Transcript Highlights:

• One is that it no longer requires a one-on-one check.
• We filed a motion to dismiss on behalf of Secretary Hobbs, which will be fully briefed as of today, and
• We filed a motion to dismiss on behalf of Secretary Hobbs, which will be fully briefed as of today. to
• dismiss on behalf of Secretary Hobbs, which will be fully briefed as of today, and we have a hearing
• I'd just add that in our briefing in the lawsuit challenging the second executive order, one concern

Summary: The House State Government & Tribal Relations Committee held a virtual work session focused first on federal actions affecting elections. A representative from NCSL reviewed recent U.S. Supreme Court and pending cases, including a redistricting/Voting Rights Act case and a case on whether mailed ballots received after Election Day can be counted. She also discussed a Trump executive order directing USPS to draft mail-ballot rules, the federal SAVE system’s expanded use for voter list maintenance, DOJ requests for unredacted voter rolls, and reduced federal election-security support. Committee members asked about proof of citizenship requirements, whether DOJ requests are compulsory, and how federal election funding and grants may be changing. The Attorney General’s Office then described Washington’s litigation challenging two election-related executive orders and DOJ’s lawsuit seeking unredacted voter registration lists. State lawyers said courts have already enjoined parts of the executive orders, including documentary proof-of-citizenship requirements and voting-system changes, and have upheld Washington’s ballot-receipt deadlines so far. They said DOJ’s voter-roll demands have been rejected by multiple courts and that Washington’s position is that state law limits disclosure of sensitive voter data. Members asked about the legal basis for DOJ’s requests, the risk of immigration-enforcement use, and whether attestation on registration forms counts as proof of citizenship; the office said it does under state law and that no evidence of mass voter-fraud problems in Washington has been shown. Deputy Attorney General Todd Bowers then gave a broader overview of the Attorney General’s federal litigation, saying Washington has filed 61 cases since January 2025, often with other states, and has had notable success obtaining preliminary injunctions and favorable summary judgments. He highlighted cases involving election rules, environmental and energy disputes, public health funding, student loans, housing, and data privacy, and said many challenges involve executive-branch conditions added to congressionally appropriated funds. He also described a growing number of federal audits and inquiries directed at state agencies. Finally, Office of Equity Director Megan Matthews discussed how federal actions are affecting state and local equity work, community organizations, and public confidence. She said the office is coordinating more closely with the Attorney General, governor’s office, other agencies, and local governments through the immigration subcabinet, while also working on data privacy, Keep Washington Working compliance, and community outreach. Committee members asked about the office’s human-trafficking work and how it is encouraging agency compliance; Matthews said the focus is on clearer guidance, technical support, and consistent expectations across agencies. The committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the most important benefits of the budget increase is the ability to implement the electronic
• He said the biggest benefit of the new budget is that it gives the agency wiggle room to work on the
• on a on a non-stop ever since but never on a on a holistic<00:26:52.480><c> comprehensive</c><00:26:
• A couple of items to note for this committee: in the governor's revised budget recommendations, one of
• A couple of items to note for this committee: in the governor's revised budget recommendations, one of

Bills: HF2432

Committee: House Public Safety Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Anybody on Zoom? wishing to testify? Anybody on Zoom?
• Anybody on<00:54:10.000><c> Zoom?</c> on Zoom? on Zoom?
• </c> with comments on Zoom. with comments on Zoom.
• We'll move on to the last bill on the agenda.
• Anybody on Zoom? Okay, thank you. No one to question. Moving on to Senate Bill 662 SD1/HD2.

