Transcript Highlights:

• Uniform playbooks, and a single threat scoring algorithm, so a critical vulnerability flagged in Tyler
• I mean, this country has recognized the importance of cyber vulnerability now for many years.
• But what I can tell you is that if we don't take action, then I think we put our vulnerability at great
• Whether or not we have any vulnerability there, I think we can address those vulnerabilities at the university
• We've dissected maybe some vulnerabilities in the bill potentially.

Bills: HB146, HB150, HB1500, HB1545, HB1562, HB2067, HB2520, HB2818, HB3214, HB3250, HB3466, HB3512, HB3623, HB4063, HB4395, HB4464, HB4668, HB4690, HB5331, HB3833, HB146, HB150

Keywords: HB 146, Texas Capitol, State Capitol, State Preservation Board, Congress Avenue, Travis County, traffic lanes, lane closure, road closure, municipal authority, local control, Capitol area, downtown Austin, special events, construction traffic plan, pedestrian safety, public works, transportation policy, government code chapter 443, cybersecurity

Transcript Highlights:

• So coordinated entry is basically a way that we prioritize who might be most vulnerable and therefore
• We want to look at things that make them vulnerable, such as being 18, being newly on the street and
• And so we're really trying to address this for our young people who are extremely vulnerable.
• This will make the program more effective in serving the most vulnerable among us.
• These are our most vulnerable people that we are talking about. I urge your support. Thank you.

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda of housing-related bills, beginning with AB 249, which would require youth-specific coordinated entry assessments for homeless services. The author and supporters from Larkin Street Youth Services and the California Coalition for Youth argued that current vulnerability tools are adult-focused and can disadvantage young people; the bill was described as a developmentally appropriate fix to better connect youth to housing and prevention services. There was no opposition, and the bill passed 7-0 to Human Services. Members then heard AB 239 and AB 1206. AB 239 would create a state-led disaster housing task force, a state disaster housing coordinator, and regular legislative reporting to speed recovery after disasters; it passed 7-0 to Emergency Management. AB 1206 would let local agencies pre-approve plans for single-family and small multifamily homes of up to 10 units to reduce permitting delays and costs; the League of California Cities opposed it unless amended, citing local variation and staffing concerns, but the author and supporters said it would preserve local control and help speed housing production. The bill passed 9-0 to Local Government. The committee also took up AB 57, which would reserve at least 10% of California’s home purchase assistance funds for descendants of formerly enslaved people. Supporters framed it as reparative justice and a way to address longstanding racial disparities in homeownership, while Pacific Legal Foundation argued it likely violated constitutional limits on race-based government action and urged a race-neutral approach. After discussion about reparations criteria and the bill’s intent, it passed 6-0 to Judiciary. The consent calendar, including AB 480, AB 726, and AB 1154, was approved 8-0. Later, AB 282 was heard to allow housing providers to prefer applicants who participate in rental assistance programs, such as Housing Choice Vouchers, despite existing source-of-income discrimination law. Supporters said it would help voucher holders find units and improve affordable housing operations; no opposition testified, and the bill passed 6-1 to Judiciary. AB 1229 followed, restructuring the adult reentry grant program to focus on permanent housing for people leaving prison by moving administration to HCD and using regional administrators; supporters emphasized the link between housing stability and reduced recidivism, and the bill passed 7-0 to Public Safety. The committee then approved AB 670, which would let local governments count preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing toward housing element goals and require better demolition reporting, and AB 750, which would strengthen oversight and reporting for homeless shelters after a prior reporting law saw very low compliance. AB 670 passed 8-0 to Local Government, and AB 750 was presented with testimony from a shelter resident describing abuse and lack of accountability in shelters.

Transcript Highlights:

• services. ...and long-term care housing for our middle- to low-income Washington seniors, as this vulnerable
• In 2025, we cared for more than 300 residents and patients who are some of the most vulnerable elders
• Underfunding doesn’t...” “...and protect the workforce that keeps vulnerable adults safe.
• Help ensure housing continuity and stability for these vulnerable populations by providing $120 million
• Thus, the most vulnerable among us will be hit the hardest here.

