Transcript Highlights:

• to go make more income so we can pay to go make more income so we can pay more<00:11:04.800>
• So currently we're paying 10 to 12 times over what other states are currently paying.
• importers would not pay this tax. importers would not pay this tax.
• from California would not pay this? from California would not pay this?
• don't have to pay? don't have to pay? >> Got<01:10:52.080> it. >> Got it.

Bills: HB1991, HB1776, HB1897, HB1900

Keywords: liquor tax, alcohol, inflation adjustment, small craft breweries, public health, tenant rights, housing stability, landlord-tenant code, eviction prevention, multilingual resources, condominium, dispute resolution, mediation, arbitration, attorneys' fees, common expenses, construction defects, building code, statute of repose, statute of limitations

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1991, which would change Hawaii’s liquor excise tax structure to an ABV-based system. The Department of Taxation and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii took no position and stood on written comments. Supporters, including the Hawaii Public Health Institute and an individual testifier who described surviving a drunk-driving crash, argued that higher alcohol taxes reduce alcohol-related harms, save lives, and generate additional state revenue. The public health witness cited alcohol-related harms as a major preventable cause of death and said the tax increase would have only a small annual cost for most consumers. Most industry testimony was in opposition. Representatives of Lanikai Brewing Company, Maui Brewing Company, the Wine Institute, and the Hawaii Food Industry Association said the bill would sharply raise taxes on beer and wine, squeeze already thin margins, and threaten local jobs and businesses. They argued Hawaii producers already face high costs for labor, energy, shipping, and compliance, and said an ABV-based tax would be difficult to administer, would require additional testing and labeling work, and could reduce consumer choice. Several industry witnesses urged lawmakers to instead adopt a small-producer or class 18 carveout, with one suggesting a cap tied to 60,000 barrels. Committee members questioned the brewers about alcohol content testing, labeling, and whether smaller producers already measure ABV. Witnesses said many local producers do not certify ABV for in-state sales, that yeast and fermentation can vary by batch, and that an ABV-based system could require more testing than current practice. No vote or final action on the bill was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The MCOs are paying for home meal delivery.
• Not, oh, well, you can pay, you can afford to pay this, so it's 20% more for you.
• And so obviously we have to pay rent. And so obviously we have to pay rent.
• I just don't have the budget to pay them.
• If you want an autopsy, you pay for it.

