Transcript Highlights:

• We'll be back here at G3 at the Capitol at 9 a.m. tomorrow to walk in and move the bill and mark it up
• uh to walk in and uh move the<01:13:49.760> bill<01:13:50.239> and<01:13:51.120> mark
• <01:13:53.280> The the bill and mark it up and passage.
• The the bill and mark it up and passage.

Bills: HF2438

Keywords: transportation finance, transportation policy, MnDOT, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Department of Public Safety, Metropolitan Council, highway funding, trunk highway fund, county state-aid highway fund, municipal state-aid street fund, state aid roads, local roads, bridge funding, road construction, transit funding, passenger rail, freight rail, aviation, airport development, safe routes to school

Transcript Highlights:

• miner, second-generation steel worker in Steelworkers Local 1938, and the 22nd of this month will mark
• 00:03:56.599> will 1938 and the 22nd of this month will 1938 and the 22nd of this month will Mark
• c><00:03:58.560> for<00:03:58.720> me<00:04:00.000> um<00:04:00.959> I Mark
• 29 years in Iron mining for me um I Mark 29 years in Iron mining for me um I want<00:04:01.319> to

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 3030 was taken up for discussion and amended with the A1 author’s amendment before moving forward. The bill was presented as an Iron Range package with three parts: a 26-week unemployment insurance extension for workers laid off by Cleveland-Cliffs, and two mining-related provisions dealing with safe storage of reactive mine waste and a site-specific sulfite standard. The authors said the bill was intended both to help laid-off workers immediately and to support the long-term future of mining jobs in the region. Testimony was overwhelmingly supportive of the unemployment extension and the broader goal of preserving Iron Range jobs and communities. Representatives of affected workers, union leaders, a county commissioner, a tribal elder, and RAMS all described the layoffs as potentially long-term and warned of broader economic harm to families, local businesses, schools, and the region if mining jobs continue to decline. Several testifiers emphasized that mining is central to the Iron Range economy and argued that the bill would give workers time and hope while also helping keep people in the region. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency testified that it generally supported the bill’s intent but raised concerns about the environmental rulemaking language in Article 2, Section 2. MPCA said the provision would amount to a new major rulemaking, would require significant time and resources, and should be reviewed by the Environment, Natural Resources, Finance and Policy Committee. During member questions, one legislator said there was strong support for the UI extension in Article 1 but expressed concern about the environmental issues in Article 2 and asked why those provisions were not being reviewed by the environment committee. The meeting ended with public testimony closed and member questions beginning; no final vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, um I had asked and maybe now have identified—I don't have this chart marked up like I did the other
• ><00:40:59.599> have<00:40:59.839> this<00:41:00.359> chart<00:41:01.359> marked
• <00:41:01.760> up the um I don't have this chart marked up the um I don't have this chart
• marked up like<00:41:02.240> I<00:41:02.560> did<00:41:03.520> um<00:41:04.160><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So presumptive eligibility, even if Mark Zuckerberg's kid needed coverage, we'd probably be able to get
• Um so presumptive eligibility even<00:58:33.839> if<00:58:34.000> Mark<00:58:34.240>
• Zuckerberg's<00:58:34.880> kid<00:58:35.200> needed even if Mark Zuckerberg's kid
• needed even if Mark Zuckerberg's kid needed coverage,<00:58:36.000> we<00:58:36.079> we'd

