Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, some of which I question as a former educator in the beginning, but I trusted your judgment on those

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We really count on your judgment in terms of how you set policy.

Bills: SB1041, SB1050, SB1131, SB1138, SB1249, SB1267, SB1272, SB1317, SB1461, SB1488, SB1504, SB1517, SB1523, SB1580, SB1582, SB1584, SB1585, SB1602, SB1630, SB1654, SB1672, SB1673, SB1718, SB1761, SB1819, SB1826, SB1827

Keywords: electronic monitoring, nursing care, assisted living, resident rights, privacy, consent, surveillance, veterans, lifetime pass, state parks, Arizona, access, disabled veterans, cardiac arrest, defibrillators, school safety, emergency response, CPR training, Arizona education funding, automated license plate readers

Transcript Highlights:

• Teachers can be marginalized when they are forced to abandon professional judgment in favor of grant-mandated

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• think the – you know if you look at it just from a public policy perspective, I think that good judgment

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I would have expected better judgment from your institute.

Bills: HB2190, HB2202, HB2233, HB2251, HB2252, HB2396, HB2437, HB2689, HB2796

Keywords: physician assistants, licensure compact, medical services, multistate practice, patient care access, healthcare workforce, military families, adverse actions, dementia care, telementoring, healthcare education, rural communities, grant funding, HB 2233, rural health transformation, rural health transformation program, AHCCCS, Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, Joint Legislative Budget Committee, JLBC

Transcript Highlights:

• Dynamic fiscal notes are not about replacing legislative judgment.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Legislative Budget Office Oversight Commission met on January 22, 2026, with a quorum present and approved the minutes from the December 17, 2025 meeting. The main presentation was by Erikica McKeler of the National Conference of State Legislatures on dynamic fiscal notes, dynamic scoring, and how they differ from static fiscal notes. She explained that dynamic analysis tries to capture broader economic and behavioral effects of policy changes, but that most states have experimented with it only briefly, often for tax bills, and many have later scaled back or abandoned the practice because it is staff-intensive, expensive, and difficult to validate. McKeler highlighted examples from Texas, Utah, and Arkansas. Texas requires dynamic fiscal impact statements for certain large tax or fee measures and for the biennial appropriations bill; Utah has done such analyses on request during the interim but only when staff time allows; and Arkansas recently began producing dynamic fiscal notes with thresholds and request limits. She noted that these states generally use REMI software, though Utah switched to IMPLAN for cost reasons. She also outlined common challenges, including the need for strong staff expertise, the sensitivity of results to assumptions, the expense of software licenses, and the difficulty of measuring accuracy over time. Members then discussed whether dynamic scoring could be useful for health and human services programs where a policy may shift costs between settings rather than create a simple new expense. Senator Marty raised a Medicaid example involving home-based blue light therapy for newborns, arguing that dynamic analysis might better capture potential savings from avoiding longer hospital stays. Legislative Budget Office and Minnesota Management and Budget staff responded that such effects may be better understood as direct program substitutions rather than true dynamic effects, and emphasized the need for reliable data and caution because savings estimates could reduce appropriations if they do not materialize. The discussion also touched on whether dynamic models would capture local government impacts, but no formal action was taken beyond the approval of minutes and receipt of the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• because there is this balancing test, sometimes the relevant public authority will have to make that judgment

