Transcript Highlights:

• [Music] Welcome to the Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee, dated March 13th, 2025.
• Cloud Area Convention visitors bureau Cloud Area Convention visitors bureau both<00:43:17.800>
• It helps consumers get the right product in the right place at the right time.
• It helps consumers get the right product in the right place at the right time.
• Thank you. retailers who in turn sell the consumers retailers who in turn sell the consumers through<

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , pork, lamb, and goat meat can be sold as individual cuts directly from the producer to the end consumer
• He said the 1,500-foot setback is really for a surface spill and is meant to protect that.
• confident that our food protective confident that our food protective services<00:42:09.200>
• or put into protective or put into protective custody<01:36:00.880> uh<01:36:01.000> we
• <01:36:46.040> in<01:36:46.520> uh Protections in uh Protections in uh 6448<01:36:48.239

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a hearing on HR 18, a resolution urging New Hampshire’s congressional delegation to seek federal changes that would let very small slaughter plants use custom-exempt inspection criteria with a third-party inspector present, so beef, pork, lamb, and goat could be sold as individual cuts directly to consumers. Representative Judy Aron said the resolution was drafted in lieu of state legislation because the issue is governed by USDA rules, and she noted she was also working on an amendment to ensure the measure covered federal “very small” plants. Representative Miner asked for clarification about custom slaughter versus retail sales, and Representative Scully supported the resolution while suggesting language to make clear it applied only to local end consumers. Joyce Brady of the New Hampshire Farm Bureau testified in support, saying the state’s four USDA slaughterhouses and the bottleneck in custom cutting made the issue important. After no further testimony, the chair closed the hearing. The committee then moved into a work session on several bills. For HB 616, members discussed an amendment that had been revised after public comments and Commissioner Jasper’s feedback; Representative Guber said it balanced the competing positions, and Representative Penza and Representative Ger said the language now addressed concerns about animal suffering by allowing euthanasia if a treating veterinarian determines the animal is in extreme suffering. The committee then discussed HB 77, with Representative Penza describing changes to landfill-related standards, including replacing aquifer references with drinking water wells, removing a penalty section, changing discretionary language to mandatory language for the department, and adjusting an in situ soils standard. Members praised the compromise, though Representative Scully raised concerns about the 1,500-foot setback and suggested engineering controls such as berms; Penza responded that current rules do not include such controls and that the setback was intended to address surface spills. Several members said the bill reflected a hard-fought balance and should not be rewritten at the last minute. For HB 505, the freeze-dried food bill, Representative Aron explained that the amendment replaced a simple exemption with a requirement that homestead food operations selling freeze-dried foods from a farm stand, farmers market, or retail food store obtain a homestead food license under RSA 143-A:4. She said the amendment defines freeze-dried foods as fruits, vegetables, and commercially prepared dairy products, and delays the effective date 120 days to allow rulemaking. Members generally supported the approach as a light-touch oversight mechanism for potentially hazardous foods, though Representative Ktoa asked for clarification about how the amendment interacts with existing licensing and inspection exemptions, and Aron clarified that these products would not be exempt from licensing under the relevant law. The committee then turned to HB 250, concerning local authority over dog muzzling, where members broadly supported the amendment as a simple solution, while Representative Ktoa asked about the underlying definition of a vicious dog and whether all listed behaviors would warrant muzzling. The discussion noted that the amendment would allow towns to require muzzling for dogs meeting the statutory definition, while excluding hunting, working, herding, and similar dogs.

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't have an emergency response team out of the Drinking Water Bureau.
• And it's to take available technical, financial, and educational resources.
• If we can protect the homes and the people who live in the communities, we're protecting the community
• Those are in protected areas of protection classes one through seven.
• I think there are protections built into the existing fare plan.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, we also know there are times when consumers need to be protected, and I feel like that's lacking
• and protects abusers.
• I urge you to pass this bill, protect due process, protect families, and protect victims before...
• I urge you to pass this bill, protect due process, protect families, and protect victims before more
• I urge you to pass this bill, protect due process, protect families, and protect victims before more