Bills: HB2289

Keywords: appropriations, budget, fiscal matters, state spending, general fund, supplemental budget, biennial budget, substitute bill, public defense, civil legal aid, courts, judicial branch, homelessness, supportive housing, affordable housing, behavioral health, juvenile rehabilitation, youth services, child welfare, foster care

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2025, we cared for more than 300 residents and patients who are some of the most vulnerable elders
• gap between cost and reimbursement becomes too large: closures, reduced access, and real harm to vulnerable
• and for those Thereby creating better health outcomes for our most vulnerable and for those at greatest
• Help ensure housing continuity and stability for these vulnerable populations by providing $120 million
• Thus, the most vulnerable among us will be hit the hardest here.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee continued its public hearing on House Bill 2289, the fiscal biennial supplemental operating budget appropriations bill. The chair and vice chair explained the hearing process, limited testimony to one minute per person, and then heard extensive public comment from a wide range of advocates, local officials, service providers, and residents. No committee vote was taken during the hearing. Much of the testimony focused on opposition to proposed budget shifts involving Climate Commitment Act revenue, especially the proposed diversion of $569 million to other uses, including the Working Families Tax Credit. Environmental, public health, and local government witnesses argued those funds should remain dedicated to climate pollution reduction, wildfire resilience, clean transportation, natural climate solutions, and affordability programs. Several speakers also urged full funding for wildfire response and forest health, including the HB 1168 commitment, and opposed transfers from the Public Works Assistance Account. Other major topics included Medicaid and long-term care rates, with nursing home and assisted living providers warning that freezing or delaying rate rebasing would worsen staffing shortages and threaten access to care. Public health and health care advocates opposed cuts to foundational public health services, Apple Health expansion, and pharmacy benefit changes, while oral health advocates asked to preserve Medicaid dental funding and support Dentist Link. Testimony also supported or opposed funding for K-12 programs such as special education, the Ninth Grade Success Initiative, and homeless student stability; early learning and child care subsidies; disability services; public defense; housing and homelessness prevention; food assistance; higher education; and immigrant legal services. The committee concluded the hearing and adjourned after public testimony ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• We stand with the folks that are the most vulnerable.
• we had over the last two years, and we were here to ensure that those gains did not hit our most vulnerable
• But we also do not stand for this deal because we will not stand by and watch vulnerable people, our
• They were willing the most vulnerable.
• </c><00:03:49.440><c> people,</c> stand by and watch vulnerable people, stand by and watch vulnerable

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Trans women are especially vulnerable in this bill.
• There are extremely vulnerable people called women in our Texas prison systems.
• Stop attacking this most precious and vulnerable. vulnerable community.
• The first is that it protects the obvious vulnerability of women.
• Make no mistake, it is not hateful to protect girls in vulnerable spaces.

Bills: SB7, SB14, SB 7, SB 14

Keywords: gender designation, civil penalties, private civil rights, multiple-occupancy spaces, Texas Women's Privacy Act, law enforcement, confidentiality, personnel files, employee records, misconduct, abortion, civil liability, abortion-inducing drugs, qui tam actions, Texas Citizens Participation Act, Religious Freedom Restoration Act, healthcare regulations, impact fees, water conservation, reuse projects

Transcript Highlights:

• dollars that should be dedicated to providing critical health care services to Minnesota's most vulnerable
• ><00:03:20.599><c> most</c> Care Services to Minnesota's most Care Services to Minnesota's most vulnerable
• vulnerable vulnerable populations<00:03:23.080><c> Minnesota's</c><00:03:23.599><c> Medicaid</c><00:
• neglect in financial<00:03:53.480><c> exploitation</c><00:03:54.120><c> of</c><00:03:54.280><c> vulnerable
• </c> financial exploitation of vulnerable financial exploitation of vulnerable adults<00:03:55.120><c