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee met on March 20, 2025, to hear a series of Human Services and Health resolutions. HCR 146, which asks the Department of Human Services to apply for and implement the Elderly Simplified Application Project, drew strong support from disability, public health, and hunger advocates. Testifiers emphasized that the measure could create a more uniform benefits application, reduce repeated paperwork, extend certification periods from one year to three years, and ease burdens on both applicants and DHS staff. DHS said it stood on its written testimony and was available for questions. The committee also heard that a universal application could help people with disabilities avoid delays and denials caused by complex or duplicative forms. The committee then heard HR 170/HCR 174, which requests review of Aloha-based learning programs for youth in the juvenile legal system. Supporters from Opportunity for Youth Action Hawaii and DebtFree Justice Hawaii said the resolution would help advance restorative justice, community service, and culturally grounded rehabilitation, especially if youth fees and fines are reduced or eliminated. Testimony also supported HR 133/HCR 139, which asks the Office of Wellness and Resilience to report on the developmental needs of children born during the COVID-19 pandemic. Witnesses from the developmental disabilities council, the Office of Wellness and Resilience, the Hawaii Community Foundation, and others said the pandemic’s trauma and behavioral impacts justify a multidisciplinary, evidence-based report, and the office requested more time to complete its findings, suggesting a deadline at the end of 2026. The committee also heard HR 88/HCR 92, proposing a two-year homelessness sanctuary pilot program in Honolulu. One testifier described sleeping in a car and said the pilot could provide a safer option, while the Statewide Office on Homelessness and Housing Solutions said it supported the intent but stressed that a sanctuary is still an unsheltered situation and should lead people toward permanent housing. HCR 180, calling for collaboration among homelessness and law enforcement agencies, received comments that many of the issues are already being addressed locally. HR 103/HCR 107, which would convene a working group to strengthen Title 9 protections, received support from education, women’s, and LGBTQ advocates, who asked for student and queer representation on the working group and said federal Title 9 changes make state action important. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided, and the committee moved from one resolution to the next after testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Otherwise, when municipalities adopt this, there's going to be a big question mark for who's responsible
• Otherwise, when municipalities adopt this, there's going to be a big question mark for who's responsible
• there's going to be a big question mark there's going to be a big question mark for<01:15:53.600>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee first took up House Bill 507, which concerns the timeline for credentialing mental health care providers. Members discussed and approved an amendment that removed section 2 and changed the bill’s effective date to January 1. A motion for ought to pass as amended was made, seconded, and approved by a 6-0 vote, with Representative Miles assigned to write the committee report. The bulk of the meeting focused on House Bill 705, a price-transparency measure requiring insurance-related data reporting and uniform formatting. Committee members and a representative from Anthem discussed how the bill would interact with federal requirements, including a recent presidential executive order and anticipated CMS guidance on uniformity standards. Anthem testified that the federal timeline was uncertain, that final rules could take months, and that the machine-readable files involved are complex and costly to produce. Some members argued the state should mirror federal standards but wait for final federal guidance; others said the bill should create a firm state requirement and not leave everything to rulemaking. The main unresolved issue was timing. Members debated whether the bill should be effective upon passage, apply to plan years beginning January 1, 2026, or be delayed until after federal guidance is finalized, with several references to a possible six-month implementation window after final federal rules. No final vote was taken on HB 705 in the portion provided; instead, the committee planned to revisit the bill the next morning after language was rewritten and circulated, with a straw vote anticipated before the executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll mark that hard no. Representative Long, yes, and the chair, yes. The motion passes 12 to 4.
• representative Howard no represent re hard hard hard no<00:17:10.880> I'll<00:17:11.039> mark
• <00:17:11.360> that<00:17:11.679> hard no I'll mark that hard no I'll mark that hard

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1/CAC 1, which concerned gubernatorial succession and incapacity. Members supporting an ITL motion said the bill was not workable as written and that New Hampshire already has a constitutional structure that has functioned for more than 200 years. Others noted the state’s two-year gubernatorial term and said the existing protections were sufficient. The committee voted 16-0 to inexpedient to legislate, and the item was placed on consent. The committee then considered House Bill 96, the energy code bill. Supporters argued that updating the code would reduce long-term energy costs, improve climate resilience, help the construction industry, and keep New Hampshire eligible for federal funding. Opponents of ITL said the bill was premature because the 2024 energy code was already under review, housing costs were a major concern, and the testimony on costs was conflicting and not well supported. The committee voted 12-4 for ITL, and a minority report was requested. House Bill 161, dealing with the Native American Affairs Commission, was also sent to ITL by a 16-0 vote and placed on consent. Members cited serious concerns about vacancies, expired terms, missing annual reports, and whether the commission was functioning effectively. Several members said the committee lacked the expertise to resolve the underlying cultural and intergovernmental disputes and that the issues were beyond the committee’s scope. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 428 and adopted Amendment 0328 by a 16-0 vote. The amendment would preserve municipalities’ ability to make administrative building-code amendments, such as permit, inspection, occupancy, and fee procedures, while still barring local governments from setting higher construction standards than the state code. Testimony emphasized that the amendment was meant to clean up and consolidate related language and make the bill administratively workable. After the amendment passed, members discussed the bill in amended form, with supporters and opponents focusing on housing costs, local control, flood protection, and the risk of inconsistent local codes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Scott Miller, who is the Director of Compliance and Marketing. and one of our professional partners, Mark
• Absolutely, I will pass that down to Mark Finlower actually. Thank you. Good afternoon.
• My name is Mark Finlower, and I'm with Rudd and Wisdom Consulting Actuaries, and our firm provides the
• So anybody that hits a 20-year mark now will get nothing.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have Mark Balado in support. Jacqueline Ambrose in support. Kevin Facenda in support.
• have um Cena PR providing comments<00:05:23.240> we<00:05:23.400> have<00:05:23.680> Mark
• <00:05:24.000> balado<00:05:25.000> in<00:05:25.199> support comments we have Mark
• balado in support comments we have Mark balado in support Jacqueline<00:05:26.319> Ambrose<00