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on several Judiciary bills, with the largest portion focused on S. 1178/H. 2052 to reduce mass incarceration and end life without parole. People incarcerated at MCI Framingham, MCI Norfolk, and NCCI Gardner described personal growth, rehabilitation, restorative justice work, family separation, and the belief that parole eligibility after long sentences would better reflect public safety and human development. Speakers emphasized that life without parole removes hope and can undermine rehabilitation, while supporters argued that many lifers are older, less likely to reoffend, and could contribute positively if given a chance at parole review. Committee members did not take votes during the hearing. The committee also heard testimony on S. 1139 to restore the statute of limitations for wrongful death claims involving tobacco use, with Sen. Keenan explaining that a recent SJC decision had cut off claims where the injured person did not sue within three years before death. He said the bill would restore families’ ability to seek redress in cases involving long-latency tobacco harms like COPD. Another major topic was S. 1205, which would add abusive litigation to the definition of coercive control in domestic violence law; Sen. Michael Moore said the bill would stop abusers from using repeated court filings to harass and financially burden survivors. The committee also took up S. 1114 on automatic record sealing, with Sen. Friedman and others arguing that the current petition-based process is slow, burdensome, and disproportionately harms people with criminal records, especially Black and Latino residents. Testimony also supported H. 1965/S. 1132 on compensation for wrongful conviction, with advocates and sponsors describing a faster administrative claims process, transitional support, and higher compensation without the current cap. Sen. Payano testified for S. 1241 to expand educational programming for incarcerated emerging adults, saying education reduces recidivism and improves reentry outcomes. A substantial portion of the hearing focused on S. 2522, an update to Massachusetts’ shield law for reproductive and gender-affirming care. Sen. Friedman, the Attorney General’s office, and DPH Commissioner Robbie Goldstein said the bill is needed to strengthen protections against out-of-state legal attacks, protect patient and provider data, clarify enforcement authority, and add a state-level EMTALA-style emergency care requirement. Committee members asked detailed questions about prescription labeling, the prescription monitoring program, attorney discipline, custody and full faith and credit issues, and whether the bill’s enforcement language could create unintended limits or conflicts. The Attorney General’s office said it would provide follow-up written testimony on several technical questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• about financial about financial burden<01:17:56.239> for<01:17:56.639> yeah<01:17:
• <01:29:30.880> from protected from protected from 91a<01:29:32.760> uh<01:29:32.880>
• Hampshire we run the risk of financially Hampshire we run the risk of financially impacting<01:55
• by their category are financially by their category are financially disadvantaged<02:10:29.960><
• <04:09:42.600> equipment put put on protective equipment put put on protective equipment and

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and kittens from reaching consumers and kittens from reaching consumers instead<00:10:24.079>
• <00:10:35.839> safety not only je jeopardizes consumer safety not only je jeopardizes consumer
• of our industry and our local economies and the rights of our consumers.
• and our local economies and the rights of our consumers.
• decisions locally and we want to protect decisions locally and we want to protect that<00:18:44.360

Keywords: Intro: 00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:31 Discussion of SB 122: 02:30 Roll Call Vote on SB 122: 26:47, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Agriculture Committee took up Senate Bill 122, a measure dealing with pet stores, breeders, and the scope of local regulation. The chair explained the bill was intended to balance private business rights with local control, and said he wanted to clarify definitions such as qualified breeder, local authority, and where fees and fines would go. He also said he would work on a floor amendment and noted concerns about whether the bill would allow localities to outright ban pet stores or instead only regulate them. The committee first adopted a committee substitute by motion and voice vote. Supporters of the bill, including representatives from Petland and an attorney who had worked on animal-related regulation in Ohio, argued that the bill would create statewide standards, protect responsible pet retailers from what they described as politically motivated local bans, and preserve consumer choice. They said local governments would still be able to inspect, require documentation, and enforce licensing, but not shut businesses down without due process. A senator from Campbell County asked whether the bill would interfere with strong local ordinances; supporters responded that the bill would set standards higher than USDA rules and still allow local regulation, while opposing local bans. Opposition came from the Kentucky League of Cities and representatives of Kentucky animal care and control agencies. KLC said local decisions should remain at the local level and noted that several cities and one county already had ordinances that could be affected; it also said the bill was opposed by its board and might overlap with pending litigation. Animal control representatives said the bill did not clearly define breeder verification or enforcement responsibility, could restrict local authority, and did not address animal care conditions or consumer transparency. After questions and debate, the committee voted on the bill; the roll call ended in a 5-5 tie, and Senate Bill 122 failed to pass out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I actually have a survey here from the Bureau of Business and Economic Research from UNM.
• This is from the executive summary from the Bureau of Business and Economic Research from UNM.
• Of course, the Financial Disclosure Act that the Speaker mentioned, Mr. Speaker, would apply.
• Act, also makes recommendations to improve consumer protections from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
• Act, with recommendations to improve consumer protections.

