Transcript Highlights:

• of the United States.
• Currently, the state of Idaho and the state of Wyoming are already doing this.
• In the state of—no, I'm sorry—the state of Utah and the state of Wyoming are already doing this.
• No, I'm sorry, the state of Utah and the state of Wyoming are already doing this.
• The state of Texas actually has built a bullion depository run... ...or the state of Texas.

Transcript Highlights:

• -25, the state.
• Many other state agencies are not able to raise substantial amounts through non-state resources.
• With the University of California and State University, they're treated as state entities.
• there in the state.
• You know, we've joined with the state of California and with 20 other states. ...other states, 21 other

Transcript Highlights:

• Lucas, stated April 2, 2026, that states that the State Library received the final program narrative
• You created the State Library.
• you in state government.
• As stated earlier by the State Library, we're in a period of transition.
• Can you state that again?

Summary: The follow-up informational hearing focused on the State Library’s oversight of the statewide Imagination Library and the Strong Reader Partnership (SRP), including how the original $68.2 million state investment was spent, why funds were not redirected sooner to the Dollywood Foundation, and whether spending complied with AB 157 and later SB 105. Committee members repeatedly raised concerns that SRP and the State Library had been slow to provide documents, that quarterly reporting and other contract requirements were not met on time, and that the State Library did not escalate issues earlier. State Librarian Greg Lucas said the library sent one demand letter, relied on counsel’s view that SRP could continue spending its $4.8 million so long as it furthered the program, and later redirected about $55 million to the Dollywood Foundation after paperwork was submitted. He also acknowledged the library should have shared SRP’s final report with the committee sooner and said the materials eventually received appeared satisfactory, though the chair and Senator Grove remained concerned that there was still no clear accounting of books delivered by SRP. A major portion of the hearing examined SRP’s expenditures and vendor contracts, including Shipyard for marketing and web services, SAGE Strategies for management consulting, Lotus Financial Solutions and other financial vendors, and United Way California Capital Region for a small marketing grant. Committee members questioned whether some spending, especially Changecraft’s work during the AB 157 period, amounted to lobbying or attempts to influence legislation, which the grant agreement prohibited. SRP representatives said the work was communications and stakeholder outreach, not lobbying, and that invoices reflected the board’s oversight and the nonprofit’s startup and closeout phases. They also said some work continued during the rescission and closeout period to unwind contracts and return funds, and that any reporting delays were due to transition, lack of a reporting mechanism from the State Library, and the need to collect records after vendors were canceled. Members of SRP said the nonprofit was created to build the infrastructure for a self-sustaining statewide program, expand local partnerships, and support multilingual outreach in underserved counties. They described a working board that met regularly, selected vendors collectively, and used multiple financial and administrative contractors to maintain checks and balances. However, committee members pressed them on the lack of detailed invoices, the absence of clear metrics showing how many books SRP actually delivered, and the limited apparent return on spending such as the $581,708 Shipyard contract, the $125,000 website work, and the $5,000 United Way grant. No formal vote or legislative action was taken during the hearing; it was an oversight session aimed at obtaining explanations and additional documentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Good morning and welcome to Senate State Affairs.
• For the record, Secretary of State Phil McGrane for the great state of Idaho.
• the state or leave public office.
• This piece of legislation would reorganize another existing state office and move the State Historic
• They put forth a call to the states and said, states, if you want to have your own state-level regulation

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• And the United States is losing its moral leadership on the climate stage, just like the United States
• The state may need to submit amendments to its Medicaid state plan, and counties will need to be given
• Are there ways in which the state could, excuse me, that the state could...
• states that states are not eligible for reimbursement if they restrict federal enforcement activities
• It permits states to use payment error rates from federal fiscal year 2025 or 2026 to determine the state