Summary: The joint Senate and House Select Committee on Civil Discourse and Freedom of Speech in Higher Education convened for its first public hearing, adopted its proposed rules without objection, and framed the hearing as an organizational, invited-testimony-only session. Members repeatedly condemned political violence and the assassination of Charlie Kirk, saying the committee was created in response to concerns about civil discourse, intimidation, and hostility on college campuses. Several members emphasized that the goal was not to suppress speech but to protect open expression while maintaining order, due process, and institutional accountability. The first witness, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Commissioner Wyn Rosser, outlined implementation of Senate Bill 37. He described the General Education Advisory Committee, which is reviewing broad core-curriculum knowledge and skills and may recommend reducing the current 42-hour core, while leaving review of specific courses to individual institutions. He also explained the new Office of the Ombudsman, the board’s role in supporting it, and existing training and certification requirements for governing board members. Members asked about enforcement tools, transparency, and whether the ombudsman would investigate complaints involving censorship, retaliation, or political bias; Rosser said some enforcement exists in certain laws, but he deferred on the exact scope of the ombudsman’s investigatory authority and on issues outside the agency’s role. University of Texas at Austin President Jim Davis testified that UT Austin supports free speech, academic freedom, and civil discourse, and he described three areas of focus: speech on campus grounds, classroom discourse, and how people treat one another. He said the university enforces time, place, and manner rules, expects professors to present alternative views on controversial topics, and has created internal reporting and appeal processes for students and faculty. Members questioned him about heckler’s veto incidents, protests, off-campus participants, complaints about professors, hate speech, and whether the university would protect speakers and students from disruption or unfair targeting. Davis said the university would not tolerate disruptions, would use due process and factual review, and is working to align campus practices with the new law and regents’ expectations. Ricky Adam Jr. of Turning Point USA’s Club America described the group’s campus and high-school organizing, praised Charlie Kirk’s approach to open debate, and said the organization is expanding in Texas. He raised concerns about school administrators and a counselor at an Early College High School in Killeen allegedly interfering with a student club and withholding footage, and committee members said they would seek information and, if necessary, use legislative process to investigate. Members from both chambers reiterated support for free speech, criticized political violence and campus suppression of viewpoints, and stressed that future hearings would continue examining implementation and enforcement issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• They may have had the best, in your judgment, the best package of pulling everything together.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the August 12 minutes and then handled a large agenda of 355 contracts totaling about $278.7 million. It agreed to defer three Office of Energy Policy items to the October 2025 meeting and reviewed a deferred Kentucky Educational Television contract without objection. The main substantive discussion centered on two University of Louisville legal services PSC amendments and a Seven Counties Services MOA item. For the University of Louisville items, members questioned a large increase in hourly rates and the scope of the legal services, especially complex litigation work and a Colorado estate matter. University officials said the contracts followed an RFP, involved specialized litigation, included local counsel where required, and were expected to be offset by savings in other PSCs and by a potential financial recovery in the Colorado matter. The committee also discussed whether the $125 hourly rate was a statutory requirement or committee policy; the chair later said staff would verify whether it was an executive-branch regulation or statutory rate. Both University of Louisville items were ultimately approved, though Senator Meredith voted no on one and Senator Douglas explained his support while urging future adjustments and more information sharing. The Seven Counties Services contract drew questions about how the $18.7 million would be used and whether federal changes could affect future funding. Cabinet officials described 988 crisis response, outpatient mental health and substance use treatment, prevention, recovery, and harm-reduction services, and said they were monitoring federal developments daily. Representative Petrie and Senator Thomas pressed the cabinet on the long-running Seven Counties bankruptcy and the need to push for resolution; officials said the matter was pending on a motion for reconsideration and that they would try to help move it along. The contract was approved. At the end of the meeting, the committee approved the remaining agenda items as reviewed without objection, but Senator Meredith voted no on the blanket approval motion because of numerous retroactive contract requests and what she said were insufficient explanations such as administrative error or staff being on conference. She said retroactive approvals should be rare and supported stronger internal controls.

Transcript Highlights:

• Does that require a judgment from a judge?

Transcript Highlights:

• around that There's been charts going around that you can get wrongful death and pain and suffering judgments

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with most drawing support after amendments or ongoing stakeholder negotiations. SB 29, by Senator Laird, would extend a sunset on the law allowing pain-and-suffering claims to survive a plaintiff’s death; supporters, including a family member describing a medical negligence case, labor groups, consumer advocates, and disability and elder organizations, argued it prevents defendants from running out the clock, while hospitals, medical groups, and business organizations warned of higher costs and added liability. After extensive debate about data collection, settlement reporting, and the impact on health care access, the bill passed to Appropriations on a divided vote. SB 294, by Senator Reyes and presented by Senator Laird, would require employers to notify a worker’s emergency contact if the worker is arrested or detained and would create a template to inform employees of state and federal labor rights. Labor and worker advocates said the bill would help workers understand and enforce their rights amid weakened federal enforcement; there was no opposition on file, and the bill passed unanimously to Appropriations. SB 697 would modernize water-rights adjudication by allowing the State Water Board to use technology instead of requiring in-person field investigations; with no opposition, it also passed unanimously. The committee also advanced SB 37 on attorney advertising, SB 645 on peremptory challenges in civil cases, SB 303 on bias-mitigation trainings in public workplaces, and SB 464 on expanding pay-data reporting for specified state workers. SB 37 drew support from consumer and legal groups but concerns from Walker Advertising about joint advertising; members said negotiations were ongoing, and the bill passed. SB 645 would extend anti-bias jury-selection rules to certain civil rights cases; criminal-defense and defense groups said they were close to agreement, and the bill passed. SB 303 and SB 464 were both amended to narrow scope and moved forward after several opponents shifted to neutral or removed opposition. The committee also approved a consent calendar of additional bills, all sent to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's my access to their qualifications, their education, potentially judgments which may have been