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• and services, including health care, nutrition, and other things that I know are essential to our vulnerable
• seen, the conversation that we’ve had, has really focused on those core areas of protecting our vulnerable
• The $351.7 billion that protects the most vulnerable among us while making smart, targeted investments
• We cannot leave our most vulnerable communities without food access, and we look forward to continuing
• This will go a long way to support. enhanced services for Asylees and vulnerable non-citizens program

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the final three-party agreement for the 2026-27 state budget and 19 implementing bills, including two budget bill juniors and 17 trailer bills. Committee leadership and administration officials described the budget as a balanced plan that reduces out-year structural deficits, maintains large reserves, and makes major investments in health care, education, housing, child care, public safety, and other core services while also responding to expected federal cuts and fiscal uncertainty. The Department of Finance outlined the package’s major components, including Medi-Cal adjustments, education funding increases, higher education changes, child care and human services updates, housing and homelessness funding, energy and transportation provisions, and tax and general government changes. Members asked questions about several provisions, including CSU enrollment targets and turnaround plans, the Prop. 98 settle-up mechanism, the plastics market development payment program, housing accountability measures, NextGen 9-1-1 implementation, and veteran services. Staff and administration witnesses explained that the higher education language is intended to improve campus-by-campus reporting and oversight, that Prop. 98 settle-up would be finalized later through the statutory certification process, and that NextGen 9-1-1 now includes one-time funding, quarterly reporting, an independent technical review, and a state audit. Members also discussed the HAP homelessness funding increase to $900 million and the balance between accountability and timely distribution of funds. The most extended exchange centered on comparisons between funding for veterans and Medi-Cal/immigrant health coverage. Republican members argued the budget spends far more on undocumented immigrant services than on veterans, while Democratic members and Finance staff responded that the comparison was misleading because many veterans’ services are federally funded and the state budget also includes dedicated veteran support. The chair and other members emphasized that the budget reflects difficult tradeoffs and that the package protects vulnerable populations, preserves health care access, and advances affordability. No final vote was described in the excerpt, but members indicated support for the overall package and said they would support it on the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• But my floor amendment is going to make D.E.S. a stronger state agency that supports vulnerable Arizonans
• DES needs to continue to help the most vulnerable population in our state.
• Resources from the most vulnerable populations of Arizona in a time where we are economically not doing
• just want to agree with my colleague: the Department of Economic Security is very important for vulnerable
• HB 2940 does not deliver food assistance and health care to vulnerable Arizonans who may not have access

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• proposals that better protect key health care and safety net programs that are essential to our most vulnerable
• We want to work with you on thoughtful solutions that will protect our most vulnerable while also making
• We cannot balance the budget on the backs of our most vulnerable.
• hundreds of Californians, and excruciatingly honest conversations about how we care for the most vulnerable
• Governor Jerry Brown realized that to bridge the great divide and make sure that the most vulnerable