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held its fifth hearing of the year to examine the newly enacted federal H.R. 1 and its effects on California. Members and the chair described the law as a major threat to state health, food, education, and climate programs, and emphasized that California would not be able to fully backfill the federal cuts. Several members also highlighted the bill’s tax provisions, including temporary deductions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, while warning that the largest benefits flow to higher-income taxpayers and that major cuts to Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and clean-energy incentives are delayed or phased in over time. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance presented detailed overviews of the bill’s likely impacts and implementation timelines. They identified the main affected areas as health care coverage and financing, food assistance, higher education, personal income taxes, and clean-energy/electric-vehicle credits. They explained that H.R. 1 limits provider taxes used to finance Medi-Cal, adds work and redetermination requirements, restricts CalFresh eligibility and increases state costs, changes student loan and Pell Grant rules, extends and modifies federal tax provisions, and phases out many clean-energy credits. Finance also noted major rescissions of Inflation Reduction Act funds, new border and immigration enforcement spending, and the possibility of PAYGO sequestration if Congress does not act to offset the deficit increase. During member questions, the committee focused on likely enrollment losses, administrative burdens, and fiscal exposure for the state and counties. Witnesses said many details still depend on federal guidance, but they estimated significant impacts on Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and graduate/professional student borrowing, and noted that California’s high CalFresh error rate could increase state costs. UC testified that the elimination of Graduate PLUS loans would affect thousands of professional students, especially in health, law, and other high-cost programs. Members asked for follow-up data on county, health, and tax impacts, and staff agreed to provide additional tables and estimates as implementation guidance becomes clearer. Public commenters from counties, early childhood advocates, health coalitions, disability rights groups, immigrant-rights organizations, and other stakeholders urged the Legislature to mitigate the law’s effects. They warned of higher county costs, reduced access to health care and food assistance, increased administrative burdens, and harm to children, immigrants, people with disabilities, and low-income families. Several urged new state revenue solutions and stronger protections for Medi-Cal, CalFresh, child care, and home- and community-based services. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with a commitment to continue monitoring federal guidance and to work on state responses in the budget process.

Transcript Highlights:

• the state.
• state of Florida.
• with in-state tuition.
• with in-state tuition.
• They will be state legislators. They will be state legislators.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for the Parkland shooting victims, quorum call, and the Pledge of Allegiance. The Rules and Ethics Committee special order report for February 13, 2025 was adopted, setting the day’s special order calendar and debate times. The chamber then took up immigration-related special order items, beginning with Senate Memorial 6C, which urged the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to provide guidance and training for 287(g) agreements. Members debated federal immigration policy and state cooperation with DHS, and the memorial passed 85-27. The House next considered Senate Bill 4C, an immigration bill creating new state offenses related to unlawful entry and reentry into Florida and requiring a mandatory death sentence for an unauthorized alien convicted of a capital felony. Members questioned the bill’s constitutionality, including Supremacy Clause, due process, and Eighth Amendment concerns, and several speakers argued it would create separate classes of people and invite litigation. Multiple amendments were offered to narrow or expand exemptions, including protections for Venezuelans on TPS, certain Haitian TPS and humanitarian parole recipients, undocumented people brought to Florida as children working in critical professions, and a proposal to delay action pending court rulings; all of those amendments were rejected. The bill passed 85-29. The chamber then took up Senate Bill 2C, which would create a State Board of Immigration Enforcement led by the Governor and Cabinet, establish a local law enforcement immigration grant program and advisory council, repeal the undocumented-student fee waiver, and appropriate more than $300 million for immigration enforcement. The sponsor described it as supporting cooperation with federal immigration agencies and ending the in-state tuition incentive for undocumented students. Early questioning focused on the impact on “dreamers” and whether the bill would effectively raise their tuition costs; the sponsor said it removed the incentive of in-state tuition but did not bar attendance. The transcript cuts off during that exchange, before final action on SB 2C is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• State v. Montroy, which is 40 years in front of Gideon v. Wainwright, State v.
• So that would be the first state office for public defense in the state of Idaho.
• The State of Idaho was then sued, and this is Tucker v. State of Idaho, by the ACLU.
• Constitutional Courts Act states that no state court at any level of jurisdiction or authority shall
• as official in the United States or state government in this instance here.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• The state auditor is elected directly by the people of the state of Washington.
• The state auditor is elected directly by the people in the state of Washington.
• This plan covers all areas of the state and applies to all of the state agencies.
• efforts in the state.
• And then from state agencies down. ...health systems, up to state agencies, and then from state agencies