Bills: SB1888, SB3003, SB2417, SB2459, SB3055, HB1393, HB2884, SB2943

Keywords: grand jury, jury qualifications, jury wheel, small counties, Texas legislation, age verification, obscene devices, online sales, juvenile protection, penalties, antitrust, attorney general, Texas Free Enterprise, business regulations, legal confidentiality, personal identifying information, data brokers, judicial safety, civil rights, data privacy

Transcript Highlights:

• All those taxes, when you do the economic judgment, is about 1.5% of GDP. But this place lies.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, March 31, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They rely on the judgment and protection of the adults in their lives, especially when it comes to complex
• They rely on the judgment and protection of the adults in their lives, especially when it comes to complex

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 30.240> regulatory legislative ceilings for regulatory legislative ceilings for regulatory judgment
• 31.920> PUC<00:40:32.400> already<00:40:32.640> has<00:40:32.800> the Judgment

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The owner of the dog is not paying, though we received a judgment to have the maximum, which we went
• So we're currently going through that, and the judgment was awarded to— —and this was your daughter?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Working with a community-based domestic violence advocate can provide a safe, confidential, and non-judgmental
• Working with a community-based domestic violence advocate can provide a safe, confidential, and non-judgmental

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Bills: SR130, SR131, SR132, SR133, SCR74, SCR12, HB582, HB221, HCR74, HCR58, HB71, HB79, HB158, HB160, HB169, HB227, HB251, HB289, HB330, HB394, HB410, HB429, HB769, HB1017, HB1234, HB712, SCR3, SB54, SB72, SB129, SB164, SB232, SB287, SB322, SB374, SB375, SB386, SB409, SB447, SB458, SB78, SB112, SB124, SB125, SB174, SB190, SB201, SB208, SB236, SB273, SB307, SB347, SB357, SB385, SB387, SB393, SB401, SB415, SB426, SB435, SB487, SB488, SB523, SB222, SCR9, SCR58, SB480, SB514, SB35, SB65, SB215, SB246, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, HCR31, HCR47, HB362, HB363, HB368, HB377, HB380, HB382, HB386, HB392, HB406, HB431, HB441, HB466, HB503, HB533, HB559, HB575, HB590, HB593, HB618, HB655, HB664, HB685, HB692, HB707, HB715, HB732, HB738, HB741, HB748, HB776, HB807, HB822, HB856, HB860, HB868, HB887, HB888, HB905, HB908, HB961, HB980, HB990, HB992, HB999, HB1000, HB1010, HB1146, HB1157, HB1233, HB1243, HB54, HB137, HB180, HB192, HB310, HB321, HB396, HB512, HB552, HB578, HB638, HB663, HB708, HB717, HB718, HB1009, HB1082, HB1104, HB1107, HB1198, HB1246, HB27, HB143, HB205, HB259, HB267, HB288, HB308, HB403, HB405, HB414, HB417, HB478, HB546, HB548, HB555, HB557, HB609, HB670, HB672, HB740, HB779, HB786, HB796, HB812, HB848, HB915, HB917, HB921, HB930, HB933, HB1095, HB1096, HB1103, HB1129, HB1154, HB1166, HB1187, HB1195, HB1230, HB316, HB511, HB514, HB799, HB1039, HB17, HB36, HB41, HB47, HB73, HB126, HB133, HB140, HB159, HB166, HB211, HB226, HB271, HB324, HB337, HB351, HB399, HB571, HB723, HB726, HB750, HB759, HB844, HB966, HB1006, HB1018, HB1036, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB217, SB274, SB300, SB379, SB382, SB441, SB449, HB134, HB258, HB359, HB782, SB149

