Video & Transcript Research : 'vote reassignment'

Page 12 of 500
KY
Transcript Highlights:
  • All those in favor of the motion vote aye. All opposed vote no. Please call the roll."
  • Senator Berg, do you want to explain your vote?
  • Um, I definitely vote aye.
  • >> A<00:08:55.440> yes<00:08:55.680> vote<00:08:56.240> again.
  • <00:08:57.040> Congratulations, >> A yes vote again.
Summary: The committee first considered Senate Bill 38, sponsored by Sen. Richardson, which would require Medicaid to reimburse pharmacists for services already within their legal scope of practice. Richardson and Taylor Williams of the Kentucky Pharmacists Association argued the bill would improve access to care, especially in rural areas, reduce emergency room use, and lower Medicaid costs by using pharmacists as lower-cost providers. Members asked whether the bill’s language simply aligned Medicaid with an earlier commercial parity law, and Richardson confirmed that it did. He also cited prior study work, research articles, and examples such as strep/flu testing and medication therapy management as covered services. The bill passed unanimously, and several members commented in support, including concerns about pharmacy access and the need for pharmacists to remain available to patients. The committee then took up a concurrent resolution sponsored by Sen. Meredith calling for a feasibility study of a proposed new Medicaid delivery model. Meredith argued that Kentucky’s Medicaid spending is growing unsustainably and that current managed care arrangements are not improving outcomes enough. He proposed an accountable community health care organization, described as a locally owned, not-for-profit public-private partnership combining elements of accountable care models, with the goal of reducing bureaucracy, improving outcomes, and lowering costs. He said the study would examine a five-year program and ultimately test the model in five regions, with initial focus on the Lincoln Trail, Green River, and Barren River area development districts. Members asked about the study timeline, vendor costs, rural versus urban impacts, and provider recruitment; Meredith said the resolution would be studied by November and that no fiscal note had been prepared. The resolution passed unanimously.
KY
Transcript Highlights:
  • I vote no, and we're going to have a roll call vote.
  • substitute as as adopted please vote substitute as as adopted please vote vote<00:16:29.160>
  • Representative Lewis voted yes. Representative Maddox voted yes. Representative Meredith voted yes.
  • Representative Neighbors voted yes. Representative R. White voted yes.
  • Representative Stalker voted yes. Representative Wht voted yes. Chairman: I vote...
Summary: The House Standing Committee on Local Government met for its first meeting of the year, established a quorum, and heard two bills. House Bill 211, sponsored by Representative Chris Lewis, would create a definition for cigar bars and allow indoor cigar smoking in qualifying establishments if they meet criteria such as deriving at least 15% of gross income from cigar-related sales, restricting entry to those 21 and older, prohibiting cigarettes and vaping, and requiring a smoke-free area for deliveries. Lewis and Louisville Metro Council member Anthony Pantini described the bill as a small-business and tourism measure modeled on Tennessee law, while the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network and a St. Elizabeth physician opposed it, arguing it would undermine local smoke-free ordinances and expose patrons and workers to harmful secondhand smoke. Several members raised local-control concerns, and Lewis said he was open to local governments making decisions on less restrictive approaches. The committee adopted a committee substitute and then approved HB 211 on a roll call vote, with multiple members voting yes and several no votes, sending the bill forward as amended. The committee then heard House Bill 160 from Representative Susan Whitten, with Logan Haynes of the Kentucky Manufactured Housing Institute. They said Kentucky faces a housing shortage of roughly 200,000 units and that starter homes are increasingly unaffordable, making manufactured housing an important part of the solution. Whitten said the bill would treat manufactured housing more like site-built housing while still allowing local governments to enforce cosmetic standards such as roof pitch, exterior facade, and foundation material, and she emphasized that HOA, deed, and historical preservation restrictions would remain in place. Haynes argued that modern manufactured homes are federally and state inspected, more energy efficient, faster to build, and more affordable than site-built homes, and he said the bill would not open the door to older-style mobile homes or single-wides except in limited narrow-lot situations. Representatives from the Kentucky League of Cities and the Kentucky Association of Counties expressed concerns about the bill’s current language, saying land-use decisions should remain local and warning that the definition of qualified manufactured home and the bill’s treatment of local standards could have unintended consequences. They said they appreciated Whitten’s willingness to work with them and indicated they hoped to continue negotiating amendments as the bill moved forward. No vote on HB 160 was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.
KY
Transcript Highlights:
  • I'm voting no.
  • Me to vote no, so respectfully I'm voting no.
  • Thank you, Chairman Meredith. me to vote no so respectfully I'm voting me to vote no so respectfully
  • All in favor vote aye; all opposed vote no. Senator Rocky Adams may explain my vote, Mr. Chairman?
  • I vote aye. Senator Carol Douglas, explain my vote? Mr.
Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Health Services opened with the chair welcoming several new members and outlining session rules: hearings would start and end on time, the committee would limit the number of bills heard each meeting, prioritize bills heard during the interim, and generally avoid using the consent calendar except in extreme circumstances. The committee then briefly considered administrative regulations, which were treated as approved if members had no questions. The main item was Senate Bill 14, a measure addressing the 340B drug discount program. The chair said the bill had already passed the Senate in a prior session and had been heard in interim, so he did not present it again. He described the bill as prohibiting drug manufacturers from discriminating against 340B covered entities by refusing 340B pricing when the same drug is offered at that price in the state. He also said the committee would not debate the federal 340B program itself, but would hear testimony on the bill. Hospital leaders and Kentucky Hospital Association representatives testified in support, arguing that 340B savings are essential to rural hospitals, oncology services, transportation support, chronic care, addiction recovery, and new service lines such as chemotherapy and hepatitis treatment. They said the program helps keep care close to home and that manufacturer restrictions on contract pharmacies have reduced access and cost hospitals millions. Opponents from BIO Kentucky and the National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions argued the bill would expand federal law beyond Congress’s intent, create administrative burdens, and not lower patient out-of-pocket costs. The chair repeatedly pressed opponents to address why Kentucky should be denied the same 340B pricing available in other states. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided.
KY

Kentucky 2026 Regular Session

House Standing Committee on Banking and Insurance. (3-25-26)

Banking & Insurance

Transcript Highlights:
  • Any other members of the committee have questions or comments before we move to a vote?
  • Representative McPherson: Explain my vote, please.
  • Representative McPherson: Explain my vote, please. Go ahead. So, two people walk in a room.
  • Explain my vote,<00:13:17.160> please. vote, please. vote, please. Go<00:13:18.280> ahead.
  • So, we appreciate the yes vote. I'd just say this is good consumer protection language.