Keywords: 996, all

Summary: The committee first heard an Aging and Long-Term Services Department budget presentation comparing the LFC and executive recommendations. The main differences were in the Aging Network, Adult Protective Services, Program Support, and Long-Term Care Division, especially the executive’s proposed $10 million infusion into the Kiki Savadra Senior Dignity Fund and $6.2 million for expanding New Mexico Care. LFC staff explained that the committee recommendation was lower in general fund and fund-balance use, while the executive emphasized rising senior population needs, meal and transportation costs, and the cost savings of keeping older adults at home. The secretary also reviewed the department’s special requests, including the conference on aging, outreach, emergency preparedness, and the Kiki fund, and described New Mexico Care’s growth, its evaluation results, and the department’s plan to separate Kiki into its own accounting fund. Members largely focused on senior services, rural meal delivery, transportation, caregiver support, and the Kiki fund. Several members urged stronger support for non-metro aging providers and for New Mexico Care, citing its role in keeping seniors out of nursing homes and the program’s reported savings and outcomes. Questions also covered eligibility, background checks for caregivers, respite care, dementia and Alzheimer’s screening, and whether Kiki funds can support home modifications such as ramps. The committee then voted to adopt the LFC recommendation with one executive language change: adding the executive’s page 14 language allowing an additional 12.5% distribution for initial payments to aging network providers at the start of FY27. Representative Dow opposed the motion. The committee then moved to the Attorney General’s budget. LFC staff explained that the office’s budget relies heavily on the Consumer Settlement Fund, with both recommendations reducing general fund revenue while increasing settlement-fund use, and that performance measures were in consensus. The Attorney General said the office was not seeking more general fund, but wanted greater ability to use funds it recovers. He highlighted major consumer and public safety work, including litigation against major social media and AI platforms, a case involving Snapchat and child exploitation/extortion, the statewide crime gun intelligence center, efforts to address oilfield theft, work on missing and murdered Indigenous persons, and efforts to protect federal funds coming into New Mexico.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, if we have no error rate at all, will we not have to pay any of the benefits or pay any share?
• we would not have to pay we would not have to pay any<00:26:34.640> share.
• Emergencies would be excluded from a co-pay. Primary care visits would be eliminated from a co-pay.
• if a co-pay is not paid?
• take a haircut if someone doesn't pay. take a haircut if someone doesn't pay.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first approved the draft minutes of its May 16, 2025 meeting, with one correction removing Representative Dry from the attendance list because she was present as a guest rather than an appointed member. The committee then received a Department of Health and Human Services update from Commissioner Lori Weaver, who focused on the rural health transformation grant process. She said the department has been gathering stakeholder input since July, issued a request for information on September 22, and is working toward an end-of-October draft and a November 3 deadline, with a grant writer request expected to go before Governor and Council at no cost to the state. The bulk of the meeting centered on federal changes affecting SNAP and Medicaid. Karen Heert explained that the federal law changes commonly referred to as the “Big Beautiful Bill” or HR1 will affect SNAP eligibility and state costs, including a shift in administrative cost sharing from 50/50 to 75/25 beginning in October 2026 and a possible state share of benefits if New Hampshire’s error rate is too high. She said the program affects about 43,000 households, that New Hampshire’s federal fiscal year 2024 error rate was 7.57% versus a national rate of 10.93%, and that the state must get below 6% to avoid liability. She also said DHS is preparing remediation steps, auditing cases, and seeking technology and staffing support, including a grant for automation and training. Henry Litman then described Medicaid changes under HB2 and the new federal law. He said New Hampshire returned to pre-pandemic eligibility verification rules on July 1, including a 10% income compatibility standard and reduced ex parte renewals, which has increased manual work and contributed to a drop in enrollment from about 185,000 in late June to about 178,000 in early September. He also reviewed new child premiums, pharmacy copays, Granite Advantage premiums, and possible Medicaid work requirements, noting that DHS is working with CMS on implementation details and may use a state plan option rather than an 1115 waiver because it would be less expensive and faster. Members asked several questions about the SNAP error-rate rules, the distinction between administrative and client errors, the effect of unpaid copays, and the timing and legal risk of the Medicaid work requirement; no votes were taken on those policy issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they get two weeks of pay.
• that pay.
• We don't have to pay for that.
• But they signed it saying OK, Gallup will pay.
• So we look at the customer's ability to pay.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do I pay for that health care plan or pay for my utility bills?
• And we will all pay the price for it.
• Those who cannot pay with their wallets will pay with their lives. Mr.
• THOSE WHO CANNOT PAY WITH THEIR WALLETS WILL PAY WITH THEIR LIVES. MR.
• A lot of families will have to pay thousands more.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, November 17, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, and then the department also pays, um, certain technology costs on behalf of districts.
• Uh, and then the department also pays, um, certain technology costs on behalf of districts.
• We can't just bring somebody in and pay them X amount of dollars to do that.
• We can't just bring somebody in and pay them X amount of dollars to do that.
• <00:59:33.040> our at the same time be able to pay our at the same time be able to pay our