Keywords: E. Joseph Savoie, Dr. Savoie, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, UL Lafayette, higher education, Louisiana Board of Regents, commissioner of higher education, president emeritus, Carnegie R1, research university, student financial aid, needs-based aid, community and technical college system, teacher education, hurricane Katrina, hurricane Rita, retirement resolution, commendation, senate resolution, public service

Summary: The Senate convened with 29 members present, opened with prayer by Oren Connor, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a musical performance by the Chuck Wagon Gang. The chamber also recognized several guests and observances, including birthdays for Senators Seabaugh, Fesi, and Price, White Coat Wednesday participants, Tourism Day, the Louisiana Oil Marketers Association, Chenault International Airport’s 40th anniversary, and visiting fair queens from Washington and Tangipahoa parishes. The Senate dispensed with reading the journal and received numerous House and Senate messages, committee reports, and resolutions. Several Senate resolutions were taken up and adopted, including commendations for Isaac Herzenberg, condolences for Kathleen Sessomson and former Senator Louis Lambert Jr., recognition of White Coat Wednesday and Tourism Day, and a study resolution on transfer-on-death and payable-on-death accounts. The Senate also adopted a conference committee report on House Bill 782, which concerned vapor and alternative nicotine products and was described as giving the state more tools to combat illegal vapes. A number of Senate bills returned from the House with amendments were either concurred in or rejected, including SB 54, SB 72, SB 129, SB 164, SB 232, SB 287, SB 374, SB 375, SB 386, SB 409, SB 112, SB 124, SB 125, SB 174, SB 190, SB 207, SB 236, SB 307, SB 357, SB 385, SB 387, SB 458, SB 477, SB 590, SB 593, SB 618, SB 655, SB 692, SB 707, SB 732, SB 738, SB 748, SB 776, SB 807, SB 860, SB 868, SB 887, SB 888, SB 905, and SB 961, with votes generally passing by wide margins. The chamber also considered several House bills on final passage. Among those approved were measures on local security districts, budget review authority, school activity access for virtual students, electronic bid forms, brake equipment and trailer safety, construction management at risk contracts, temporary registration plates, the Louisiana Maritime Academy name change, OMV fee and ID issues, ferry operations, group purchasing for local governments, the Green Envelope Program for drivers with disabilities, OMV field office fees, LED fee updates, port development priorities, workforce instructor capacity, and a campus disciplinary process bill tied to hazing prevention. Some House bills were passed after amendments, while others were passed over or rejected for later conference, including bills on virtual school participation, historic preservation, civil service, suicide prevention, local government training, and economic development districts. The Senate also rejected House amendments on SB 78 and SB 208, and rejected amendments on SB 387, sending those matters toward further negotiation.

Bills: SJR37, SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB108, SB125, SB251, SB318, SB378, SB379, SB396, SB472, SB487, SB503, SB533, SB565, SB583, SB608, SB650, SB686, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB763, SB854, SB875, SB916, SB924, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB987, SB988, SB1006, SB1019, SB1021, SB1024, SB1026, SB1038, SB1146, SB1185, SB1194, SB1202, SB1252, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1497, SB1498, SB1499, SB1527, SB1547, SB1596, SB1697, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SJR37, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB925, SB1362, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1302, SB856, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB608, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB541, SB379, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB1352, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB961, SB1038, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, 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

Keywords: voter ID, citizenship, election integrity, constitutional amendment, voting rights, central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy

Bills: SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB14, SB24, SB108, SB112, SB125, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB318, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB513, SB565, SB621, SB650, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB761, SB763, SB815, SB854, SB875, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1006, SB1018, SB1019, SB1024, SB1026, SB1146, SB1194, SB1198, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1379, SB1497, SB1498, SB1527, SB1532, SB1547, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SJR37, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Bills: SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB14, SB24, SB108, SB112, SB125, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB318, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB513, SB565, SB621, SB650, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB761, SB763, SB815, SB854, SB875, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1006, SB1018, SB1019, SB1024, SB1026, SB1146, SB1194, SB1198, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1379, SB1497, SB1498, SB1527, SB1532, SB1547, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SJR37, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency