Video & Transcript Research : 'testimonials'
Page 139 of 500
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Emergency Management Committee Apr 23rd, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- Written testimony may be submitted directly to the committee.
- Okay, thank you both for your testimony.
- So I'd like to thank my witness for the testimony.
- Is there anyone who would like to add on any testimony in opposition or any me-too testimony? Okay.
- Is there anyone who'd like to add testimony in opposition to this bill?
Summary:
The committee heard several bills related to public safety, emergency response, wildfire prevention, and environmental protection. AB 2152 by Assembly Member Mark Gonzalez would streamline CEQA litigation for new fire station projects and add best-practice requirements; supporters, including firefighters, said it would help communities and firefighter safety, while opponents argued the project labor agreement requirements would raise costs and limit participation for small and nonunion contractors. The bill passed to Appropriations. AB 2041 by Assembly Member Carrillo would expand reporting related to 911 dispatcher pre-arrival medical instructions; after amendments and stakeholder agreement, opposition groups said they would remove their opposition, and the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 2101 by Assembly Member Gipson would require human trafficking notices and training at disaster sites and for disaster response workers; supporters said it would protect vulnerable workers, while broadband, city, and county representatives raised implementation concerns, especially in rural disaster areas. It passed to Appropriations despite a no vote from Vice Chair Hadwick.
The committee also considered AB 1805, which would require an audit and stronger oversight of the state’s Next Generation 911 project after concerns about major spending and delays. CalNENA supported the bill’s transparency and accountability provisions, and the measure passed to Appropriations. AB 1536 by Assembly Member Addis would tighten safety and public review requirements for offshore oil pipeline restarts and require decommissioning of certain spill-prone pipelines; environmental and coastal government groups supported it, while the Western States Petroleum Association warned it would threaten fuel supply and pipeline operations. The bill passed to Appropriations on a divided vote. AB 1964 would direct the State Fire Marshal to survey home hardening in fire-prone areas and estimate costs; it passed to Appropriations with broad support.
AB 1960, also by Assembly Member Bennett, would use a portion of wildfire prevention grants to encourage community-level home hardening certification. The author said the bill would create incentives and broader public awareness, while the vice chair argued it would favor communities that can already afford hardening and divert resources from higher-need areas; the bill still passed to Appropriations. AB 1863 by Assembly Member DeMaio would clarify that people cannot be charged simply for calling 911 or when no services are rendered, while preserving fees for actual services and allowing billing for legitimate emergency response costs; it passed to the Assembly floor. The committee also took up consent item AB 2517, which passed to Appropriations. After add-on votes for absent members, the meeting adjourned.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Regulating AI in psychotherapy 3/24/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- Again, state your name for the record and continue with your testimony. Okay.
- Thank you for your testimony. We will move on to Dr. Steve Gerardo.
- We will Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you, proceed with your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony. Are there any public testifiers to this bill?
Summary:
House File 3893, which would regulate the use of artificial intelligence in psychotherapy and counseling, was heard with an A3 amendment adopted by voice vote at the start of the meeting. The amendment was described as the product of stakeholder discussions and was intended to clarify the roles of licensing boards, the attorney general, and other stakeholders, including language about large corporations versus individual practitioners.
The bill author argued that AI chatbots should not be allowed to provide psychotherapy or counseling, citing concerns about suicide risk, the need for licensed human professionals, and examples of harmful chatbot interactions. Supportive testimony came from Eric Meshy of SAVE, who said AI cannot assess risk or intervene in crises, and from Dr. Steven Gerardo of the Minnesota Psychological Association, who said AI is designed to keep users engaged and monetize conversations rather than provide treatment. A virtual testifier from TechNet supported the bill’s overall goal but urged clearer definitions so the measure would not unintentionally restrict supervised, administrative, or wellness uses of technology, and asked for clearer limits around emotional distress and AI’s role in treatment decisions.
Members raised several concerns and questions, including why religious counseling was exempted, whether the bill could conflict with interstate licensure compacts, privacy issues around AI used for scheduling or administrative support, and whether chatbot screening language would itself require analyzing sensitive mental health disclosures. The author said the bill was still being refined and that the attorney general language was intended to apply to AI companies, while boards would handle individual licensed professionals. After discussion, the committee renewed the motion to re-refer House File 3893 as amended to the Committee on Commerce, Finance, and Policy, and the motion prevailed by voice vote.