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee heard three State Auditor’s Office performance audits: implementation of the Law Enforcement Training and Community Safety Act, Washington’s digital equity planning, and the Department of Commerce’s Digital Navigator Program. In the law enforcement training audit, the State Auditor found the Criminal Justice Training Commission had developed most required training content but had not developed all required topics, lacked a systematic project management approach, and had weak tools to ensure participation and compliance. Auditors said most officers had not completed the required 40 hours, patrol tactics training was a major bottleneck, and the Commission’s reporting did not clearly show statewide compliance. The Commission said it generally agreed with the recommendations and had begun implementing some changes. Committee members raised concerns about staffing, liability, incentives, and whether the law had enough enforcement “teeth.” In the digital equity audit, auditors said Washington lacked a comprehensive, unified statewide plan, a designated leader, and reliable funding for digital equity efforts. They said existing plans were fragmented, with the NTIA-approved plan the most complete but no longer fully funded after federal changes. The State Auditor recommended the legislature establish oversight authority and require a lead organization to coordinate and evaluate statewide digital equity efforts and develop a unified plan. The Department of Commerce and Office of Equity agreed with the need for clearer leadership and coordination, and a public witness described ongoing coalition and local planning work. Committee members asked about best practices from other states and whether the auditor could provide additional research on coordination models. In the Digital Navigator Program audit, the State Auditor concluded Commerce did not consistently follow core grant-management practices, including competitive award processes, vetting of grantees, clear contracts, performance monitoring, and reimbursement controls. Auditors said Commerce expanded grants without a new competition, lacked adequate documentation and reporting, and paid out millions without sufficient support; they also cited management decisions that overrode staff concerns. Commerce said it had already begun major contract-management reforms, created a new contracts and compliance structure, and was working on risk assessments, documentation standards, and staff training. Members pressed Commerce on accountability, possible recoupment of improper payments, ethics issues, and whether the agency had clear performance metrics for the program. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended after public testimony and committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the founder of State Armor.
• Going back as far as 2020, the United States State Department concluded that CSSAs are used to monitor
• Going back as far as 2020, the United States State Department concluded that CSSAs are used to monitor
• There are several other states.
• I would like to know specifically if there are other states, what states they are.

Committee: House Education

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 399 by Senator Bass, which would create the Louisiana Higher Education Research Security Council to review and potentially block certain gifts, contracts, academic partnerships, and research partnerships involving foreign adversary sources. Bass said the bill is intended to protect university research, intellectual property, and students from foreign influence, and would also require public disclosure of certain foreign-linked arrangements and a plan to eliminate foreign-adversary-linked software. Supporters from State Armor argued Louisiana universities have been vulnerable to Chinese Communist Party influence and intellectual property theft. Representatives from Tulane University and Lenovo raised concerns that the bill could create duplicative review, delay research, raise costs, and sweep in legitimate private or multinational entities; a proposed amendment to exempt entities operating under a CFIUS national security agreement failed 4-8. After debate, the committee moved SB 399 favorably. The committee then considered Senate Bill 310 by Senator Cloud, presented by Representative Carlson, which would require public school and college health centers to display information about pregnancy resources available in Louisiana. Supporters from Louisiana Right to Life said the bill would help connect pregnant students with existing state and private assistance programs, while the ACLU submitted a red card in opposition without speaking. The bill was moved favorably without objection. The committee also advanced House Resolution 171 by Representative Turner, which calls for a study of the workforce-oriented TOPS Tech and M.J. Foster programs, with business and workforce groups supporting the study as a way to measure outcomes and return on investment; it was moved favorably. Next, the committee took up House Bill 1084 by Representative Turner, a tuition autonomy bill for public post-secondary institutions. An amendment was adopted to add a conceptual framework for tuition-setting considerations, but the bill would still remove the existing 10% over two years cap and allow institutions to set tuition more freely. Turner argued universities need more flexibility because state funding has declined and campuses face deferred maintenance and operating pressures. Several members, especially Representative Carlson, warned that higher tuition could reduce access and that the bill did not address broader structural problems in higher education. Despite those concerns, HB 1084 was moved favorably by an 8-3 vote. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 351 by Senator Jackson Andrews, which would let families apply for child care assistance through CCAP once pregnancy is known, rather than waiting until after birth, to help move them up the waiting list. An amendment was adopted to have BESE, rather than the department, handle rulemaking and to allow the House and Senate education committees to approve the implementation process. The bill was then discussed as a way to help parents return to work sooner, and the hearing continued with questions from members.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is a state operation.
• As you all know, we are now the third largest state in the country and the fastest growing state in the
• We have 12 counties in the state of Florida that are larger than states in this country.
• Cities can experiment on policies and course correct quickly in a way that state and state and state
• But I think it's also important to have state involvement in this issue as well. important to have state