Bills: HB145, HB164, HJR6, HR1, HB20, HB65, HB66, HB80, HB166, HB295, HB306, SB29, SB37, HB99, HB206, HB213, HB270, HJR5, SB104, SB193, HJM2, HJM3, HJM1, HM7, HM17, HM4, HM22, HM23, HM24, HM26, HM2, HM16, HM32, HM13, HM47, HM20, HM51, HM1, HM31, HM35, HM36, HM46, HM53, HM54, HM39, HM11, HM14, HM21, HM34, HM50

Keywords: high-wage jobs, tax credit, job creation, New Mexico, economic development, lobbying, transparency, public records, government oversight, accountability, constitutional amendment, legislative sessions, veto override, New Mexico legislature, session length, House Resolution 1, HR1, House investigatory subcommittee, special committee, legislative investigation

Transcript Highlights:

• There's all kinds of constitutional protections.
• I think it's a fair protection.
• It's a fair protection, should you say?
• I am here on behalf of the Solano County Farm Bureau and the California Farm Bureau.
• California Farm Bureau is in support.

Summary: The committee first heard SB 753, which would modernize California’s shopping cart recovery rules by allowing cities and counties to return abandoned carts directly to retailers, recover documented retrieval costs, and avoid the current impound-and-wait process. The author and supporters, including San Jose officials and the League of California Cities, said the bill would help clear streets, sidewalks, and waterways and reduce local costs. Grocers and retailers opposed the measure unless amended, arguing it would turn cart retrieval into a new cost burden and could create incentives for cities to charge too much for stolen property. After extensive discussion about notice periods, cost caps, and local ordinances, the committee adopted amendments and passed the bill 6-0 as amended. The committee then took up SB 445, which would speed up permitting and approvals needed for high-speed rail by requiring early engagement, setting rules for third-party coordination, and creating a dispute-resolution process. The author said the bill was narrowed from an earlier, broader transit proposal and was intended to reduce delays caused by utilities, local governments, and other entities. Supporters said permitting bottlenecks add major costs and delays to infrastructure projects, while opponents from utilities, cities, counties, telecoms, and special districts raised concerns about safety, reliability, affordability, and the need to review the pending amendments. The bill passed 8-1 to the Utilities and Energy Committee. The committee also heard SB 9, a narrower housing bill focused on accessory dwelling units. The author explained that it would require local ADU ordinances to be submitted to HCD for review and would make state standards control if a local agency fails to submit a compliant ordinance or respond to HCD findings. Supporters from housing and YIMBY groups said the bill would improve enforcement of state ADU law and prevent local barriers from slowing housing production. There was no opposition, and the bill passed 6-0. The committee then began hearing SB 79, which would allow more housing near major transit stops; the author and supporters framed it as a response to the housing shortage and transit underuse, and the hearing continued with extensive support testimony as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• The financial structure of the court-appointed counsel system is a great economic value to the state.
• After the 2008 financial crisis, other justice partners recently...
• Chief Bureau of Firearms Department of Justice.
• The Bureau Chief, Bureau of Firearms, Department of Justice.
• And is that information available on the website or publicly consumable?

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so I think the Farm Bureau has an excellent point.
• And so I think the Farm Bureau has an excellent point.
• And balancing the protection of our workers, the protection of our students, the protection also of our
• SB 954 also goes further with labor protections compared to, SB 954 also goes further with labor protections
• These are necessary protections.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of where the consumer views the property.
• Such as human trafficking and financial fraud.
• protect the public.
• about protecting the food supply.
• We're trying to protect it—an economic outbreak.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to make sure that we are protecting our citizens, protecting our kids, To make sure that we are
• protecting our citizens, protecting our kids, because certainly they shouldn't feel like they need to
• need protection.
• All of our patients who need to consume but can’t consume inside their own homes because they rent.
• I'm just simply asking for protection for children who cannot protect themselves.