Committee: House Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, we have one nomination, six bills on the agenda.
• we're taking the budget out.
• Chairman, could I add a brief comment on the matter?
• So that's why I pose... the second one on the first front on that bill.
• The second one, which is 5445, is the one that says that the cap on the penalty will be at instead of

Bills: SB1040 , SB1041 , SB1095 , SB1096 , SB1097 , SB527

Committee: Senate Senate Judiciary

Keywords: drug competition, product hopping, generic drugs, biosimilars, federal regulations, FTC Act, Federal Trade Commission, sham petitions, competition, public health, unfair competition, healthcare, pharmaceutical, antitrust law, pay-for-delay, reverse payment settlement, interchangeable biologics, brand-name pharmaceuticals, patent settlement, antitrust

Summary: The meeting focused on addressing the high cost of prescription drugs and the abusive practices that contribute to elevated prices affecting American families. Several bills were presented, including proposals to end pay-for-delay deals and to enhance transparency in the operations of pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs). The discussion was notable for its emphasis on consumer protection and ensuring that cheaper generic drugs reach the market more effectively. Members expressed frustration over past attempts to pass similar legislation stalling in the Senate, leading to renewed efforts to push these bills forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Natalie, please brief the commission on this agenda item.
• Chair: Amanda, will you please brief the commission on this agenda item?
• Chair: Natalie, why don't you brief the commissioners on this agenda item?
• Chair: Amanda, will you brief the commission on this agenda item?
• Amanda, brief us on this, please.

Summary: The Texas Ethics Commission convened at 9:03 a.m. and held an executive session, reconvening at 10:18 a.m. During the meeting, the Commission approved a settlement agreement with Michael Quinn Sullivan, ending ongoing litigation. The agreement involved Sullivan dropping his legal challenges regarding a civil penalty previously imposed by the Commission. The Commission also announced personnel changes, including the departure of the director of enforcement, Marie Prim, and the appointment of Jordan Hun as interim director. The Commission discussed outside counsel contracts, approving the addition of Bickerstaff, Heath, Delgado, Acosta LLP to their pool of qualified vendors. They scheduled their next meeting for September 23rd and approved minutes from previous meetings. The agenda included several rulemaking items, with three rules adopted and five proposed for publication in the Texas Register. Notably, amendments to Chapter 20 regarding reporting contributions and expenditures were approved, as well as changes to lobbyist registration thresholds in Chapter 34, which were proposed for publication. The Commission also addressed advisory opinions, adopting several, including one regarding political advertising by charter schools and another concerning the revolving door prohibition for former state employees. Appeals for administrative waivers and reductions of fines were considered, with several fines waived or reduced based on individual circumstances. Lastly, the Commission discussed policies related to alternative dispute resolution and clarified responsibilities between the Commission and staff, concluding the meeting at 11:15 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• Being one of the be-blazered frequent flyers, I will keep it brief.
• Um, what we do on an annual basis, we have a process for a capital budgeting task force, which includes
• Um, what we do on an annual basis, we have a process for a capital budgeting task force, which includes
• Um, what we do on an annual basis, we have a process for a capital budgeting task force, which includes
• Um, what we do on an annual basis, we have a process for a capital budgeting task force, which includes

Bills: HF4841 , HF4234 , HF3697

Committee: House Taxes

Keywords: Hennepin County, sales tax, health care facilities, ballpark improvements, tax revenue, HF4234, Minnesota private activity bonds, tax-exempt bonds, bond cap, aggregate bond limitation, residential rental projects, multifamily housing, affordable housing finance, housing bonds, public finance, bond allocation, private activity bond cap, Minnesota Statutes 474A.02, tax committee, tax refund

Transcript Highlights:

• This is, admittedly, one of the more mundane budget bills we handle—the nuts and bolts of state government
• Lady from Green, thank you to the briefing inquire of the Budget Chair.
• We had a brief conversation on our way in, and I asked you about your amendment.
• on the budget.
• You know, when I talk about, hey, you know, I have 300-plus million on the bottom line with this budget

Transcript Highlights:

• Indeed, I think we're hearing from one of your panelists later in the week with a demonstration on one
• And then we increased that a little bit in 2012 and on and on.
• And one other. In 2020, Okay. And one other.
• And so it will be a de minimis impact on the state budget to apply the $7,500, which is also... ...be
• a de minimis impact on the state budget to apply the $7,500, which is also refundable for low-income