FL
Florida 2026 5th Special Session
Appropriations Committee on Higher Education Dec 3rd, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Do we have any public testimony? Seeing no public testimony, thank you.
- We do have some public testimony. We do have Elion Hooks, I believe.
- Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you very much for your testimony.
- Seeing no further testimony, okay, thank you very much.
- We appreciate your testimony.
Summary:
The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to hear confirmation testimony for a large slate of university and state college trustees. Most of the discussion centered on the nominees’ backgrounds, ties to their institutions, and priorities such as student success, workforce development, financial sustainability, research growth, housing, and maintaining or improving university rankings. Several University of Florida trustees emphasized campus improvements, “One UF” integration, institutional neutrality, and ambitions to move UF into the top tier nationally. Other nominees highlighted goals for Florida A&M, Florida Atlantic, UCF, Florida State, Florida Poly, the Florida Prepaid College Board, and several state colleges, with recurring themes of affordability, economic mobility, cybersecurity, and keeping Florida students in-state for college and careers.
Public testimony was heard on the Florida A&M appointment, where Elijah Hooks spoke in opposition to the current administration and described his expulsion, arrest, and trespass from the university after protesting the selection of President Marva Johnson. During questioning of FAU nominee Tina Vidal-Duart, senators asked about her prior service on the Hope Florida Foundation board and about reports concerning CDR Health’s contracting practices; she said she was not aware of the foundation issues at the time and noted that CDR’s state contract was a flat daily rate, so subcontractor pricing affected only the company’s internal margins. Other nominees received little or no questioning.
At the end of the meeting, the committee voted to confirm all nominees except Tina Vidal-Duart separately. Senator Bracy Davis requested the separate vote and opposed her confirmation, citing concerns related to her Hope Florida Foundation board service. Despite that objection, the committee ultimately voted to report Vidal-Duart favorably as well. The committee also noted that one University of West Florida nominee would be taken up at a later hearing because he was unable to attend.
FL
Florida 2026 Regular Session
Appropriations Committee on Higher Education Dec 3rd, 2025
Appropriations Committee on Higher Education
Transcript Highlights:
- Do we have any public testimony? Seeing no public testimony, thank you.
- Thank you very much for your testimony today. We appreciate it greatly.
- We do have some public testimony. We do have Elyon Hooks, I believe.
- Thank you very much for your testimony. Seeing no further testimony, no, okay, thank you very much.
- We appreciate your testimony.
Summary:
The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to hear confirmations for 19 appointees and reappointees to university and state college boards, with most of the agenda focused on the University of Florida, Florida A&M University, Florida Atlantic University, University of Central Florida, Florida State University, Florida Polytechnic University, Florida Gulf Coast University, Pensacola State College, State College of Florida Manatee-Sarasota, North Florida College, South Florida State College, and the Florida Prepaid College Board. Testimony from the nominees generally emphasized their educational backgrounds, professional experience, and priorities such as student success, workforce development, financial sustainability, research growth, housing, and maintaining or improving institutional rankings. Several UF trustees highlighted the university’s “One UF” vision, institutional neutrality, and goals of reaching top-three or top-one national status. Other nominees stressed the role of state colleges in workforce pipelines, and Florida Poly witnesses focused on STEM growth, housing, and strong graduate outcomes.
One in-person public testimony came from Elijah Hooks, who spoke in opposition to the current FAMU administration and described his expulsion, arrest, and trespass from campus after protesting the appointment of President Marva Johnson. For FAMU, Jocelyn Dobson Rodriguez testified in support of her appointment, emphasizing her legal background, alumni ties, and goals of strengthening leadership, alumni engagement, and the connection between the main campus and the College of Law in Orlando. For Florida Atlantic University, Tina Vidal-Duart was questioned closely about her prior service on the Hope Florida Foundation board and about CDR Health’s involvement in state contracts; she said she was not aware of the foundation’s governance problems at the time and that CDR’s state contract was a flat daily rate.
The committee then voted to report all appointees favorably except for Tina Vidal-Duart, whose confirmation was held for a separate vote at the request of Senator Bracy Davis. After discussion, the committee voted 5-1 to report her confirmation favorably as well. The meeting concluded with no further business and adjournment.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- There will be a time limit of three minutes per witness during the public testimony period.