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee held its first meeting of the 2025 session and focused on an overview of county and municipal home rule powers and state preemption. After roll call and member introductions, Chair Alex Rizzo and Vice Chair Griff Griffiths explained the constitutional and statutory basis for local self-government, the distinction between charter and non-charter counties, and how express and implied preemption limit local authority. Griffiths emphasized that home rule gives local governments broad power to address community needs, but the Legislature can override that authority through clear preemption, with courts ultimately deciding disputes. Representatives Holcomb and LaMarca added that local issues should generally be addressed locally first, but statewide standards can be appropriate when uniformity is needed or local action is ineffective. The committee then heard from a panel representing counties, cities, business, and construction interests: Ginger Delegal of the Florida Association of Counties, Carolyn Johnson of the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Rebecca O'Hara of the Florida League of Cities, and Carol Bowen of Associated Builders and Contractors of Florida. Delegal and O'Hara argued that home rule is rooted in local autonomy, policy experimentation, and accountability to voters, and warned against broad or “vacuum” preemptions that remove local authority without replacing it with state regulation. Johnson and Bowen supported preemption when local rules create a patchwork that hurts statewide competitiveness, raises costs, or complicates business operations, citing examples such as labor rules, heat safety, permitting, and procurement preferences. The panel also discussed the 2023 local ordinances law, which requires business impact estimates and provides attorney’s fees in certain challenges, as a mechanism to resolve disputes locally before resorting to preemption. Members questioned the panel about the 2024 heat-safety preemption and how to protect workers in the absence of local ordinances. Business representatives said existing OSHA duties and industry best practices already require employers to provide safe conditions, while local governments and the state should avoid inconsistent standards across jurisdictions. Another discussion centered on construction permitting, licensing, and local boards that may slow projects and increase costs; Bowen suggested eliminating redundant local fees and barriers while preserving statewide licensing and enforcement against bad actors. No votes were taken, and the meeting remained informational, with the chair inviting continued discussion on when preemption is appropriate versus when local governments should retain authority.

Transcript Highlights:

• The state currently regional plan.
• ,</c> As political subdivisions of the state, As political subdivisions of the state, we<00:14:03.680
• inmates on behalf of the state.
• Not every other state has counties contracting to house state inmate populations. >> Okay.
• </c> state inmate populations. state inmate populations.