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee heard opening remarks on the 2025 Budget Act, which will be amended into AB 101 and SB 101 for floor consideration. Committee leaders described the budget as a difficult compromise shaped by a $12 billion deficit, federal funding uncertainty, wildfire impacts, and rising out-year costs, while emphasizing a balance between compassion and fiscal responsibility. Each budget subcommittee chair then summarized major actions in their areas, including health care, human services, education, climate and transportation, housing and state administration, public safety, and oversight/transparency. Key policy items included delaying or narrowing some of the Governor’s proposed cuts, especially in Medi-Cal and other safety-net programs; preserving funding for dental care, women’s health, family planning, hospice, long-term care, IHSS, and services for undocumented Californians; and maintaining or expanding child care, foster care, food banks, and CalWORKs-related supports. Education actions included additional Proposition 98 settle-up, reduced deferrals, support for TK-12, teacher recruitment, literacy, mental health, preschool slots, and restored funding for UC and CSU. Other major items included housing and homelessness investments, wildfire and disaster response funding, transit loans and greenhouse gas reduction fund support, Proposition 36 and VOCA-related public safety funding, and oversight measures on federal impacts and state efficiency. Department of Finance and Legislative Analyst staff said the package makes some of the same savings moves as the May Revision but relies more on internal borrowing and fewer reductions, leaving a smaller reserve than the administration’s plan but still maintaining roughly $11 billion in the rainy day fund. Members from both parties largely supported the package while raising concerns about long-term sustainability, Medi-Cal costs, reserve use, and the need for future revenue and program review. The committee adopted the subcommittee actions by roll call, 18-6, with the roll held open for absent members and additional comments continuing after the vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• This fiscal trajectory, however, seems to be willing to further burden the vulnerable if necessary.
• My faith teaches me that God is found first and foremost in solidarity with vulnerable people and is
• , seems to be willing to further burden the vulnerable, if necessary, in order to alleviate tax burdens
• My faith teaches me that God is found first and foremost in solidarity with vulnerable people and is
• seen most often in the face. in solidarity with vulnerable people, and is seen most often in the faces

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 1001, sponsored by Representative Les Eaves, which would lower the individual income tax rate to 3.7% retroactive to the current year and reduce the corporate rate to 4.1% beginning in 2027. Eaves argued the bill continues Arkansas’s recent tax-cut strategy, would provide broad relief to working families, and would keep the state competitive while preserving future surpluses rather than cutting existing services. He and Representative Bray emphasized that prior tax cuts have benefited taxpayers and supported economic growth. Several opponents testified against the bill, including representatives from Arkansas Appleseed, Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, a pastor, and individuals speaking about disability services and food insecurity. They argued Arkansas cannot afford further revenue reductions given needs in public education, early childhood care, Medicaid and food assistance, rural hospitals, and supported living services. Witnesses said the tax cut would disproportionately benefit higher earners while providing little or no relief to lower- and middle-income families, and urged the committee to prioritize public investments over tax cuts. After debate, the committee adopted a motion to limit witness testimony to five minutes each. Representative Eaves closed on the bill and moved to pass it. Following discussion, the committee voted to pass HB 1001, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, members, House Bill 4136, unlawful entry, vulnerable adults, vagrants, as amended, classifies
• class four felony a person who commits unlawful entry in or on a residential structure in which a vulnerable
• Celiana, can I just ask: how would you know if a vulnerable adult is inside a building before you enter
• I believe the clause does continue to also include knowing that a vulnerable adult is residing within
• Vulnerable adult is defined in statute. Okay. Okay, thank you.