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 History of SEEK 00:02:15 Summary of On-Behalf Payments 00:12:40 Discussion on Collection of University Debt Department of Revenue 00:32:40 Northern Kentucky University 00:57:10, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the minutes from the September 17 meeting, and heard a presentation from Kentucky Department of Education staff on SEEK school funding and KDE on-behalf payments. KDE explained recent SEEK changes, including the guaranteed base per-pupil amount, attendance-based calculations, second-month and January growth, the 2022 change funding kindergarten at 100% instead of 50%, and the existing add-ons for at-risk students, exceptional children, limited English learners, home/hospital instruction, and transportation. Staff also reviewed tier one funding, noting the 2024 increase from 15% to 17.5% and explaining that eligibility depends on local tax effort and property wealth. They also described Senate Bill 6 from the 2025 session as a reporting proposal to include on-behalf costs in education spending totals. KDE staff then outlined on-behalf payments made for districts, including roughly $458 million for Teachers Retirement System contributions, $942 million for health insurance, about $12 million for technology costs, and additional SFCC debt service outside KDE’s appropriation, for a total of about $1.5 billion. Members asked how a future Senate Bill 6 would affect local contributions and whether folding on-behalf payments into SEEK would shift costs among districts. KDE and Senator Gibbons clarified that the bill was intended only as a reporting mechanism and would not change local contribution or district payments; it would simply present a broader total of state education investment. The discussion also noted that Kentucky’s reported SEEK amount alone does not capture all state education spending. Members raised questions about home and hospital instruction data, saying local concerns suggest growth in some communities even if statewide numbers appear stable. KDE said the statewide figure has been relatively consistent but offered to provide district-level trend data. Co-Chair Petrie also asked about the accuracy of SEEK projections and on-behalf calculations, referencing prior concerns from the Office of Education Accountability. KDE responded that it works with the state budget director’s office in a consensus forecasting process and has been reviewing demographic and property-assessment data, including exceptional child counts, to improve forecast accuracy.

Transcript Highlights:

• While we did pay off the bonds, we did not choose to follow this path, and that's fine.
• While we did pay off the bonds, we did not choose to follow this path, and that's fine.
• This proposal takes a pay-as-you-go approach, as referenced by Chair Rest.
• The state of Minnesota pays nothing to host the Vikings' games at our stadium.
• <00:46:12.720> host<00:46:13.520> the Minnesota pays nothing to host the Minnesota pays

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• an annual visitor were willing to pay an annual visitor fee<00:19:21.799> to<00:19:21.960>
• <00:24:38.760> another like a small price to pay another like a small price to pay another
• I'm not certain about all of the fees that they pay over.
• They go online and book a ticket online, and then they also pay for parking.
• Residents do not pay for an entrance, nor do they pay for parking. For residents, but, um...

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint hearing of the House Committees on Tourism and Water and Land was held on March 20, 2025, on SB 1396 SD3 HD1, which would raise transient accommodations tax revenues beginning in 2027, impose a $20 per-night tax on stays booked through loyalty or rewards points, and dedicate funds to DLNR for natural resource protection, management, and restoration. The Office of the Governor, DLNR, DBEDT, the Hawaii State Energy Office, Tax Department, Hawaiian Home Lands, HI-EMA, the Climate Advisory Team, Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, HCDA, the Hawaii Ocean Legislative Task Force, Resource Legacy Fund, KUA, and the Hawaii Tourism Authority all testified in support or with comments, generally emphasizing the need for dedicated funding for environmental stewardship, resilience, wildfire and climate preparedness, and community-based projects. Several supporters cited polling showing broad visitor willingness to pay additional fees to protect Hawaiʻi’s resources, and DLNR and the Attorney General noted the bill aligns with broader state land-management and fire-safety priorities. Opposition came from the Tax Foundation of Hawaiʻi and the Maui Chamber of Commerce, which argued the bill unnecessarily raises the TAT, places more burden on visitors and visitor-dependent businesses, and could harm Maui’s still-recovering economy. The Activities and Attractions Association of Hawaiʻi initially marked opposition but then said it had misunderstood the bill’s relationship to another measure and asked to resend testimony. Expedia Group did not oppose the TAT increase itself but raised operational concerns about the new tax on loyalty-point redemptions, calling it novel and difficult to administer. The American Hotel Lodging Association and Hawaiʻi Hotel Alliance were listed as having no comments present. Testifiers also suggested amendments, including dedicating the revenues to a special fund, ensuring community grants, and clarifying administrative provisions. One testifier urged the bill be used to fund hurricane shelters and stronger building standards, while another emphasized that the measure should support people and disaster resilience as well as environmental protection. During questions, members asked for the polling methodology and for a breakdown of current TAT allocations; staff indicated they could share the survey memo and began identifying existing statutory remittances. No vote or final committee action was taken during the excerpted portion of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• the agency that can pay attorneys more.
• We pay the counties’ witness fees up to $30,000 per county per biennium.
• and pay for ice time, which makes no sense to me.
• So when we talk about expenses, it's paying staff, it's paying for the e-tab leases or ownership, and
• They're paying them minimal money.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to hear the Attorney General’s budget and related agency presentations. Legislative Council first reviewed the compliance with legislative intent report and the base budget worksheet, highlighting current and ongoing appropriations, FTE changes, one-time funding items, continuing appropriations, and major special and federal funds. Members asked about items such as the Missing Indigenous People Grant Fund, the Internet Crimes Investigation Fund, and the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit grant funding, and staff explained the funding sources and status of those programs. Assistant Attorney General Clare Ness then outlined the Attorney General’s office structure, staffing, and budget pressures. She emphasized the office’s broad statutory duties, the value of its legal and investigative work for state and local governments, and concerns about attorney salary competitiveness, the new and vacant FTE pool, and the impact of the 3% operating budget reduction on BCI, IT, and the crime lab. Members also discussed AG opinions, boards and commissions training, and the office’s litigation and settlement recoveries. Ness and committee members raised the possibility of broader attorney salary benchmarking across state government. The crime lab director described severe space and infrastructure constraints, including overcrowding, shared workspaces, glycol leaks, air handling limits, and aging fire and burglar alarm systems. She said the 2024 study projected a much larger facility would be needed and that a new building on the current health department site would best address the lab’s needs. She also reported that backlogs have improved significantly in DNA, drug, fingerprint, and firearms work, though toxicology had a recent delay after an air compressor failure. The Medicaid Fraud Control Unit director described the unit’s fraud, abuse, and neglect work, noted federal-state funding and recent federal scrutiny, and said the unit needs more staff. The gaming division reviewed charitable gaming growth, e-tabs, trust accounts, and compliance issues, while BCI covered its caseload, cybercrime and child sexual abuse material investigations, the missing indigenous person task force, and the use of lottery funds for drug task forces. No formal votes or budget actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, fiscal year starting July 1, 2026, counties will be able to use some of their BHSA dollars to pay
• And then the kicker: they've been charging him a $60 co-pay each month, when he could be just paying
• Patients have to pay—usually they're $2,000 deductible at the beginning of the year.
• If I want more than that, with paying that co-pay over and over and over again, I want to try to avoid
• If I want more than that with paying that co-pay over and over and over again, I want to try to avoid