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills related to cesspools, Red Hill cleanup, water testing, environmental governance, and beverage container recycling. For SB 472, SB 501, SB 675, and SB 958 on cesspools, most testimony supported accelerating cesspool conversion and expanding Department of Health capacity, though the Attorney General flagged a single-subject issue on SB 472 and the Department of Health and others raised concerns about funding, program structure, and coordination. Supporters emphasized cesspools as a major water pollution source and urged earlier deadlines, while some testimony questioned the tax credit approach and asked for clearer grant and staffing language. For SB 639 on underground storage tanks and Red Hill cleanup, the Department of Health asked for clearer cleanup standards and noted limits on laboratory detection and sampling, while supporters argued the bill would create a binding legal standard for remediation and help prevent reopening of the facility. Testimony also stressed the need to remove all contamination to the extent practicable and protect aquifers and drinking water. SB 664 on water quality testing drew strong support from residents and water advocates, but the Department of Health warned the measure could duplicate existing authority and create significant cost; the Board of Water Supply supported the concept while noting it would expand responsibilities into private-property testing. SB 674 on environmental advisory council and waste reduction received mixed testimony: supporters said it would help address landfill siting and protect water resources, while industry groups requested changes to advisory council membership and exemptions for certain products, and one witness opposed the measure. For SB 1067 on deposit beverage container recycling, the Attorney General said the grant language may be constitutionally problematic because it lacks standards, while industry testimony both supported the recycling goals and asked for amendments, including broader representation on the advisory council and clearer treatment of compostable and packaging-related issues. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so do you have some comments on the effectiveness of the delivery tax and if it’s meeting its mark
• the delivery tax um and if it's meeting the delivery tax um and if it's meeting its<00:56:30.400> mark
• 56:31.640> Mr<00:56:31.880> chair<00:56:32.319> it<00:56:32.440> is its mark
• thank you Mr chair it is its mark thank you Mr chair it is underperforming<00:56:33.680> one<

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Minnesota House Transportation Finance and Policy Committee met on January 22, 2025, for its first meeting and took up House File 5, introduced by Representative Jim Joy and moved to the Tax Committee. Joy said the bill would make Minnesota more affordable by eliminating the Social Security tax, repealing the motor fuels tax inflator, removing the retail delivery fee, and changing vehicle-related taxes and metro-area sales tax allocations. Committee fiscal staff reviewed the bill’s fiscal effects, including impacts on the general fund, the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund, the Transportation Advancement Account, and the split between Metropolitan Council and metropolitan counties. Testimony was largely divided along stakeholder lines. The Minnesota Grocers Association and Minnesota Propane Association supported repealing the retail delivery fee, arguing it creates administrative burdens, requires costly software changes, and raises costs that are passed on to consumers; propane representatives said the fee is especially burdensome because most of their deliveries are exempt but still require tracking and reporting. In contrast, the League of Minnesota Cities, Minnesota Association of Small Cities, Metro Cities, and Minnesota Association of Townships emphasized the need for stable, predictable transportation funding for local roads and said they support the Transportation Advancement Account and related revenue streams, though some were neutral on the exact source of funding. The League and small cities groups said local governments need reliable annual revenue and that past funding has been inconsistent. Committee members asked about who pays the delivery fee, its exemptions, and how much revenue it has generated versus earlier forecasts. Fiscal staff said current estimates for delivery fee revenue are below original projections, and explained the fee’s exemptions and $100 transaction threshold. Representative Joy said his intent was to keep small cities and townships whole as the bill moves forward. No vote was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the bill was heard and referred as noted at the outset.

Transcript Highlights:

• And nothing in this would require someone to opt in, unlike my school, where now I get marked as unexcused
• And nothing in this would require someone to opt in, unlike my school, where now I get marked as unexcused
• And nothing in this would require someone to opt in unlike my school, where now I get marked as unexcused

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And Reverend Mark Werner from Emmanuel Lutheran Church, opposed. So let's start with those people.
• I'm Pastor Mark Werner from Emmanuel Lutheran Church, Alloway Township, Salem County.
• In just weeks, our nation will mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, a document

Keywords: 1146, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Mark me unmarked. I probably won't be here. But thank you for the bill. Ms.
• Mark me unmarked. I probably won't be here. But thank you for the bill. Ms.
• Mark probably would be here. But thank you for the bill. Ms. Carter, thank you for being here.

Summary: The House and Governmental Affairs Committee met on Senate Bill 123, a proposed constitutional amendment to create a legislative process for removing judges for cause. Senator Morris said the bill was needed because of uncertainty in the current Constitution about whether impeachment applies to judges, given the Judiciary Commission’s role in judicial discipline. He argued the measure would provide a clearer, higher-threshold accountability mechanism, and the committee adopted a technical amendment renumbering provisions and later clarified that the bill uses a majority vote in the House and two-thirds in the Senate, consistent with impeachment-style thresholds. Much of the hearing centered on testimony from Anna Carter and her family, who supported the bill after the murder of Jacob Carter in New Orleans. They described his death and other cases they said showed judges releasing dangerous offenders despite repeated violations, missed electronic-monitoring check-ins, and other warning signs. They argued the bill would create a last-resort accountability tool when judicial decisions or supervision failures lead to preventable harm. Several committee members expressed sympathy and said the testimony highlighted serious problems in the justice system, though some also suggested the bill should address district attorneys, electronic-monitoring oversight, or broader systemic issues. Opposition came from members who warned the proposal was overly broad, could become a political tool, and might conflict with existing constitutional provisions governing impeachment and judicial discipline. They argued the Judiciary Commission and Supreme Court already provide a disciplinary framework and that the bill could chill judicial independence or create due-process concerns. The ACLU’s Sarah Whittington also opposed the bill, noting technical inconsistencies in the draft, questioning why impeachment had not been tried first, and arguing the measure singled out judicial discretion while leaving other elected officials’ discretion untouched. The committee took no final vote on the bill during the hearing, but did adopt the technical amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• People laughing, people, hospital, question mark, because even in lighter moments, Senator Hansen's work
• And I have a picture of him, John McAllister, and Mark Colderman, who were the three people who overrode
• recognize our head sergeant at arms, Scott Black, for his lifetime of exceptional public service as we mark

Bills: LB764, LB815A, LB839, LB888, LB955, LB972A, LB1029, LB1087, LB1091, LB1126A, LB1181A, LB1237A, LB1261A, LB304A, LB762, LB889, LB929, LB966, LB1022, LB1187, LR508

Keywords: law enforcement, correctional services, Department of Correctional Services, corrections officers, state prison employees, peace officer, certification, police standards, training academy, Nebraska Commission on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, Nebraska Police Standards Advisory Council, criminal justice, correctional staff, conditional officer, law enforcement authority, public safety, LB815A, LB815, appropriation, appropriations bill

Transcript Highlights:

• I also want to thank Chairman Olson for meeting with our chief investment officer, Mark Steed, to discuss
• Chair, we have Mark Barnes against. Mr. Barnes, Mr.
• Chairman and members of the committee, for the record, Mark Barnes here on behalf of the Pinal County

Bills: HB2143, HB2273, HB2290, HB2373, HB2784, HB2794, HB4037

Keywords: public safety, retirement system, investments, trust fund, board of trustees, financial report, income tax rebate, Pinal County, taxpayer eligibility, state revenue, financial assistance, transaction privilege tax, business location, tangible personal property, shared vehicle, sourcing, income tax, veterans, donations, tax refunds

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee first set aside House Bill 2794 at the sponsor’s request and then took up House Bill 2290, which would clarify Arizona transaction privilege tax sourcing rules for tangible personal property by specifying that an order is received at a seller’s business location and that server location does not control sourcing. The sponsor said the bill codifies existing, historic treatment and would provide certainty for taxpayers, while the League of Arizona Cities and Towns opposed it, arguing it would be a major departure from current practice, could shift revenue away from rural communities, and could create multiple tax rates for a single transaction. The Department of Revenue said it was neutral, acknowledged ongoing ambiguity and administrative complexity, and explained that a 2023 draft ruling had been based on a legal analysis but was never finalized. Several business and association witnesses supported the bill as necessary to prevent inconsistent audits and to preserve origin-based sourcing for in-state sellers. After extended debate, the committee passed HB 2290 on a 5-3 vote, with one member absent. The committee then heard House Bill 2373, which would add a space on the individual income tax return for taxpayers to voluntarily direct part of a refund to the Veterans Donations Fund or a veterans service organization fund. The sponsor and a representative of veterans advocacy groups described it as a simple, voluntary way to support veterans organizations and local projects. No opposition was raised, and the bill was approved unanimously by the members present, 8-0, with one absent. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 2143, a technical change to Public Safety Personnel Retirement System law that would limit the 5% ownership cap to publicly traded corporations. PSPRS representatives said the change would reduce compliance costs and avoid unnecessary workarounds while maintaining existing investment safeguards and diversification rules. Members discussed that ASRS does not have the same cap and that PSPRS already has broader limits on concentration risk. The bill was presented as an administrative cleanup measure, and discussion focused on clarifying that it would not increase investment risk.

Transcript Highlights:

• recall, none of the rules currently for this General Assembly, the subcommittees didn't last year mark
• incorporate into the substitutes, and then, of course, you know, the committee will have the opportunity to mark
• Mark James, I'm the director in Missouri Department of Public Safety.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I know Mark talked about this morning.
• We did get it marked up and kind of moving forward in that direction, but it died and didn't advance.
• But I wanted to bring up one or two quick things in the introduction I saw online by Mark...

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe it might be marked fiscal, so it might be going to a probes.
• Marked fiscal, so it might be going to a probes. This bill will probably change.
• Mark Fenstermaker for the California Association of Resource Conservation Districts, in support.

Summary: The committee first heard SB 14, which would direct state agencies to reduce single-use plastics and improve waste diversion at state facilities by updating integrated waste management plans, increasing reusable foodware use, reducing paper purchasing, and requiring better employee education and recycling/composting practices. Supporters from the California Compost Coalition, Republic Services, Waste Management, and others said the bill would help build composting and recycling markets and let the state lead by example. Several groups that had opposed earlier versions said they were now neutral after amendments, including the removal of a 90% requirement. The bill was moved out on a due pass as amended recommendation. The committee then took up SB 326 on wildfire mitigation. The bill would create a framework for Cal Fire to evaluate the risk-reduction benefits of fuels management and landscape resilience investments, and it would accelerate implementation of Zone Zero defensible-space standards, including grants for local enforcement and broader application to rental and sale properties and post-fire reconstruction. Support came from Stanford climate researcher Michael Mastrandrea and several local government, insurance, and climate groups. With no opposition, the bill passed as amended to Appropriations. Next, SB 34 on port emissions and the South Coast Air Quality Management District drew extensive testimony. The author said the bill was narrowed by committee amendments to preserve the ports’ ability to reduce emissions while preventing cargo throughput caps and addressing concerns about automation, local control, and the timeline for port clean-air planning. Supporters included ILWU, business groups, and port-related stakeholders, while the South Coast AQMD and many environmental and community organizations opposed it, arguing it would weaken public-health protections and set a bad precedent. After lengthy debate, the committee approved the bill on a due pass as amended vote to Transportation, with some members voting no and others abstaining. The committee also heard SB 279, which would expand composting options for farmers and small community composters by allowing limited on-farm composting after large biomass events and increasing the amount small operations may process and sell. Supporters said the bill would help address agricultural waste, expand composting capacity, and reduce landfill disposal. Commercial composting representatives opposed it, warning that the bill could create regulatory inequities, strand recent investments in permitted facilities, and allow too much unregulated food waste. Despite those concerns, the bill passed to Appropriations on a due pass vote. The transcript also briefly referenced SB 613 on upstream methane emissions data, described as having no opposition and intended to improve tracking of imported oil and gas emissions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Mark Newton with the Legislative Analyst's Office.
• Mark Newton of the Legislative Analyst's Office continued: The first issue is the pharmacy benefit manager
• Mark Lowry from the Orange County Food Bank and Orange County Diaper Bank.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held an informational hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, focusing first on the Commission on Behavioral Health, then EMSA, and then the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). The Department of Finance said the state faces a third consecutive deficit and that the May Revision includes difficult trade-offs, including proposed eliminations or reversions of some behavioral health and public health funds. The LAO echoed concern about the structural deficit and said it was still awaiting some budget details before offering a full analysis. For the Commission on Behavioral Health, Finance proposed eliminating $20 million in Mental Health Wellness Act funds, arguing the money would help offset General Fund costs and noting future Proposition 1 innovation funding. The commission strongly opposed the cut, saying it would eliminate or delay launch-ready grants for early childhood supports, full-service partnerships, and peer respite, and would eventually end ongoing grant programming. Several advocates and commissioners testified that the funds support underserved communities and that Proposition 1 is not a substitute for the existing programs. The chair asked Finance to look for alternatives, but no vote was taken. EMSA presented mostly technical budget adjustments: increased authority for the California Poison Control System, a correction to EMSIS funding, and a reappropriation for enterprise services and data management. CDPH then reviewed a broader set of May Revision proposals, including reversions from the California Reducing Disparities Project, workforce development, STD prevention, hepatitis C prevention, hospice, and extreme heat funding, as well as a new generative AI pilot for health facility survey reporting. Members raised concerns about cuts to CRDP and gender health equity programs, especially because many grants are mid-contract and serve underserved communities; CDPH said the reversions were part of solving the deficit and that CRDP had been successful, while also clarifying that abortion.ca.gov would not be eliminated. Public comment was overwhelmingly opposed to the CRDP and related cuts, with many speakers describing the programs as life-saving and cost-effective. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 503, relating to the establishment of an electronic registry of livestock marks and brands
• An electronic registry of livestock marks and brands, Bill 503. The secretary will call the roll.
• They are marked with an 'S' next to their name, and they are unable to cast a ballot without proving