Summary: The meeting was a caucus review of a long list of bills on Minority Caucus Calendars 8 and 9, with members briefly noting whether measures were unanimous, on consent, or had split votes. Topics included appropriations for homeless veteran shelter services (HB 2620), the Veterans Court Program grant fund (HB 2960), municipal improvement districts (HB 4064), a memorial measure (HB 2079), child care grants (HB 2239), midwife medication administration and advisory committee changes (HB 2251), home and community-based service provider funding (HB 2403), EMS reciprocity (HB 2437), prescription monitoring (HB 2434), electronic monitoring in health care facilities (HB 2914), pregnancy resource center funding and restrictions (HB 2229), limits on police transport of mental health patients (HB 2404), Access coverage for mild obstructive sleep apnea treatment (HB 2726), school district spending and teacher pay requirements referred to the ballot (HCR 2007), mobile home park operator training (HB 2199), local government investment pool oversight (HB 2344), task order contract website posting (HB 2445), tourism improvement areas (HB 2950), ambulance certificate reporting (HB 2402), short-term rental occupancy rules (HB 2429), ASRS retirement rules for elected officials (HB 2505), trespass penalties after eviction (HB 2047), post-nuptial agreement enforcement (HB 2861), civil rights board continuation (HB 2931), and utility replacement plant siting (HB 2389). Members also discussed child welfare and family law bills on Calendar 9, including kinship foster placement (HB 2035), neglect standards based on financial resources (HB 2041), family court evidence (HB 2968), DCS response to abuse reports (HB 4004), prostate cancer insurance cost-sharing (HB 2617), mental health hearing technology (SB 1242), optometrist prescriptions (SB 1023), behavior analyst regulation (SB 1145), assisted living occupants (SB 1247), manufactured home installer licensing and fingerprinting (HB 2868), supervised parenting time (HB 2615), unlawful entry involving vulnerable adults (HB 4136), uranium contamination monitoring funding (HB 2889), a gas and petroleum refinery study committee (HB 4025), and veteran state park fee exemptions (HB 2165). Several members raised policy concerns on bills involving privacy, rural transportation capacity, environmental review, pregnancy centers, and funding priorities, while others noted support or that amendments had addressed earlier issues. No formal roll-call votes were taken in the transcript itself; the chair mainly recorded whether bills were unanimous, consent, or split and whether any should be taken off consent or discussed further. The meeting ended with announcements about an upcoming CAP breakfast, a Latino Caucus meeting, and an Affordability Award presented to Representative Volk before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Persons like Jonathan are vulnerable to abduction, manipulation, or bad actors.
• There is no meaningful protection in place for this vulnerable population.
• Persons like Jonathan who are vulnerable to abduction, manipulation, or bad actors.
• There is no meaningful protection in place for this vulnerable population.
• There is no meaningful protection in place for this vulnerable population.

Summary: The House Community Safety Committee met on February 23, 2026, with a compressed schedule and limited testimony time. Members first heard Second Substitute Senate Bill 5974, which would set eligibility standards for sheriffs, police chiefs, and marshals, require background checks for sheriff candidates through the Washington State Patrol, regulate volunteers and youth cadets, and create a vacancy in office if an elected law enforcement official is finally decertified or fails statutory eligibility requirements. Supporters, including Senator Lovick and several advocacy groups, said the bill promotes accountability and professionalism. Opponents, including the sheriffs of Walla Walla and Spokane counties, argued it imposes unfunded mandates, conflicts with voter sovereignty and recall procedures, and could create problems for rural counties and volunteer use. The committee later took executive action and reported the bill out with a do pass as amended recommendation, 6-2 with one excused. In executive session, the committee also acted on Engrossed Senate Bill 5068, which expands law enforcement hiring eligibility to people legally authorized to work in the United States. A striking amendment clarified that agencies are not liable for employment discrimination claims if hiring is impracticable, allowed applicants who cannot yet possess weapons to apply if they can possess them when hired, and made technical changes. Representative Burnett raised concerns about background investigations, foreign-country vetting, oath of office, and firearm issues, but the committee adopted the striker and then reported the bill out as amended on a 6-2 vote with one excused. The committee also considered Substitute Senate Bill 5855, which prohibits law enforcement officers from wearing facial coverings while interacting with the public except in specified circumstances and creates a civil cause of action. Amendments added an intent section, expanded exceptions for health and safety equipment under OSHA/WISHA, and proposed stronger prosecutorial language, though two amendments were rejected. The bill was then reported out as amended on a 6-2 vote with one excused. The committee then held public hearings on several bills. Engrossed Senate Bill 5890 would expand reckless driving to include driving more than 30 miles per hour over the posted speed limit, and 20 miles per hour over in active construction zones when workers are present; law enforcement, prosecutors, traffic safety officials, and construction industry representatives testified in support. Substitute Senate Bill 5936, a Uniform Law Commission proposal on human trafficking, would allow prosecution of businesses that knowingly engage in or profit from trafficking, strengthen victim confidentiality, and improve U and T visa certification procedures; testimony was overwhelmingly supportive, with one witness urging caution about unintended consequences for businesses that report trafficking. Finally, Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 6070 would expand missing-person response tools by allowing certain surveillance devices to be used for community caretaking to locate missing endangered persons, create Ebony and Purple Alerts, transfer the missing persons website to the State Patrol, and add a public records exemption. Testimony strongly supported the alert provisions, especially for people with disabilities, while one privacy advocate objected to the surveillance provisions as an overreach.