Summary: The committee met for its sixth meeting, established a quorum, and approved the minutes from the October 21 meeting. The main agenda item was a presentation from Kentucky Association of Counties (KACo) leaders and county officials on jail funding and jail-system reform. Speakers said county jail costs have reached crisis levels, citing large and rising general-fund subsidies in counties such as Hardin, McCracken, and Warren, and noting that county general-fund contributions to jail funds have increased by 76% since 2019. KACo outlined a three-part legislative approach for the upcoming session: incentivizing regional jails, clarifying responsibility for pre-trial felony detainees, and redefining the model for housing state inmates in county jails. On regional jails, they proposed one-time state construction funding, statutory changes to allow former county jails to serve as 96-hour holdover facilities, broader participation of jailers on regional jail authority boards, an increased supplement for closed county jails, and a one-time payment for counties that close local jails and join regional facilities. Union County Judge Adam Onan described his county’s savings from contracting with Webster County and said regionalization can reduce costs where feasible. Harlan County Judge Executive Dan Mosley focused on pre-trial felony detainees, saying counties bear the full cost of housing people awaiting trial for long periods, sometimes years, and that pre-trial time is later credited toward state sentences. He argued the state benefits from that credit and referenced prior bills that would have reimbursed counties for time-served credit. Shelley Hampton then proposed replacing the current per diem model for state inmates with contracts requiring the Department of Corrections to pay actual housing costs and to support programming such as substance abuse treatment, cognitive behavioral programming, re-entry services, workforce training, and academics. No votes were taken on the jail proposals, and the meeting ended with the presentation and discussion of the county recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• no-income states.
• It's good to look at other states. It's good to think about other states.
• So in the governor's State of the State, he promised carve-outs for three industries.
• And what's happening in those states is those states are trying to do the inverse.
• And what's happening in those states is those states are trying to do the inverse.

Summary: The Missouri House met with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, approval of the prior House journal, and numerous guest introductions, including a tribute to Harris-Stowe State University President Dr. Latanya Collins-Smith during Women’s History Month. The chamber then took up House Committee Substitute for House Joint Resolutions 173 and 174, which would place on the ballot a constitutional change to gradually eliminate Missouri’s individual income tax and allow the legislature to broaden the sales tax base to services if needed. The sponsor and supporters framed the proposal as a long-term tax reform that would let Missourians keep more of their earnings, spur economic growth, and ultimately let voters decide the state’s tax structure. Supporters argued that no-income-tax states have stronger growth, more business relocation, and better population trends, and said the resolution includes triggers and revenue-neutral safeguards, including protections for school funding and local governments. Several members said the measure is only a referral to the voters, not an immediate tax change, and emphasized that the plan is designed to phase out the income tax only as state growth allows. Opponents countered that the measure would ultimately require a large sales tax increase on goods and services, shifting the burden onto working families, seniors, renters, and low-income Missourians, while threatening public schools, services, and tax-credit-supported nonprofits. They also criticized the ballot language as misleading and warned that the fiscal impact could be as high as an $8.5 billion revenue loss. Members debated comparisons to Tennessee, Texas, Florida, Washington, Oregon, and Kansas, with supporters citing those states as evidence that lower or no income taxes can attract growth, while opponents said Missouri’s economy, tourism, and budget structure are not comparable and that the Kansas example shows the risks of tax-cut experiments. The sponsor and several allies repeatedly stressed that the proposal is a constitutional amendment for voters to decide, not a final legislative tax hike, and said the plan is different from Kansas because it uses triggers and a defined path to zero. The transcript does not show a final vote on the resolution in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• at the same time. popular program in the state and cutting popular program in the state and cutting
• </c><00:33:34.559><c> of</c> education system here in the state of education system here in the state
• </c><00:37:38.079><c> um</c> I'm thinking of like the Keen State um I'm thinking of like the Keen State
• and building our staying in our state and building our state<00:44:12.200><c> we're</c><00:44:12.359
• </c><00:45:32.400><c> as</c> financial circumstances of the state as financial circumstances of the state