Bills: SB1004, SB1012, SB1100, SB1110, SB1170, SB1213, SB1317, SB1402, SB1413, SB1416, SB1476, SB1511, SB1573, SB1655, SB1656, SB1709, SB1720, SB1723, SB1725, SCR1040

Keywords: sex offender registration, sex offender registry, A.R.S. 13-3821, sexual offenses, public safety, GPS monitoring, electronic monitoring, transient offender, homeless registrant, online identifiers, internet identifiers, sheriff notification, Department of Public Safety, DPS, DNA collection, juvenile adjudication, kidnapping of a minor, unlawful imprisonment of a minor, lifetime registration, community notification

Transcript Highlights:

• Ryoto from Hawaii Farm Bureau and support.
• I'm speaking on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau.
• Brian Moto from the Farm Bureau is opposed.
• really warrants um some protective really warrants um some protective measures<01:24:57.040>
• <01:25:08.760> is Bureau is Bureau is opposed<01:25:10.639> Tim Lions<01:25:14.040>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees heard testimony on Senate Bill 103, relating to electric vehicle batteries, and then moved to Senate Bill 995, relating to renewable fuel. On SB 103, the Department of Health and the State Energy Office supported the measure, and Redwood Materials said it supported the bill’s intent but requested an amendment to add a battery recycler to the commission. Other testimony on SB 103 included support from several individuals and organizations, with one opponent noted. A committee member also raised a possible deadline change requested by the Alliance of Automobile Innovation for future work on the measure. The bulk of the hearing focused on SB 995, which would create tax incentives for sustainable aviation fuel and related renewable fuel production. Supporters included the Hawaii Renewable Fuels Coalition, Pono Pacific, Hawaiian Airlines/Alaska Airlines, the Tax Foundation, PAR Hawaii, Pacific Biodiesel, and others. Supporters said the bill would help build a local SAF industry, encourage camelina and other feedstocks, and advance decarbonization goals. Several supporters also said they had proposed amendments or technical comments and stood on their written testimony. Opposition testimony argued the bill could allow toxic waste feedstocks, such as construction and demolition waste, into fuel production, and questioned whether the incentives would truly benefit Hawaii farmers or consumers. One opponent said the bill’s benefits could flow to the producer and to imported feedstocks rather than to local agriculture, and another questioned the scale of local land and water available for camelina production. Committee members pressed witnesses on acreage, water use, expected yields, the role of PAR Hawaii’s refinery investment, and whether the state would be subsidizing a business decision that might not produce significant local fuel. No vote or final action was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau found that the largest banks charge between $400
• > Financial For example, the Consumer Financial For example, the Consumer Financial Protection
• watchdogs they would fire at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
• <04:37:46.320> It Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
• It Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, May 20, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much. existing law uh adequately protects the existing law uh adequately protects the
• asked about your financial asked about your financial ability<01:19:20.760> um<01:19:21.199
• they're looking for the financial they're looking for the financial ability<01:19:52.880> we<
• Coalition for child protective Coalition for child protective reform<01:52:11.400> and<01
• asking the legislative reference Bureau asking the legislative reference Bureau to<02:25:00.160>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 1324, which would require the Judiciary to contract for legal services for residential tenants in landlord-tenant disputes and allow attorneys, paralegals, and law students to provide those services, with an appropriation. The Department of the Attorney General recommended removing reference to Hawaii Public Housing Authority tenants because HPHA eviction proceedings are administrative and could conflict with the bill. Hawaii Appleseed and other testifiers strongly supported the measure, citing studies showing much higher tenant retention when counsel is available, and suggested adding notice of the right to counsel at key points such as rent increases, eviction notices, and lease signing. The committee adopted amendments, including the Attorney General’s suggested change and a technical amendment, and passed the bill out with a recommendation to move it forward; members voted aye, with one member voting with reservations and several excused. The committee then heard House Bill 126 on property forfeiture, which would increase transparency and accountability in civil asset forfeiture by clarifying covered property, changing disposition rules, and removing language requiring liberal construction of the forfeiture act. The Attorney General said forfeiture remains an important law enforcement tool and that the bill would not impair its use. The Office of the Public Defender supported the measure but argued civil forfeiture is broadly problematic because many people cannot meaningfully challenge it and are not entitled to counsel. Honolulu Police Department opposed the bill, saying forfeiture is useful in fighting illegal activity and that added procedures would delay enforcement and reduce operational funding from forfeiture proceeds. Community Alliance on Prisons, the Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, and other supporters urged reform or abolition of civil forfeiture, citing transparency concerns and the risk of abuse. No vote on HB 126 was taken in the portion provided. The final measure discussed was House Bill 166, which would require the state to defend professionally licensed or certified state employees in certain civil actions, allow employees to hire their own counsel at their own expense, and set a process for the Attorney General to transfer or withdraw representation if the state declines to defend. Testimony from the Hawaii Association for Justice and labor representatives was in strong support, describing the bill as a negotiated clarification that balances employee protections with accountability and noting it had passed previously but died in conference. The transcript cuts off before any committee action on HB 166.