Transcript Highlights:

• I really like this bill because I think that protecting our most vulnerable communities and ensuring
• She's vulnerable.
• It increases risk and puts our most vulnerable in danger.
• Medically vulnerable people like people with cancer.
• Medically vulnerable people like people with cancer.

Bills: S1082, S1168, S1756, S1156, S1480

Keywords: provider disputes, health plan, dispute resolution, Medicare, Medicaid, healthcare regulation, background screening, athletic coaches, youth sports, criminal history, expungement, Florida statutes, medical freedom, vaccination, ivermectin, healthcare practitioner liability, immunization exemptions, ambulatory surgical centers, patient safety, licensure

Summary: The committee took up several health-related bills. SB 1082, on a statewide provider and health plan claim dispute resolution program, was presented as a way to let providers and insurers use the federal independent dispute resolution process for emergency out-of-network claims under state-regulated commercial plans. A late-filed amendment clarified when providers and health plans could access the state program, and the bill was reported favorably as a committee substitute. SB 1168, which would centralize background screening clearinghouse functions at the Agency for Health Care Administration, also passed as amended after an amendment requiring sealed and expunged records to be included in screenings for qualified entities. Supporters said centralization would improve turnaround times, reduce duplication, and save costs; the sponsor said the bill also addresses coaches’ background screening language from last session. The committee then approved SB 1156, which moves ambulatory surgery center regulation out of the hospital-focused chapter of law into a standalone section, and SB 1480, as amended by a strike-all, which would grandfather certain temporary certificate holders practicing in areas of critical need if federal designation changes affect those areas. Testimony on SB 1480 emphasized continuity of care for patients in underserved communities, and the bill was reported favorably. The final and most heavily debated measure was SB 1756 on medical freedom, which would require state-approved educational materials on childhood vaccines, require practitioners to provide those materials and alternative schedules before vaccination, expand school immunization exemptions to include conscience-based objections, clarify that the Surgeon General cannot order vaccination during a public health emergency, and authorize pharmacists to provide ivermectin behind the counter without a prescription with written information and safeguards. The sponsor argued the bill strengthens parental choice and informed consent. Committee members raised concerns about vaccine-preventable disease risks, immunocompromised children, school outbreaks, and the impact of adding a new exemption. A Department of Health representative said the department would need to provide details on the history of exemption consultations and noted that removing the earlier consultation requirement had not been shown to increase outbreaks. The committee adopted a friendly amendment to give physicians the same liability protection as pharmacists for ivermectin dispensing, but rejected a substitute amendment that would have required a consultation for exemption requests. Public testimony was overwhelmingly opposed to the bill, with physicians, pediatric specialists, cancer advocates, parents of immunocompromised children, and public health groups warning that it would lower vaccination rates and endanger vulnerable Floridians. The bill remained pending after testimony, with the committee continuing to hear public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today's hearing is intended to map out our programs that are most vulnerable and to identify when we
• A big disgusting bill, because what it does is impact our most vulnerable in all of the key areas that
• As the fourth largest economy, we know and we are capable of doing right by our most vulnerable neighbors
• HR 1 is a serious threat to the health care of California's most vulnerable populations, threatening
• Our members are the unsung heroes who care for some of the most vulnerable people in the state and have