- All right, with that, we will proceed to testimony. The chair calls Bob Hardin.
- Thank you so much for your testimony. We've got a couple of resource witnesses.
- I appreciate your testimony.
- Appreciate your testimony. Thank you. from TCEQ.
Keywords:
groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management, 997, house, all
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- We'll reserve your right to close, and we'll go to public testimony.
- We'll reserve the right to close and we'll go to public testimony.
- We'll reserve your right to close and we'll go to public testimony.
- Chair: Thank you very much, ma'am, for your testimony.
- Chair: For your testimony.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- There will be a strict limit of two minutes per witness during the public testimony.
- Thank you for being here and offering your testimony. Are there any questions?
- We appreciate your testimony. Are there any questions? Thank you for being here today.
- All right, not hearing any, we'll go to testimony. You deserve the right to close.
- I appreciate the testimony from all the witnesses.
Bills:
HB345, HB721, HB2580, SB815, HB3057, HB4603, HB3233, SB495, HB3863, HB3914, HB4570, HB5099, HB5173, SB458
Keywords:
insurance, appraisal process, disputed losses, residential property, policyholder rights, insurer obligations, natural disasters, appraisal expenses, umpire selection, policyholder, insurer, umpire, claims management, health care, cost disclosure, benefit plan, administrators, traumatic brain injury, health benefit plans, insurance coverage
TX
Texas 89th Regular
Delivery of Government Efficiency Apr 16th, 2025
Delivery of Government Efficiency
Transcript Highlights:
- Seeing none, thank you for your testimony. Thank you, Laura.
- Seeing none, thank you very much for your testimony.
- I just want to thank you for your testimony.
- Seeing none, thank you for your testimony. The chair calls Emily French.
- Seeing none, thank you for your testimony.
Bills:
HB3146, HB3719, HB3895, HB3923, HB4748, HB4751, HB4936, HB4952, HB4990, HB4991, HB5061, HB5196, HB5238, HB5246, HB5487
Keywords:
State Office of Administrative Hearings, SOAH, administrative hearings, contested case, contested case hearing, administrative law judge, ALJ, final decision, proposed decision, agency hearing, hearing continuance, rescheduling, Texas administrative law, Government Code Chapter 2001, workers' compensation, Department of Human Resources, Texas Labor Code, Transportation Code, Agriculture Code, Insurance Code
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Based on what he said, we will proceed to testimony.
- We will proceed to testimony. The chair calls Ron Luque. Mr.
- Can you provide testimony with respect to...
- But I appreciate your testimony. Thank you very much. Thank you.
- A few questions to kind of clarify some of your testimony.
Bills:
HB767, HB 1242, HB1373, HB1404, HB1708, HB1936, HB2041, HB2198, HB2270, HB2315, HB2415, HB2427, HB2455, HB2457, HB2522, HB2523, HB2686, HB2763, HB2775, HB2944, HB3034, HB1683, HB1695
Keywords:
highway designation, memorial, Montgomery County, Paul P. Mendes, transportation, HB 1242, Texas Transportation Code, U.S. Highway 281, Brooks County, Ernesto Soliz Cantu, memorial highway, road naming, TxDOT, road signage, commemorative resolution, memorial markers, county road 304, Huppergate Road, Los Robles Trail, Farm-to-Market Road
NM
New Mexico 2025 Regular Session
Senate - Tax, Business and Transportation Mar 20th, 2025
Senate Tax, Business & Transportation
Transcript Highlights:
- Uh, there will be no public testimony on these bills.
- Then what we will do is we will go to public testimony, um, and we will do, uh, support and opposition
- We will do the same thing online, uh, and then you will have 5 minutes to respond to that public testimony
- testimony.
- So 3 of you want to get up and go ahead and give your public testimony, you do have 1 minute.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Fish and Game and Marine Resources (02/14/2025)
Fish and Game and Marine Resources
Transcript Highlights:
- But more, a lot of the testimony we heard yesterday was on coyotes, and there's no limit on coyotes.
- <00:10:08.519>
but um they didn't all do testimony but um they didn't all do testimony but - He said he even abbreviated those points at the end of his testimony and absolutely agrees.