Summary: The committee first considered an amendment to add a new “Lakes” license plate to HB 2, with proceeds directed to the cyanobacteria fund for lake cleanup. Representative McGuire said the bill had already passed on consent and asked that it be included in HB 2; members discussed that it had also gone to the Senate. The motion to adopt the amendment failed on a 7-8 vote. The committee then took up an amendment imposing a 5% administrative fee on certain dedicated funds, with several exemptions for funds that could not legally or appropriately be charged, such as those involving federal money or bequests. Supporters said it would make the treatment of dedicated funds more consistent and raise roughly $31 million over the biennium for the general fund, while opponents questioned the number of carve-outs and who currently pays the administrative costs. The amendment failed on a 4-5 vote. Next, the committee reconsidered and then adopted an amendment changing the distribution of business profits tax and business enterprise tax revenue, reducing the share going to the Education Trust Fund from 41% to 30% and increasing the General Fund share. Supporters argued the Senate had overfunded the Education Trust Fund and that the change would help balance the budget without changing education spending levels; opponents said they could not support taking money from the Education Trust Fund. The amendment passed 5-3. The committee also adopted, by the same 5-3 margin, an amendment incorporating HB 741 language on open enrollment and student attendance in public schools, with supporters calling it House policy and opponents noting it had been a close, partly partisan vote in the House. Finally, the committee considered a change to the University System of New Hampshire budget that would reduce general fund appropriations by $40 million per year, offset in part by $15 million in previously approved unique dollars for a net reduction of $25 million per year. Supporters said the cut was necessary to balance the budget and that other options had been exhausted; opponents called it harmful to the university system and argued the committee should instead look to other areas, including education freedom accounts, for savings. The discussion continued, but the transcript excerpt ends before a final vote on the UNH item.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator, there are always some EMS caregivers that move from state to state.
• Court for the state of.
• state procurement, and it goes To these 32 providers across the state.
• across the entire state.
• It also creates an out-of-state telehealth registry for out-of-state telehealth and other state medical

Committee: Senate Senate Health & Public Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• present in the United States.
• Florida resident can marry someone from out of state so their spouse can get in-state tuition.
• for in-state tuition. ...in getting in-state tuition or someone not eligible for in-state tuition.
• This law that offers in-state tuition for undocumented students has impacted our state.
• The Florida State folks might think it's Florida State that has the lowest admissions rate in our state

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The Appropriations Committee took up SB 2B, a major immigration bill by Senator Gruters, described by supporters as a Trump-aligned package to strengthen Florida’s role in immigration enforcement. The bill would create a grant program for local law enforcement, expand jail-ICE agreements beyond sheriff-operated jails, establish a chief immigration officer and a state immigration enforcement council, require more coordination on E-Verify and detention-bed reporting, allow immigration status to be considered in bail decisions, increase penalties for certain offenses tied to illegal reentry and voting, and repeal in-state tuition waivers for undocumented students. Much of the sponsor’s presentation and debate emphasized focusing on criminal offenders, improving coordination with federal authorities, and using state resources to support detention and enforcement. Committee questioning focused heavily on the tuition-waiver repeal, reimbursement for jail costs, E-Verify coverage, and whether the bill could lead to street-level immigration enforcement in schools or churches. Senator Smith, Senator Pizzo, Senator Polsky, Senator Sharief, and others challenged the tuition repeal as unfair to students who were brought to Florida as children and argued for grandfathering current students or studying the fiscal impact first. Senator Fine defended the repeal as ending a state subsidy for people who are not lawfully present and argued the change would save tens of millions of dollars. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified that the bill was limited to jail-based enforcement, said there was no current street-level 287(g) program in Florida, and stated he did not believe the bill raised concerns for law enforcement or schools/churches. A representative of the Florida Supervisors of Elections supported the voting-related section, while a Florida Highway Patrol representative said state agencies would need additional funding if they were expected to take on more enforcement duties. The committee adopted Senator Gruters’ late-filed amendment correcting a drafting error. Senator Smith’s amendment to require an OPAGA study on the tuition-waiver policy was withdrawn after discussion, and his handwritten amendment to delete the repeal of in-state tuition for undocumented students failed on a roll-call vote. The bill then advanced as amended, with several members speaking in debate both for and against it. Supporters framed it as a focused public-safety and enforcement measure; opponents criticized the special-session process, the cost, and the tuition repeal’s impact on students already enrolled.