Committee: Senate Senate Committee on Climate Change and Global Warming

Summary: The hearing focused on ways Massachusetts can accelerate solar deployment, lower costs, and preserve reliability as electricity demand rises and federal support for solar and other renewables changes. Chair Creem opened by emphasizing solar’s role in meeting climate mandates and peak demand, citing June heat-wave data showing behind-the-meter solar reduced wholesale prices and saved ratepayers money. Commissioner Elizabeth Mahoney of DOER said Massachusetts has grown from 3 MW of solar in 2008 to 3.5 GW today, highlighted SMART 3.0 as a flexible, evergreen incentive program, and said DOER is working on updated rates, interconnection reforms, flexible interconnection, net crediting, and a petition to the DPU to speed implementation. She also said Massachusetts joined the lawsuit over canceled federal Solar for All funding. Committee members and witnesses discussed several policy changes to speed projects before federal tax credits expire, including automated permitting, remote inspections, faster interconnection, and changes to caps on municipal and regional solar development. Senator Barrett pressed Mahoney on whether the 10 MW municipal cap and regional caps should be lifted, and on whether the state should increase its solar tax credit to offset the loss of the federal residential credit. Mahoney said the municipal cap should be revisited and that interconnection cost allocation and other market issues need to be worked out before lifting broader caps. She also said DOER is open to automated permitting and is already developing a permitting portal under the 2024 climate law. Industry and advocacy witnesses largely supported streamlining measures. Sunrun’s Bronte Payne urged removal of a proposed requirement that all net-metered facilities enroll in SMART, and recommended automated permitting, remote inspections, flexible interconnection, better hosting-capacity information, consumer protections, and continued support for Connected Solutions and virtual power plants. Permit Power’s Hannah Bernbaum and Solar App’s Matthew McAllister argued that smart permitting and remote inspections can significantly reduce soft costs and delays, with McAllister saying Solar App now operates in over 320 jurisdictions and saves about three weeks on average. They said remote inspections are already common and can be done safely with photos, video, and qualified third parties. Community solar and clean energy advocates, including CCSA’s Kate Daniel and Vote Solar’s Lindsay Griffin, supported a 10 GW solar target by 2035, a higher refundable state tax credit for low-income households, interconnection reforms, flexible interconnection, and preserving the option to build outside SMART so projects can retain renewable energy certificates. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and members requested follow-up materials and draft language from witnesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Education Finance.
• Assembly Budget Committee No. 2 on Human Services and the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Education
• On page 13 of your agenda, you'll see the list of activities that were in the 2025-26 budget.
• On reading screening, he supported the budget proposal for $40 million in one-time funds for successful
• Maiavau-Werno with Cadengo, and today I'm here on behalf of the ECE Budget Coalition.

Transcript Highlights:

• I can keep this brief and talk that the biological... one of the greatest outcomes of the one of the
• > on one side than the on one side than the other<00:32:13.880><c> firearm</c><00:32:14.320><c> Zone<
• I'm new to this issue, I'll admit, so I'll keep my comments brief and work to build on what Ben shared
• and work to uh keep my comments brief and work to uh build<00:45:34.119><c> on</c><00:45:34.319><c>
• </c> with the author on on the the change with the author on on the the change from<00:48:06.079><c>

Bills: HF647 , HF2824 , HF1249 , HF623 , HF820

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• I spoke with one of them last night on the phone.
• The last two weeks before we voted on a budget, my next-to-last week was 85 hours, and you were still
• day one.
• day one.
• This is one time I'm going to be very brief, Senator Pasadomo, because I just want to say thank you for

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion on the amendment? Do you want to just do a brief?
• two, three, one at a time on the provisions of yours.
• That, I believe you're one to... other representative on that one, I think.
• That, I believe you're one to... other representative on that one, I think.
• And those are some givens that, you know what, if you're on a limited budget, you're not going to be

Committee: House General Laws

Transcript Highlights:

• If you go to slide 3, just a general overview of our overall budget, we operate on about $33 million
• , on.
• Uh, today, Kelly and I will be providing a brief overview on the status of capital appropriations in
• It describes the current phase that projects are in, as well as brief comments on the status of the projects
• For one, you only get one reauth in one year and if not, it goes away.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is the timer on?
• Go ahead and come on up. Chance. Go ahead and come on up.
• And just one other clarification: the expert, I think, mentioned in your brief opening that this isn't
• We can only have one on. And so I also have Larry Horan, who has also been working on this.
• We can only have one on. And so I also have Larry Horan, who has also been working on this.

Summary: The Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee heard and voted on several bills, beginning with SB 190, which would authorize revenue bonds for Gila Regional Medical Center to replace an aging linear accelerator for cancer treatment. The sponsor and hospital representatives said the project is critical for rural patients who otherwise travel long distances for radiation therapy. After a brief amendment changing the bond term from 20 to 30 years, the committee advanced the bill 7-0. The committee then took up SB 152, a broadband affordability and rural telecommunications bill that would keep money in the broadband fund for maintenance, expansion, and a new affordability program after the federal ACP lapsed. The sponsor and broadband stakeholders said the bill is needed to close the digital divide, while some industry witnesses supported the affordability goal but wanted changes to broaden eligibility and adjust program rules. The committee heard public testimony from supporters and opponents, then passed the bill 8-0. Next, SB 77 would require certain highway and public works contractors to contribute to apprenticeship training funds; labor groups supported it as workforce development, while highway and asphalt contractors opposed it as an added cost and argued they already run their own training programs. After extended debate about whether the 60-cent-per-hour contribution would raise project costs or simply redirect existing prevailing-wage funds, the committee advanced SB 77 on a 5-3 vote. The committee also heard SB 182, a dyed diesel gross receipts tax deduction for agricultural use, but held it for the tax package without a vote. SB 151, a corporate income tax decoupling bill intended to recover revenue lost to federal tax changes, drew strong support from tax and advocacy groups and strong opposition from business, oil and gas, and chamber representatives who called it a tax increase that would hurt investment and competitiveness. Committee members raised concerns about long-term revenue stability and business impacts, but the sponsors said the bill would restore state tax capacity and selectively decouple from federal provisions; the bill was held for later consideration in the tax package. Finally, the committee heard SB 133 on eliminating gross receipts tax on medical providers for medical equipment and supplies, and SB 212 on a ski-area construction equipment gross receipts tax exemption, with sponsors arguing both would improve competitiveness and support industry investment; both were discussed as possible tax-package items and held for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• time and on budget.
• It's coming up on 25 years old. We do that one building or one place at a time.
• is on our mind.
• I don't really want to go on and on about it. I just...
• Keep it very, very brief because we have one more thing. Very brief. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Committee: House New Mexico Finance Authority Oversight Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• This will be a big impact on them, on our schools, on services to the elderly, services to the veterans
• The list goes on and on.
• local bodies lose out on the money that they're collecting on the contracts.
• I'll be brief.
• I found it very interesting that there was not one member on this committee, not one, who suggested that

Bills: SB100

Committee: House House Judiciary

Keywords: burglary, aggravated burglary, dwelling, criminal law, property rights

Transcript Highlights:

• today on September 15th after one o'clock.
• The first one that you see in front of you is on the shared-use path on Oregon, on Hayden Island.
• The first one that you see in front of EU is on the shared use path, on Oregon, on Hayden Island.
• And when we miss our deadlines, it really does have an impact on our transportation budget as we try
• And the FTA oversight continues throughout the project, monitoring how we're doing on budget, schedule

Committee: Joint Joint Oregon-Washington Legislative Action Committee

Summary: The Joint Special Session Committee on the Interstate 5 Bridge met jointly with the Washington-Oregon Legislative Action Committee and adopted its proposed committee rules. Program staff then provided updates on the Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) project, saying the work remains in the supplemental environmental impact statement process, with a final SEIS and amended record of decision expected in early 2026 before construction can begin. Staff reported progress on Section 106 historic preservation work, a NOAA Fisheries biological opinion, and an upcoming Coast Guard navigational impact report that will help determine whether the bridge will be a fixed or movable span. They also described extensive outreach, tribal consultation, and architectural workshops that produced non-final visualizations and guidance for the bridge, corridor, shared-use paths, walls, lighting, and landscape treatments. Members pressed staff on schedule delays, rising costs, accessibility, and whether community input would change the design. Senator Pham questioned the repeated slippage in the environmental timeline and the effect on taxpayer costs; staff said the process is complex, that some steps are outside the program’s control, and that they are working toward a 2026 record of decision. Representative Bostert Davis urged the program to emphasize functionality, safety, efficiency, and economy over aesthetics. Representative Tran asked about accessibility on the Vancouver side, and staff said the shared-use path height is constrained by the BNSF rail line but that they are working with local partners to improve connections and that public comments have already influenced the design. Representative Lay asked about the movable-span option and cost impacts; staff said a movable span would likely add more than $400 million but they still expect to keep the overall construction start in 2026. The committee also received funding and tolling updates. Staff said the program has committed state and federal funding in place, including the initial state contributions, Washington’s and Oregon’s larger commitments, and federal grants totaling about $2.1 billion, while tolling is expected to contribute roughly $1.1 billion to $1.6 billion depending on the final plan. They said the updated cost estimate is being developed now using a risk-based process and should be ready for the committee in December. On the transit side, staff outlined the Federal Transit Administration Capital Investment Grant process, including project development, engineering, and a target full funding grant agreement in 2028, and said Oregon’s transit operations and maintenance share is committed through TriMet while Washington-side funding is still being worked out. The tolling agencies then described Level 3 traffic and revenue work, possible toll scenarios, exemptions and discounts, and a planned 2027 start for pre-completion tolling. Public testimony followed, with supporters urging the project to move ahead and critics arguing it is behind schedule, underestimating costs, and facing uncertain toll and federal funding assumptions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The purpose of this informational briefing is to provide an update on findings from the deportation data
• The purpose of this informational briefing is to provide an update on findings from the deportation data
• on Oahu.
• on Oahu.
• Here on Oahu.

Summary: The Committee on Public Safety held an informational briefing on findings from the deportation data project and possible policy responses to increased federal immigration enforcement in Hawaii. In opening remarks, the chair said the committee was concerned about changing federal executive orders, policies, and enforcement actions, and framed the issue as one involving due process and public safety. The chair and presenters described reports of ICE activity on multiple islands, including raids, courthouse presence, and fear in immigrant communities, and said the committee was considering whether state policies should be advanced more quickly. Mandy Fernandez of the ACLU of Hawaii presented updated deportation data and argued that increased immigration enforcement is creating fear, reducing crime reporting, and potentially making state and local agencies extensions of the federal immigration agenda if they accept federal funding with conditions. She said the deportation data project, housed at UC Berkeley Law with UCLA’s Center for Immigration Law and Policy, uses FOIA requests and its latest data runs through late July 2025. She reported 153 ICE arrests in Hawaii from January through July 2025, up from 41 in the same period in 2024; 96 removals, up from 15; a federal detention center average daily population of 91 in June 2025 versus 31 in June 2024; and 111 ICE detainers issued in Hawaii from September 2023 through July 2025, with 49 issued in 2025. She also cited an immigration court backlog of 1,144 pending cases as of August 2025 and noted that about one in five Hawaii residents were born outside the United States. Haley Chang of the Office of the Public Defender said her office is seeing a marked increase in ICE presence around courthouses and more ICE contacts with clients, including reports of people being detained after court appearances or while on supervision. She emphasized that the office is not an immigration law office and that much of its information is anecdotal, but said the pattern appears new compared with prior years. In response to committee questions, she explained that ICE detainers are requests, not judicial warrants, and said local law enforcement is generally not required to honor them unless accompanied by a judicial warrant or other legal authority. She also said the public defender’s office had not yet seen new criminal charges arise solely from an ICE detention or failure to appear tied to immigration enforcement, though cases could be affected if defendants are removed from the criminal process.