- It also would not, there was testimony that possibly this would eliminate public input.
- Jacobs um most of the uh testimony Jacobs um most of the uh testimony yesterday<00:21:30.000>
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- We appreciate your understanding and remind you that the committee has your written testimony.
- We appreciate your understanding and remind you that the committee has your written testimony.
- We stand on our written testimony. I'm just here to answer any questions if there are any. Mahalo.
- We stand our written<00:04:36.320>
written <00:04:36.720>testimony. - I'm just here written written testimony.
Summary:
The committee heard testimony on three resolutions: HCR 61, HCR 182, and HCR 183. Testimony on all three was generally supportive, with support noted from the Hawaii Children’s Action Network, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, ACLU, Chamber of Commerce, Hawaii Food Industry Association, Hawaii Renewables Fuels Coalition, the University of Hawaii, and CARES. Angela Melody Young testified in strong support on behalf of CARES on multiple items, urging consideration of county processes, financing structures, and the need for procedures free from partisan influence. For HCR 183, the University of Hawaii said it stood on its written testimony and was available for questions.
The discussion focused less on opposition and more on suggested policy considerations. Testimony on HCR 61 raised questions about how physical notes or related procedures should be administered and whether the process should be housed in a nonpartisan office. On HCR 182 and HCR 183, testimony emphasized coordinating state and county financing and planning, including references to property tax classifications, general obligation bonds, and long-term statewide projects such as Aloha Stadium.
At the close of the hearing, the chair recommended taking all three resolutions together. The committee voted to pass HCR 61, HCR 182, and HCR 183 unamended, with all voting members present voting aye and two senators excused. The resolutions were adopted.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- I'd be happy to answer any questions, but we just stand on our written testimony.
- You have my written testimony and support of this bill, and I'm present for any questions you may have
- We submitted written testimony in support of HB 1440 this morning.
- written testimony in support of<00:13:09.279>
hb1 <00:13:10.279>1440 <00:13:11.279> - That was what the auditor referred to in his testimony.
NH
Transcript Highlights:
- . testimony. testimony.
- testimony testimony that<00:32:49.200>
the <00:32:49.440>roads <00:32:50.159>throughout - 06:40.400>
the already heard testimony from the already heard testimony from the director<01:06 - This says that testimony through House.
- I will not read my testimony verbatim.
AZ
Transcript Highlights:
- But thank you for your testimony. Caitlin Contreras, ACLU.
- Thank you, Jen, for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony, Dr. Guy. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Guy.
- Okay, members, as I said earlier, that's it for testimony, right? Okay.
- Okay, members, as I said earlier, that's it for testimony, right? Okay.
Keywords:
sample ballots, elections, primary election, general election, mailing deadline, ballot mailing, county election officials, board of supervisors, secretary of state, early voting list, election administration, voter information, postal service, USPS processing center, city elections, town elections, special district elections, Arizona election law, ballot proofing, party chair
Summary:
The Judiciary and Elections Committee approved the minutes from February 18, February 20, and March 4, 2026, and then took up several election and traffic-related measures. House Bill 2006, which would require counties without a USPS processing and distribution center to mail printed sample ballots 14 days before an election instead of 11, was explained as a way to allow more time for mail delivery in affected counties. The Association of Counties supported the bill, and after brief discussion it passed on a 7-0 vote.
House Bill 2109, dealing with hands-free driving penalties, drew extensive debate. The bill would raise penalties for repeat violations, add a penalty when a violation results in a motorcycle crash, and expand the prohibition to watching, recording, or streaming video on a device while driving. Two amendments were offered to remove the citation ban and to strike the “records” language, but members and witnesses raised concerns that the remaining video-streaming language was vague and could unintentionally affect dash cams, rear cameras, CarPlay, navigation, rideshare safety cameras, and other in-vehicle systems. After robust discussion, the committee held the bill without prejudice to allow a stakeholder meeting and possible revision.