Summary: The committee heard several health-related measures. SB 27 by Senator Umberg would revise and expand California’s CARE Court by limiting the expansion to people with bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, clarifying the definition of “clinically stabilized,” and narrowing the role of nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Supporters, including behavioral health officials and family members, said the bill would reduce dismissals and better serve people with severe illness; opponents warned the expansion would strain county staffing and housing resources and could undermine voluntary engagement. The bill passed on a do pass motion to the Committee on Public Safety. SB 503 by Senator Weber Pierson would require AI tools used in health care facilities to be identified, monitored, and mitigated for bias when used in clinical decision-making or resource allocation. The author and supporters from Kaiser Permanente and the California Medical Association said the bill would help prevent discriminatory outcomes and improve trust and safety. The committee discussed the need to clarify developer and deployer responsibilities, and the bill passed as amended to Privacy and Consumer Protection. SB 68 by Senator Menjivar would require restaurants to provide written allergen information for the top nine food allergens, with tiered flexibility for smaller establishments. The bill was supported by patients, families, nurses, and allergy organizations, who described severe reactions and the difficulty of relying on verbal disclosures alone. The California Restaurant Association opposed unless amended, seeking broader use of the national model food code and additional liability language. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 403 by Senator Blakespear, which would remove the sunset from the End of Life Option Act; supporters described the law as a compassionate, well-functioning option for terminally ill patients, while faith-based groups opposed it. The bill passed to Judiciary. Later, SB 41 by Senator Wiener was introduced to rein in pharmacy benefit manager practices that steer patients to mail-order pharmacies and reimburse community pharmacies below cost; community pharmacists and several health organizations testified in support, describing pharmacy closures and patient access problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• individuals on the path to good paying individuals on the path to good paying careers<00:42:34.880
• That is the state pays with a free ride. That is the state pays for<01:30:47.199> it.
• We over there, we pay Vermont taxes. We pay Massachusetts taxes. It's just a way of life.
• We over there, we pay Vermont taxes. We pay Massachusetts taxes.
• We over there, we pay New Hampshire. We over there, we pay Vermont<05:50:29.680> taxes.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• SPONSOR MAY NOT PAY PETITION ON THE RESOURCES OF THE SPONSOR.
• SPONSOR MAY NOT PAY PETITION CIRCULATORS IN SUCH A SITUATION.
• CURRENTLY THE ORGANIZATION RUNNING THESE PETITION DRIVES, THEY HAVE TO PAY CERTAIN EXPENSES NOW UNDER
• HAS THERE BEEN A PROBLEM WITH THEM ACTUALLY PAYING THOSE EXPENSES OR A MAJORITY OF THE FOLKS TRYING TO
• Grall: I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN A PROBLEM WITH THEM PAYING THEM.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On these projects, employers often underpay or fail to pay workers altogether.
• We in the industry typically pay for this, and we want to pay for it.
• We in the industry typically pay for this, and we want to pay for it.
• Now Massachusetts businesses and workers are paying the price.
• I only had a small allowance to pay for necessities for our children.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a lengthy public hearing on a wide range of civil actions, labor, consumer protection, and animal welfare bills. Chair Lydia Edwards and Representative Michael Day opened with strict testimony rules and time limits, then heard from legislators and advocates on measures including animal-abuser pet ownership bans (S. 1207/H. 1914), a name-change privacy bill (S. 1045/H. 1973), tort claims reform (H. 1724), law enforcement council coverage under the Tort Claims Act (S. 1199), civil rights and qualified immunity-related proposals (H. 1641), employee free speech/captive audience restrictions (S. 1078/H. 1653), consumer protection and civil rights jurisdiction expansion (S. 1041), private right of action for wage theft (H. 1916), gun-owner liability insurance (H. 1836), pseudoephedrine sales tracking (S. 1243/H. 1581), prepaid legal services plans (H. 1612), structured settlement protections (H. 1863), third-party litigation financing disclosure (H. 1861), antitrust reform for small businesses and workers (S. 1038/H. 1982), legal notices in online-only newspapers (S. 1279/H. 1632), and several animal cruelty and protection bills including H. 1938, H. 1949, S. 1277/H. 1934, and H. 1764. Testimony was largely supportive from bill sponsors and advocacy groups, with repeated themes of protecting vulnerable people and animals, improving access to justice, and updating outdated laws. Supporters of the animal bills argued for stronger possession bans, broader cruelty citations, and civil removal tools to prevent repeat abuse; opponents or conditional supporters raised due process and enforcement concerns, especially around warrantless seizures and requiring retail or shelter staff to check registries. On the labor and consumer side, supporters said the antitrust bill would curb monopoly power and help small businesses and workers, while opponents warned it could destabilize competition and burden successful firms. The employee free speech bill was backed as a response to captive audience meetings, and the wage-theft bill was presented as a way to let workers or organizations pursue claims when individual employees are afraid to come forward. Several public officials and association representatives testified on the law enforcement and civil rights bills. Chiefs of police supported adding law enforcement councils to the Tort Claims Act, saying it would close a liability gap for regional mutual-aid collaborations. But police representatives opposed changes to the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act and qualified immunity-related provisions, arguing the federal system already provides a workable forum and that expanding liability could increase costs, reduce morale, and worsen recruitment and retention. On the consumer/civil rights bill, Senator Collins and a veteran described an out-of-state assault case that they said showed the need for Massachusetts to let residents seek redress at home when rights are violated elsewhere. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the hearing itself; the committee mainly received testimony and questions. Several witnesses indicated they had submitted written testimony or proposed amendments, and some bills drew requests for favorable reports while others were explicitly opposed unless amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• out of state they are currently paying out of state tuition. tuition. tuition.
• have been paying our taxes and have been paying our taxes and supporting<00:18:33.840> these<00
• <00:18:41.280> the state that hasn't been paying the state that hasn't been paying the freight
• It says things like anybody and anyone who gets a job offer comes here for any level of pay.
• So we could have very very low paid pay.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And these people will have to pay tax in our country.
• You wouldn't want to do that, but they have to pay tax, create jobs.
• <01:20:45.480> for people out of colleges and paying for people out of colleges and paying
• <01:21:26.639> a creating people they're going to pay a creating people they're going to pay
• <01:29:57.719> subsidies<01:29:58.320> to dollars we pay subsidies to dollars we pay

Keywords: Presidential address to the Joint Session of the United States Congress on Tuesday, March 4, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• have to pay uh TRA contributions<00:20:22.440> for.
• people in J-1 right now that are paying people in J-1 right now that are paying into<00:20:52.600
• But, so you have teachers that pay in at But, so you have teachers that pay in at at<00:21:17.240>
• Not needing to pay 9.81% for J-1 visa holders is going to help them."
• <01:14:42.840> and but currently uh still paying and but currently uh still paying and qualifying

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The commission approved the March 17 minutes and then heard testimony on Senate File 4419 / House File 4069, as amended, which would exempt J-1 visa-holding teachers and their school districts from Teachers Retirement Association contribution requirements during the teachers’ exchange term. Senator Pappas and Representative Feist said the bill is intended to help districts fill hard-to-staff special education and other positions by letting J-1 teachers keep more of their pay for immediate relocation costs, while also redirecting employer savings toward onboarding, mentorship, and cultural orientation. They argued the teachers are temporary by design, often cannot stay long enough to benefit from TRA, and that the bill would be roughly neutral for TRA because contributions and matching liability would both be removed. Supportive testimony came from Matthew Connelly of Lattice Global Teachers and Melissa Schaller of Intermediate School District 917. Connelly said J-1 teachers arrive with significant upfront expenses and only a short window to establish themselves, and that the exemption could save them about $4,000 to $5,000 while helping schools afford recruitment and support costs. Schaller said her district has relied on international special education teachers to fill vacancies, that the H-1B option is no longer workable because of a large fee increase, and that J-1 hiring is needed to remain competitive; she noted 17 open special education positions for 2026-27 and no other applicants. Caitlin Snyder of Education Minnesota opposed the bill, arguing it lowers compensation and removes a retirement option without enough input from teachers themselves. She said the bill does not ensure the employer savings would be used for housing or other supports, and urged more direct consultation with J-1 teachers. Several members raised concerns about fairness, pension protection, and whether the bill could create unintended consequences for teachers who later remain in Minnesota. Senator Pappas responded that the circumstances are unusual because J-1 teachers are temporary and often cannot return, and said TRA had indicated the proposal would be neutral or supportive, unlike a separate St. Paul teachers issue. Representative O’Driscoll asked about J-1 teachers in higher education and private schools, and Mr. Connelly said the visa is mainly used in K-12 settings but can also appear in charter and private schools; he also noted many J-1 holders face a two-year home-residence requirement. The chair indicated the bill was slated for inclusion in the omnibus pension bill, but no final vote on the bill itself was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:25:00.159> a<00:25:00.279> lot area and that pay you have to pay a lot area and
• that pay you have to pay a lot for<00:25:00.679> clinicians<00:25:01.200> to<00:25:01.399
• this resource available and to pay this resource available and to pay attention<00:34:05.320> to
• <01:04:07.960> for know do we prioritize say paying for know do we prioritize say paying for
• <01:13:25.120> payment implementing the directed pay payment implementing the directed pay