Transcript Highlights:

• , all General Fund-State.
• all general fund state.
• We're in Washington State.
• by state government than this state.
• by state government than this state.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee met in executive session on a proposed substitute operating budget bill and worked through a long series of amendments before voting on the bill. Members discussed a wide range of budget items, including court funding for Thurston County civil filings, Attorney General funding for a domestic extremism task force, grants for Yakima aquatics access, North Mason mobile integrated health, mentoring programs, poverty reduction work, a proposed Department of Housing task force, federal grant inventory staffing, HEAL Act funding, assisted living rebasing, DCYF family resource centers and pediatric interim care, law enforcement training and equipment, shellfish and birthing center licensing fees, school bus depreciation, charter school accountability, transition to kindergarten priorities, and several Fish and Wildlife and OSPI grants. The committee also considered amendments related to the Columbia River Gorge Commission, shrub-steppe habitat mitigation, and a study on Lower Snake River reservoir drawdown impacts. Debate on many amendments centered on whether items were statewide priorities or local projects, and on the fiscal constraints of the budget. Supporters often argued that proposals would protect vulnerable populations, improve public safety, or leverage future savings and outside funding; opponents frequently cited budget pressure, the availability of existing funding, or the need to avoid singling out local projects. Some amendments were adopted, including Clark 343 on intent to fund up to 10,000 additional eCAP slots, Jones 419 on paint stewardship funding, and Stevens 070 limiting birthing center license fees. Many others failed, including amendments on Thurston County court funding, the domestic extremism task force, Yakima aquatics, North Mason mobile integrated health, mentoring, poverty reduction workgroup funding, the Department of Housing task force, federal grant staffing, HEAL Act funding, assisted living rebasing, the PIC Center contract, the Lacey regional training academy, and several Fish and Wildlife and OSPI-related proposals. The committee then moved to the underlying bill, Proposed Substitute House Bill 2289, and adopted a do pass motion after disposing of the amendments. The transcript indicates the committee ultimately reported the bill out of committee with a do pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• It prohibits the state protocol officer, the Secretary of State, from encouraging a sister city or sister
• state affiliation.
• states to help them build out state solutions to national security problems.
• All of those kinds of individuals are being targeted by the Chinese Party state in the United States
• Similarly, Section 10 bars state contracting related to the state.

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 1178, the Foreign Interference Restriction and Enforcement Act. Senator Grohl explained that the bill expands state restrictions and disclosure requirements related to foreign countries of concern and designated foreign terrorist organizations, including foreign-agent registration, gift bans for public officials, ethics training, procurement limits for IT and critical infrastructure, restrictions on sister-city/sister-state affiliations, changes to linkage institutes and in-state tuition provisions, and new criminal penalties for certain offenses committed to benefit foreign governments or terrorist organizations. Senator Polsky raised questions about higher education, election technology, federal FARA overlap, and whether the bill would affect candidates or events involving CARE; the sponsor responded that the bill focuses on foreign countries of concern, ownership/control, and gifts, and does not prohibit speaking at events. An amendment clarifying definitions, willful violations, and ethics-training content was adopted, and after supportive testimony from Kelly Curry and Robert Pierce, the committee reported CS for SB 1178 favorably. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1622, which provides a one-time waiver of the automatic fine for a late-filed financial disclosure if the filing is made before the maximum fine accrues and the filer has not previously received such a waiver or accrued the maximum fine in prior years. Carrie Stillman of the Commission on Ethics testified that the bill supports transparency and makes the fine and appeals process more efficient, noting it was a commission recommendation. The bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee held confirmation hearings on appointments in Tabs 3 through 26. No senator requested separate votes on any appointee, no public testimony was offered, and the block of appointments was approved and recommended favorably to the full Senate.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that would mean that a rule can be passed by a vote of 16 states with 15 states objecting to that
• However, it does not state in here, as I pointed out earlier, it states that our administrative rules
• of 16 states with 15 states objecting to that rule, yet those 15 states would now be bound by a rule
• for those. person to move state to state.
• So yes, there are costs that arise when you move state to state.