House Bill 2167, which would impose liability on the Attorney General for damages when a public nuisance or consumer fraud action is dismissed or found meritless under certain conditions, received divided testimony. Supporters argued it would curb overreach, while opponents said it would interfere with the AG’s ability to protect Arizonans. The committee approved the bill 4-3. Finally, HCR 2016, a referral measure that would eliminate county vote centers and on-site early voting and impose a precinct cap of 2,500 registered voters, drew strong opposition from voting rights groups, county officials, and rural and Navajo Nation witnesses who warned it would increase confusion, provisional ballots, costs, and access barriers. The committee did not act on the resolution and instead held it without prejudice for further stakeholder discussions.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- We're going to ask that all testifiers limit their testimony to one minute.
- Keith Reagan. >> Chair, as we stand on our written testimony, providing comments on this. >> Thank you
- In our testimony, one of the things that we recommended is that rather than extract this, we already
- But one of the things that we kind of threw in here in our testimony, which I don't think we've ever
- ,<00:03:59.519>
one approaches is um in our testimony, one approaches is um in our testimony
Bills:
SB2066
Keywords:
permitting, construction, efficiency, state projects, county collaboration, funding, staffing shortages, 912, senate, all
Summary:
The joint committees on Energy, Intergovernmental Affairs, and Government Operations heard Senate Bill 2066 on county permitting and inspection. Testimony focused on whether the bill should exempt state projects from county permitting requirements. One testifier opposed the measure, arguing it would bypass established permitting processes, weaken good government, and put the public at risk. A DOE representative said the intent was to speed up state projects, but suggested a different approach: funding county positions dedicated solely to state permits, possibly as a pilot program, rather than removing county review entirely. Committee members discussed the difficulty of moving state projects through county systems, the lack of special treatment, and whether a more systematic or standardized process could be created for repetitive projects.
After the discussion, the chairs announced a substantive rewrite of SB 2066. The amended version would delete the county-permitting exemptions for state projects and instead create a cooperative working group to address the intersection of state projects and county permitting needs. The revised measure would also include a blank appropriation for counties to fund personnel to expedite permitting for state projects only. Members clarified that any funded staff would be dedicated solely to state projects. The committee then took votes on the revised measure.
The committees adopted the amended bill. The Government Operations Committee recommended the Senate draft one version, and members present voted yes, with Senator Awa excused. The measure was adopted with the revised approach and an effective date set for April 19, 2042.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
AI use prohibited during health insurance prior authorization request review 2/19/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
US
US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session
Hearings to examine the censorship industrial complex. Mar 25th, 2025 at 01:00 pm
Constitution Subcommittee
Transcript Highlights:
- So as I touched on, both in the written testimony and just a few minutes ago.
- The various examples that I've pointed out in my testimony involve viewpoint discrimination.
- Hemingway's testimony and Professor Turley's testimony, so I got part of it.
- Rotman, your testimony, but the truth is they were threatening. This wasn't just...
- Thanks for your testimony. Thank you all.
Keywords:
censorship, First Amendment, social media, misinformation, free speech, government regulation, Big Tech, public discourse
Summary:
The meeting primarily focused on the implications of government involvement in censorship, particularly regarding social media platforms and compliance with misinformation standards. senators and witnesses discussed growing concerns over the influence of large tech companies, like Facebook and Google, in shaping public discourse and suppressing dissenting views. A significant part of the meeting included testimonies from various experts emphasizing the dangers of the 'censorship industrial complex'—a term used to describe the collaborative efforts between government entities and private organizations to control information flow. This collaboration is viewed as a violation of First Amendment rights, with calls for urgent legislative action to restore free speech protections.
NH
New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session
Senate Health and Human Services (03/11/2026)
Health and Human Services
Transcript Highlights:
- We'll take testimony from any departments that are here and then testimony from the public will be strictly
- We'll take testimony from any departments that are here and then testimony from the public will be strictly
- <00:17:12.319>
from we're going to be hearing testimony from we're going to be hearing testimony - <00:50:41.520>
I'm and have some written testimony I'm and have some written testimony I'm - we'll we've got uh some more testimony we'll we've got uh some more testimony to<02:09:18.159>
MN
Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session
Committee on Housing and Homelessness Prevention - 03/20/25
Housing and Homelessness Prevention
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Please wrap up your testimony.
- testimony. Wrap it up. Yes. Oh, okay. testimony. Wrap it up. Yes. Oh, okay.
- please conclude your testimony? I will. please conclude your testimony? I will.
- Uh, thank you all for your testimony.