather than the Constitution so future legislatures can adjust it if state finances tighten, and said the bill would start the program a year earlier with a $65 million appropriation for one school year. DPI testified that the estimate did not include nonpublic schools that do not participate, and members questioned the impact on Title I, free-and-reduced applications, private-school accountability, breakfast mandates for schools that do not currently serve breakfast, and whether the funding could come from the DPI budget or other sources. Supporters, including North Dakota United, the North Dakota Catholic Conference, a pediatrician, and the American Heart Association, said universal meals improve student health and learning, reduce family costs, and are better handled in statute than by constitutional amendment. No opposition testimony was offered, and the chair closed the hearing for later work-session action.
The committee then took up House Bill 1627, introduced by Rep. Tye Dressler, which would raise the income threshold for the state-funded school lunch program from 225% to 300% of poverty, with an estimated cost of about $7 million for 2026-27. Dressler said the bill is intended as a targeted, budget-friendly alternative to the ballot measure and emphasized that the state should maximize federal meal dollars while improving participation in the current program. Members questioned whether raising the threshold would actually increase utilization, whether a dollar amount would be clearer than a percentage, and how the change would affect federal reimbursements and application rates. DPI said it could quickly calculate additional percentage levels, and the chair closed the hearing, directing DPI to prepare more numbers for the work session.
Finally, the committee opened Senate Bill 2403, presented by Sen. Schiable, to create a short-term bridge-loan program for financially distressed hospitals, centered on Jacobson Memorial Hospital in Elgin. The bill would authorize up to $5 million per loan, with a $10 million appropriation available on a first-come, first-served basis, and would run only through June 30, 2027. Schiable said the hospital’s debt and operating problems threaten local health care, ambulance service, and the community’s economy, and that the proposal was designed narrowly with Bank of North Dakota review to avoid creating a broad precedent. Committee members asked whether the appropriation could be reduced and whether the bank would still apply commercial feasibility and repayment standards; Schiable said yes, the bank would still evaluate the loan and could reject it if it was not sound.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Broncho, for your testimony. Oh, sorry. Dr.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
Keywords:
dentistry, botulinum toxin, aesthetic treatments, dental regulation, training, medical staff privileges, hospital administration, healthcare regulation, Texas Health and Safety Code, consistency in privileges, SB 672, Texas hospital emergency operations plan, hospital diversion, emergency department, cyberattack, cyber security, power outage, electrical outage, patient diversion, hospital preparedness