Transcript Highlights:

• in protection of species. in protection of species.
• bureau was self-funded out of the fund. bureau was self-funded out of the fund.
• protect our timber owners from theft. protect our timber owners from theft.
• This act actually is a critical piece of consumer protection.
• This act actually is a critical piece of consumer protection.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the protection of fraud.
• Um, the protection of fraud.
• I'm the title bureau Jennifer Gornert.
• awareness and consumer protection in regards to that fraud aspect.
• awareness and consumer provide consumer awareness and consumer protection<01:14:24.159> in<01

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• deal with generally deal with advertisers, broadband business organizations, commercial activity, consumer
• protection and some consumer services.
• We deal with part of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
• We deal with their Division of Consumer Services and their division of licensing under consumer Services
• I think protections are contributions through our school districts.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Today I rise to support AJR 29 to protect our fundamental right to vote.
• Today I rise to support AJR 29 to protect our fundamental right to vote.
• The Voting Rights Act was the beginning of those protections.
• People die to protect and advance this right.
• This bill preserves environmental protections...

Summary: The Assembly met in session after a quorum call and opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a ceremonial observance for Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. Members from multiple caucuses spoke in support of House Resolution 107, which designates May as AAPI Heritage Month, emphasizing the community’s contributions, resilience, and the need to confront discrimination and hate. The resolution was adopted, and the chamber then recognized 13 honorees for the 2026 AAPI Heritage Month celebration, highlighting leaders in education, business, labor, media, cultural preservation, and public service. After guest introductions, the Assembly took up a series of bills. Measures discussed included HOA reserve funding for common interest developments (AB 2050), professional review requirements for lawsuits against design professionals (AB 2106), direct home delivery of enteral formula (AB 1794), expanded CalWORKs-related support for student parents (AB 1829), longer insurance moratoriums for wildfire survivors (AB 2038), election cybersecurity (AB 2281), medical privacy protections for reproductive and gender-affirming care (AB 2448), water district board compensation (AB 2568), county public contract change-order authority (AB 1658), and several other education, health, and licensing bills. Most measures passed with broad support; AB 2050 passed 44-6, AB 2038 passed 45-8, AB 2448 passed 49-13, and AB 1658 passed 61-2, while several others passed unanimously or near-unanimously. The Assembly also adopted AJR 29, a resolution opposing a federal executive order affecting vote-by-mail and affirming California’s mail voting system. The resolution prompted extended debate over election integrity, voter access, and federal versus state authority, with supporters arguing mail voting is secure and accessible and opponents calling for stronger voter list maintenance and verification. The resolution passed 47-13. In addition, ACR 141 and ACR 123 were adopted by voice vote after co-author roll calls, and the chamber continued or passed on numerous other file items as it worked through the daily file.

Transcript Highlights:

• These features are matters of consumer preference, not product safety defects. 1748 protects the ability
• It's not a matter of consumer preference because I am a gun guy, and every consumer firearm I know has
• you are a consumer and make a consumer choice, great.
• I don't see that listed as those protected holidays.
• I probably would have protected those kids at all costs.