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We do provide vulnerability scanning.
• We do provide vulnerability scanning.
• patches needed or their vulnerabilities?
• They get reports that show them all of their vulnerabilities.
• And then they're vulnerable.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• His passing showed how vulnerable young athletes can be.
• We must protect vulnerable and marginalized people like me.
• I always knew that I was vulnerable in other ways.
• at greatest risk at a very vulnerable time.
• They're another group of vulnerable patients.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health opened its first hearing of the session and heard testimony on bills in three areas: emergency medical services/AED access, athletic training and student safety, and end-of-life options. Committee chairs outlined testimony rules and noted that written testimony would also be accepted. Some bills had no live witnesses, while others drew extensive testimony from advocates, professionals, and legislators. On AED-related bills, the American Heart Association supported requiring automated external defibrillators at sporting events and athletic fields, citing sudden cardiac arrest survival rates and urging cardiac emergency response plans as an added safeguard. A parks and recreation professional supported AED access but raised concerns about the cost, staffing, maintenance, and feasibility for municipalities with limited resources. Athletic trainers supported expanding their scope of practice and removing workplace restrictions, arguing it would improve injury prevention, reduce costs, and help retain professionals in Massachusetts. The committee also took extensive testimony on end-of-life options legislation. Supporters included legislators, physicians, hospice volunteers, clergy, patients’ family members, and advocacy groups, who described the bills as allowing terminally ill, mentally capable adults to choose a peaceful death with strict safeguards and self-administration requirements. They emphasized personal stories of suffering, public support, and the claim that other states have not seen abuse. Opponents, including faith-based, disability-rights, and family policy representatives, argued the bills amount to physician-assisted suicide, could pressure vulnerable people, and may be influenced by prognosis errors, coercion, or financial incentives. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• These proposed cuts are targeting the most vulnerable of our neighbors, those already working multiple
• it's more important than ever that we really prioritize the resources toward protecting the most vulnerable
• You know, California, we cannot forget our responsibility to protect our most vulnerable communities,
• We must protect our most vulnerable, like our undocumented communities, our children, and our seniors
• We must protect our most vulnerable, like our undocumented communities, our children, and our seniors

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held the first of several hearings on the Governor’s May Revision for health care, with opening remarks focused on the state’s projected $12 billion deficit, looming federal Medicaid changes, and the potential impact on Medi-Cal, public health, reproductive health, and safety-net providers. Several members criticized the proposal as balancing the budget on vulnerable Californians, while others defended the need for cost containment and questioned the administration’s assumptions. The chair set ground rules for respectful, focused questioning and outlined three topics: the Medi-Cal proposals, Proposition 35, and Proposition 56. DHCS Director Michelle Baas presented the May Revision’s Medi-Cal package, saying the department’s budget totals $200.6 billion overall, including $45.2 billion General Fund, and that the proposals are intended to address rising caseloads, pharmacy costs, and managed care spending. She described proposed changes for adults with unsatisfactory immigration status, including a freeze on new full-scope enrollment for those 19 and older, $100 monthly premiums beginning in 2027, elimination of adult dental and long-term care coverage, removal of PPS/RAP payments to FQHCs and rural health clinics for that population, and a pharmacy rebate aggregator. Other proposals included eliminating certain OTC drug classes, removing GLP-1 coverage for weight loss, prior authorization and step therapy changes, reinstating the Medi-Cal asset test, eliminating acupuncture as an optional benefit, allowing utilization management for hospice, raising the managed care minimum medical loss ratio to 90%, reducing PACE capitation rates toward the midpoint of the actuarial range, eliminating the skilled nursing facility workforce and quality incentive program, and suspending the SNF backup power requirement. The LAO said the revised Medi-Cal spending estimate is about $2.5 billion higher than the Governor’s Budget in the budget year, and that the increase appears driven more by higher per-enrollee costs than by caseload alone. The LAO said the budget solutions are concentrated in a few areas, are largely ongoing, and should be considered in light of federal uncertainty, but suggested the Legislature could explore alternatives such as more targeted income thresholds for the undocumented expansion and simpler asset-test rules. Department of Finance officials said the proposals are difficult but necessary to address a third consecutive deficit and rising Medi-Cal costs. Members then pressed the administration on the methodology and impacts of the proposals, especially the enrollment freeze, premiums, asset test, hospice controls, PACE reductions, and the elimination of benefits and provider payments. No votes or formal actions were taken at this hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• paid in comparison to other southern states for potentially life-changing therapy for a highly vulnerable
• :02:50.319><c> highly</c> life-changing therapy for a highly life-changing therapy for a highly vulnerable
• </c><00:02:53.120><c> while</c> vulnerable patient population. while vulnerable patient population. while
• where they live and that hospitals can continue providing critical outpatient services for our most vulnerable