Transcript Highlights:

• on July 4th.
• No one signed up to testify. We received one support, one comment.
• </c> one support, one comment. one support, one comment.
• No<00:38:34.000><c> one</c> No one No one has<00:38:35.600><c> questions</c><00:38:36.040><c> of,</c>
• Voting on SCR 11. Thank you. Voting on SCR 11.

Committee: House Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Summary: The Committee on Hawaiian Affairs heard several Senate concurrent resolutions. SCR 11, urging Congress to amend the Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity, drew support from the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women and Pride at Work Hawaii, both of which backed the measure as a statement of equality and protection for LGBTQIA+ people. A member also reminded testifiers to keep signs and statements relevant to the measure. SCR 22, recognizing the 50th anniversary of the restoration of Ahu and Aliʻa, had no testimony. SCR 58, calling for a progressive enforcement framework for parking violations in DLNR boating and ocean recreation lots, drew strong support from multiple testifiers who argued that towing is overly punitive, costly, and unfair to beach and harbor users; they favored warnings or smaller citations instead of towing and raised concerns about signage, contract oversight, and the cost of proposed enforcement technology. One member asked about whether DLNR could use HPD or other officers for citations, and the discussion focused on staffing and enforcement authority. The committee then heard SCR 60 SD1, requesting an update on the “Breaking Cycles” study on alternative rehabilitation and restorative justice models on Oahu. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation was not present, but the Corrections Reform Working Group strongly supported the resolution, saying the study reflects extensive community outreach and should not be shelved. Testifiers urged the committee to use the report to examine alternatives to a new jail, including diversion, pre-trial reform, probation reform, and renovations to existing facilities, and one testifier suggested amendments to add experts in those areas and technical assistance from the Prison Policy Initiative. Another testifier described Maui’s use of wraparound reentry services, prosecutorial discretion, and programming as an example of reducing incarceration without expanding jail capacity. SCR 184, asking the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission to examine anti-discrimination laws as applied to algorithmic and automated decision systems, had no in-person testimony, with the chair noting one support and one comment submitted. The final measure, SCR 89 SD1, which would create an advisory committee under the Hawaii correctional system oversight commission to develop recommendations on alternative rehabilitation and restorative justice models on Oahu, also had no testimony from the department, but the Corrections Reform Working Group supported it as a way to ensure community input into jail planning. A later testifier echoed concerns about building a large new jail and urged the committee to consider alternatives to incarceration and to include people with expertise in diversion, pre-trial reform, and probation reform. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• the budget, proviso, and back of the bill.
• So I'd like to say thank you on that.
• One hour notice. Do you mind please stating your name?
• So I'd like to say thank you on that.
• One hour notice.

Summary: The meeting focused on the House’s first offer on the budget, proviso, and back-of-the-bill items in negotiations with the Senate. Representative Persons-Mulica explained that the House’s proposal would create an academic acceleration options supplement to support advanced courses such as AP, IB, ACE, and CAP, and would fund that supplement at 100% of the amount generated under the current statutory weight system, rather than the lower level included in the Senate’s proposal. She said the House’s offer would provide more funding to every district than this year and at least as much as the current formula would generate. She also highlighted two back-of-the-bill items: a Family Empowerment Scholarship Stabilization Enrollment Program to provide additional funding if enrollment projections create issues, and a provision allowing early learning coalitions to use unexpended school readiness funds in fiscal year 2025-26. Senator Burgess praised the offer and noted the House and Senate were working toward addressing concerns raised during session. A public commenter, a longtime teacher, thanked lawmakers for preserving funding for academically rigorous courses and urged future improvements in school funding and teacher pay. Representative Joseph asked how the additional supplemental funds would be allocated between district schools and other programs, and Persons-Mulica said that guidance would be included in a forthcoming conforming bill. With no further questions or public comment, the committee moved to adjourn, and the meeting ended with notice that it could reconvene on one hour’s notice.