Bills: SB540 , HB1085 , HB1484

Summary: The Senate convened, established a quorum, and opened with prayer and several introductions, including the nurse of the day and student guests. The chamber then took up Senate Bill 540, a Department of Defense-request compact bill creating a dental/dental hygienist licensure compact. The author and supporters said it would improve reciprocity and help military spouses and workforce needs without lowering Oklahoma standards, while several senators raised concerns about sovereignty, rulemaking authority, potential enforcement actions, and possible costs. After debate, the bill passed 35-12. The Senate next considered House Bill 1085, which would standardize and adjust the fee structure for the service contract industry. An amendment changing dates was adopted, and the bill passed 44-3. The chamber then heard House Bill 1484, a fentanyl education bill requiring instruction for students in grades 6-12 on the dangers and consequences of fentanyl exposure. The author described it as a response to rising fentanyl deaths and a tribute to a young victim; the bill was said to apply to school districts and, by understanding, private schools as well. It passed 47-9 and then passed as an emergency measure. Before adjournment, senators also introduced visiting students and family members affected by fentanyl, and members made announcements about an appropriations subcommittee meeting and a Farm Bureau of Women lunch. The Senate then adopted a motion to adjourn until Thursday, February 12th at 9:30 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, the practice for State Police is that if it's an out-of-state vehicle with no insurance, the
• In every state, the way I understand it—and State Police may be able to clarify this more—but the way
• Do states...
• Do states share information as to whether an individual who's in a state from a different state has valid
• One, I know you had stated that not all states participate in the online system. Is that correct?

Committee: House Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• As background, the state broadband office is the central broadband planning office for the state, and
• industry in the state.
• industry in the state.
• There are folks here who can get way into the state of the state of Washington And under the governor's
• So I think, like the governor indicated, it is state of the state.

Summary: The Technology, Economic Development and Veterans Committee held public hearings on three bills and then a work session on tourism. House Bill 2365, concerning digital equity programs, would shift more responsibility to the Broadband Office, rename the Digital Equity Opportunity Program as the Digital Opportunity Program, expand the forum’s role, and require more reporting and outreach on broadband adoption and affordability. The prime sponsor and several advocates from community organizations, PTA, and digital navigation groups supported the bill, emphasizing the need for digital skills, cybersecurity, affordability, and trusted community partners. Commerce testified that the bill has technical and fiscal concerns and would add costs, and the sponsor said amendments were likely to reduce the fiscal impact. The hearing on HB 2365 was then closed. House Bill 2446 would direct the Department of Commerce to develop a state quantum strategy by June 30, using non-state funding if possible, to identify growth areas, partnerships, and workforce and economic impacts for the quantum industry. The prime sponsor, industry representatives, and technology organizations supported the bill as a way to keep Washington competitive with other states and build a quantum ecosystem. Committee members raised questions about fiscal impact, private funding, regulatory capture, and cybersecurity risks, including concerns about quantum’s effect on passwords and AI-related harms. A Microsoft representative requested a technical amendment to broaden the definition from quantum computing to quantum technology and said the company would follow up on funding and AI-regulation questions. The hearing on HB 2446 was closed. House Bill 2357 would create a Washington Division of Civil Air Patrol within the Military Department, allowing the governor to activate it for cadet training, communications, disaster relief, cybersecurity, search and rescue, and related missions. The sponsor, the adjutant general, the Civil Air Patrol commander, and a veterans coalition representative all supported the bill, citing recent flood response work, emergency preparedness, and youth training benefits. Testimony emphasized that the proposal would clarify coordination, not change federal authorities, and would not create a fiscal impact. The hearing on HB 2357 was closed without any amendment requests. In the work session on tourism, State of Washington Tourism and industry partners presented recommendations from an advisory group calling for a more sustainable, industry-led funding model, likely through an assessment or visitor-fee structure. They argued Washington is underfunded compared with western peers and estimated that a competitive program could generate $14.6 billion in additional visitor spending over the next decade, along with significant tax revenue and lodging tax growth. Speakers from tourism, the wine commission, hospitality, and advisory group leadership stressed predictable funding, industry governance, and statewide benefits, while committee members discussed international tourism, regional access, and the need to avoid further decline in the sector. The meeting adjourned early after the work session.