Keywords: Medicaid - Room 216, 3 February, 2026; 10:30 AM, 925, all

Summary: The Senate Medicaid Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 2674, which would increase Mississippi Medicaid reimbursement for outpatient vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) procedures used to treat drug-resistant epilepsy. Dave Weinberger of LivaNova said current Medicaid rates are far below Medicare and most neighboring southern states, creating financial pressure on hospitals and causing some to stop offering the procedure. He argued the therapy provides durable clinical benefits and long-term savings for Medicaid, and said the bill would align Mississippi’s rates with Medicare’s 2026 outpatient rates and with other states. Weinberger said the bill would set reimbursement at $45,000 for CPT 64568 and $35,000 for CPT 61885, and framed the measure as improving access, hospital stability, and fairness for vulnerable patients. Committee members did not ask questions during this hearing, though the chair noted the bill had been double referred and would go to appropriations, with a more detailed hearing scheduled for the next day. After discussion, a motion was made that the title was sufficient and the bill do pass. The committee approved the motion, and the bill was reported out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• These cuts deepen educational and economic vulnerability, particularly for low-income, underrepresented
• But these decisions are under appeal by the federal government, and they remain vulnerable to further
• Assemblymember Patel, thank you, panelists, for the robust discussion and being a little vulnerable with
• , that support the most vulnerable students that we have and help us get through one year after the other
• So international students remain vulnerable in two key areas: one, housing; and two, legal support.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee held an oversight hearing on how federal actions are affecting California higher education, with opening remarks from the chair and members emphasizing the importance of state-federal shared governance and the need to protect access, affordability, and campus diversity. The first panel included leaders from the CSU, University of the Pacific, California Community Colleges, and UC, who described broad impacts from federal grant terminations, changes to student aid, loan limits, visa and immigration policy, and proposed reductions to research support. Testimony focused on the elimination of Grad PLUS loans, caps on Parent PLUS and Pell-related changes, the loss or suspension of hundreds of grants, and the resulting harm to student support services, research, workforce pipelines, food assistance, and health care training. UC and CSU representatives warned of major losses in research funding, indirect cost reimbursement, and student opportunities, while community college leaders highlighted uncertainty around federal grants and the need to maintain services for low-income, first-generation, undocumented, and other vulnerable students. Committee members asked how the state could respond, including through intersegmental partnerships, dual enrollment, transfer pathways, and support for basic needs and nutrition programs. Witnesses said California could help by sustaining financial aid, protecting minority-serving institution programs, and investing in research, housing, and workforce development. Several speakers stressed that federal changes were creating instability for students and campuses, and that the effects would likely be long-lasting, especially in health care, teaching, STEM, and social work pipelines. A second panel then focused on equitable access. The California Student Aid Commission described state efforts such as the $3.9 billion investment in aid programs, the Cal Grant system, the Dream Act, and possible reforms to better serve adult learners, foster youth, undocumented students, and students with dependents. The Los Angeles Community College District reported that federal cuts and policy shifts are discouraging students from applying for aid, threatening TRIO and MSI/HSI-funded services, and reducing support for basic needs, counseling, and workforce programs. The Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities and the CSU Academic Senate echoed concerns about FAFSA confusion, international student restrictions, grant losses, and the erosion of equity-focused programs. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and discussed possible state responses.