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• supporting our work around direct pay supporting our work around direct pay it's<00:15:11.279>
• that<00:31:23.159> the direct pay I mentioned this that the direct pay I mentioned this
• Second question is on the direct pay program.
• <00:59:41.960> the fund were ever out of funds to pay the fund were ever out of funds to pay
• And also pay for them at a smaller or at a lower rate.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Capital Investment held its first meeting of the 2025 session with members and staff introducing themselves and describing their priorities. Senators from both parties repeatedly emphasized the goal of passing a strong bipartisan bonding bill this year, with several members noting that local projects were delayed after no bonding bill passed the previous year. Chair Housley also said the committee would not meet later that week and previewed an upcoming presentation from MMB on federal funds. The committee then heard a presentation from MMB’s Leah Corey and Anna Ming on Minnesota’s federal funding efforts. Corey explained that MMB’s federal funds team coordinates state efforts to maximize funding from IIJA, IRA, CHIPS, and related federal programs. She said Minnesota has secured about $12.3 billion in federal funding so far, including roughly $3 billion more since the last presentation, supporting about 1,800 projects statewide. Most of the funding is going to transportation, roads, and bridges, with other major areas including clean energy and weatherization. She also highlighted an interactive public dashboard showing projects by region and noted that much of the data reflects funds flowing through the state enterprise. Corey also discussed state match programs that helped unlock federal dollars, including the IIJA discretionary match fund, the State Competitiveness Fund, and the Forward Fund. She said $180 million in state match has unlocked about $1 billion in federal investment through the IIJA discretionary match fund, nearly $17 million in state investment has unlocked nearly $90 million in federal funding through the State Competitiveness Fund, and $124 million for the Forward Fund has unlocked nearly $1 billion in federal and private investment. Members asked whether more state dollars could have brought in more federal funds; Corey said she was not sure, but noted the IIJA match fund is expected to run out in the coming months. The presentation also focused on direct pay tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act, which allow tax-exempt entities such as governments, nonprofits, school districts, and tribal nations to receive payments for eligible clean energy projects after they are completed. Corey said the state is building awareness and technical assistance around direct pay, including educational sessions and a tax expert resource. She also described Minnesota’s Green Bank, the Minnesota Climate Innovation Finance Authority, which is beginning to issue loans for projects such as community energy, nonprofit geothermal systems, and solar-plus-battery installations.

Transcript Highlights:

• It simply is the price the state pays to borrow money from outside. roads or opening schools.
• It simply is the price the state pays to borrow money from outside financial institutions.
• AB 2350 sets guardrails on rent-now-pay-later financial services for rental housing. ...rails on rent-now-pay-later
• Rent-now-pay-later loans with high interest rates and junk fees can be harmful.
• My members aren't in the rent-now-pay-later space. We saw the analysis.

Summary: The Assembly Banking and Finance Committee met and first approved the consent calendar, which included AB 2028, AB 2425, and committee bill AB 2795, all sent to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee also noted that AB 2558 and AB 2746 had been pulled from the agenda. The chair reviewed hearing procedures, including acceptance of written testimony and rules against disruptive conduct. The committee then heard AB 2116, which would require registration and basic conduct standards for certain small-business financing providers, including merchant cash advance companies, and prohibit confessions of judgment and power-of-attorney provisions before default. Supporters argued the bill would close an oversight gap and improve transparency for small businesses; a small business owner testified that a purported 13% loan turned out to have a 235% APR. Opponents said the bill mixed consumer and commercial regulation and could restrict access to capital, though they supported banning confessions of judgment. The bill passed on a roll call vote and was sent to Appropriations. AB 2243, by Assembly Member Haney, proposed creating a state bank commission to study whether California should establish a state bank or other public financing tools. Supporters said a public banking model could reduce borrowing costs, keep more public money in-state, and better finance housing, infrastructure, and other public priorities; opponents from banking groups raised concerns about taxpayer exposure, deposit guarantees, and the use of public funds and existing lending structures. The bill passed and was sent to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 2350, which would set guardrails on rent-now-pay-later products for rental housing; supporters said these products can lead to high fees, debt, and eviction risk, while industry groups opposed the bill unless amended. AB 2350 passed as amended and was sent to Appropriations. At the end of the meeting, the committee completed roll calls for absent members and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have an extra billion dollars laid around the state to come up with to pay for this?
• about a year, and then we would have to start either raising taxes or cutting services in order to pay
• Is that that Correct, and mental health and everything else that we pay for.
• If we had not saved the money, we would not be able to pay for these items without making major cuts
• the full amount we pay as we determine in each individual case.

Bills: HB4440, HJR1067, HJR1087, HJR1089

Keywords: Medicaid, low-income adults, healthcare, eligibility restrictions, constitutional amendment, Medicaid expansion, SoonerCare, health coverage, federal matching funds, FMAP, Article XXV-A, state question, special election, Title 63, public assistance, healthcare funding, federal-state match, Medicaid eligibility, Oklahoma Constitution, ad valorem