Bills: SJR12, SJR37, SB7, SB8, SB16, SB27, SB108, SB125, SB207, SB251, SB318, SB371, SB379, SB396, SB406, SB472, SB503, SB533, SB578, SB599, SB608, SB617, SB621, SB689, SB707, SB763, SB836, SB854, SB856, SB857, SB875, SB878, SB906, SB922, SB942, SB965, SB985, SB988, SB1021, SB1059, SB1084, SB1098, SB1185, SB1188, SB1202, SB1207, SB1307, SB1321, SB1330, SB1366, SB1388, SB1396, SB1453, SB1484, SB1497, SB1498, SB1535, SB1563, SB1596, SB1610, SB1619, SB1737, SB1738, SB1741, SB1816, SB1822, SB1841, SB1939, SB2188, SJR36, SJR12, SJR37, SJR81, SJR50, SCR22, SCR12, SCR39, SB875, SB318, SB707, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB1497, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB1215, SB1302, SB856, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB608, SB955, SB957, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB541, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB1352, SB785, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB1029, SB1185, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741, SB7, SB927, SB1227, SB1229, SB1353, SB1366, SB1464, SB1709, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1816, SB1841, SB2188, SB1147, SB879, SB1008, SB1536, SB2016, SB1453, SB1173, SB1163, SB996, SB27, SB568, SB1370, SB1321, SB1101, SB906, SB860, SB1563, SB993, SB693, SB1610, SB1537, SB836, SB1332, SB1307, SB963, SB493, SB922, SB984, SB1084, SB619, SB1098, SB1122, SB455, SB522, SB1057, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1664, SB1877, SB464, SB1277, SB32, SB732, SB660, SB731, SB921, SB268, SB1822, SB1188, SB1939, SB1589, SB397, SB1388, SB2230, SB1058, SB1036, SB1267, SB2112, SB1930, SB532, SB1035, SB2155, SB508, SB29, SB292, SB291, SB901, SB1333, SB1436, SB1494, SB964, SB779, SB1378, SB2312, SB1719, SB1386, SB287, SB2143, SB1245, SB261, SB1247, SB1948, SB2406, SB2407, SB1882, SB1197, SB1814, SB618, SB38

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, voter ID, citizenship, election integrity, voting rights, water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability, immigration enforcement, ICE agreements, sheriff grants, law enforcement, county jail, federal immigration law

Transcript Highlights:

• The Chair calls Mark Bell. To testify briefly. That's the only one I can pronounce.
• So we, we show you as Mark B or Bell, um, representing Association of Electric Companies of Texas, and
• For the record, my name is Mark Bell on behalf of, uh, AECT, the Association of Electric Companies of

Bills: HB 14, HB 106, HB 146, HB 267, HB 274, HB 1127, HB 1359, HB 1393, HB 1584, HB 1640, HB 1710, HB 2152, HCR 101, HJR 8, HR 51

Keywords: nuclear energy, advanced reactors, energy security, grant programs, Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, HB 106, oil and gas, Railroad Commission of Texas, overhead electrical lines, electrical distribution system, power line maintenance, administrative penalty, Natural Resources Code, oil and gas lease, well operator, energy safety, utility infrastructure, regulatory compliance, cleanup fund, oil and gas regulation and cleanup fund