Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, it's in there now as to the penalties for uh violating this section.
• So you have sections of uh the borders.
• This is just bringing some code sections forward.
• It should all be just bring the code sections forward.
• </c> just bringing some code sections just bringing some code sections forward.<00:36:44.960><c> Uh</

Keywords: Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks - Room 210, 2 February, 2026; 3:00 P.M., 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of Justice from 2019 to 2022 concerning the repealed criminal statute of Penal Code Section 653.22.
• One of the other topics I just wanted to touch on for this section is at the California Department of
• This concludes the data presentation for this section of the hearing. Thank you.
• So the percentage of people who were either arrested or prosecuted for Penal Code Section 653.22 from
• And as I indicated, our special prosecution section is statewide.

Summary: The Assembly Standing Committee on Public Safety held an informational hearing in Pomona on sex work-related crimes and efforts to combat human trafficking. The chair and Assembly Member Michelle Rodriguez framed the issue as a major public safety and victim-protection concern, referencing the repeal of the loitering law in SB 357 and the recent enactment of AB 379, which targets buyers of sex rather than sex workers. The hearing was organized into three panels: data and research, policing and anti-trafficking efforts, and courtroom/prosecution impacts. In the first panel, the California Department of Justice presented arrest and conviction data for the repealed loitering statute, noting overall declines from 2019 to 2022 but also explaining that the data did not distinguish clearly between people selling sex, people loitering to sell, and people purchasing sex. USC law professor Hannah Gary summarized a 2021 report finding that law enforcement stings and raids often lack transparency, disproportionately harm Black women, minors, LGBTQ+ people, and undocumented migrants, and rarely achieve the stated goals of protecting victims, prosecuting traffickers, or preventing trafficking. The ACLU of Southern California argued that criminalization of sex work is discriminatory and historically used to police women and people of color, and that laws aimed at buyers still harm sex workers and can increase immigration consequences. Committee members asked about data collection, racial disparities, and whether the new law could worsen profiling; the panelists urged public health approaches, better data, and more survivor services. The second panel featured the California DOJ human trafficking coordinator, Pomona Police Chief Mike Ellis, and survivor advocate Jess Torres of Rising Worldwide. DOJ described its regional trafficking teams, task forces, victim services, and prosecutions, emphasizing a victim-centered and trauma-informed approach. Chief Ellis said SB 357 limited police intervention and contributed to visible open-air prostitution near schools and other sensitive locations, citing complaints from residents and a reported drop in juvenile rescues in Pomona after the law changed; he supported AB 63-style enforcement with safeguards and service referrals. Torres, speaking as a survivor, argued that anti-trafficking policy must be survivor-led, that many youth in the sex trade are boys or LGBTQ youth, and that criminalization and street enforcement often worsen harm and displacement rather than solving the underlying problems. In the final panel, a Riverside County deputy district attorney said AB 63 could help law enforcement make earlier contact with potential victims and identify traffickers, while stressing the need for training, documentation, and oversight. A Los Angeles County public defender argued that prosecuting trafficked people reinforces traffickers’ control, creates lifelong barriers, and retraumatizes survivors, and pointed to diversion programs as a better model. The Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking began its testimony by describing its survivor services and crisis response work. The hearing ended without any vote or formal action, but with committee members and witnesses continuing to debate the balance between enforcement, data collection, and survivor-centered services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, you said that your C-section prediction tool, The C-section prediction tool can predict with 90%
• accuracy whether a C-section will be needed.
• because the tool outputted a C-section prediction.
• And having had incredible care, I was on the verge of a C-section with my first.
• Sections. So can you talk a little bit about that? Yeah, it's a great point.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Health and Privacy Committees focused on generative AI in health care, with opening remarks emphasizing both its potential to improve care and its risks around privacy, bias, liability, workforce impacts, and unequal access. Chair Bauer-Kahan and Chair Bonta framed the discussion around how California can encourage beneficial innovation while protecting patients, especially given the sensitivity of health data and the possibility that AI could worsen existing disparities if not carefully governed. The first panel featured representatives from Cedars-Sinai, Kaiser Permanente, Penguin AI, and Google, who described current uses of AI such as ambient clinical scribes, nursing documentation tools, imaging triage, maternal-fetal risk prediction, and administrative automation. Speakers said these tools can reduce clinician burden, improve patient experience, speed treatment, and in some cases improve outcomes, including a reported mortality benefit from a Kaiser predictive model and faster thrombectomy times at Cedars-Sinai. Members raised concerns about accuracy with accents and multilingual visits, whether predictive tools could reinforce bias or lead to more interventions such as C-sections, and how to ensure a human remains in the loop for important decisions. The second panel, including representatives from the California Health Care Foundation, UC Berkeley, and Stanford, focused on policy and governance challenges. Testimony highlighted examples of AI supporting homelessness outreach and community health work, but also warned that biased algorithms can encode inequities, especially when trained on data that reflect under-treatment of Black, rural, or low-income patients. Witnesses urged clearer standards for trustworthy AI, stronger monitoring and governance structures, better data access for accountability, and attention to the safety net’s limited resources. Several speakers argued that states should require health systems to have AI governance processes, clarify liability between developers and deployers, and regulate downstream uses of AI while preserving access to data for lifesaving research and oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• . been voluntarily terminated, that section is A through U.
• And there's a section called Section O, which provides that agent. child's parents' rights can be terminated
• Dutton, is this section that you're going to take out, is this the section that the Chief Justice stood
• Under Rule 11, Section 2, on the grounds that the amendment is not germane to the bill.
• Consideration of House Bill Number 2001 under the Caption Rule, Rule 8, Section 1.

Bills: HB29, HB 125, HB145, HB171, HB255, HB50, HB796, HB363, HB 116, HB491, HB589, HB1495, HB368, HB 1285, HB1905, HB1360, HB2002, HB917, HB2723, HB2067, HB 1238, HB2337, HB745, HB 1188, HB1606, HB2003, HB2147, HB2391, HB2355, HB2546, HB2495, HB2818, HB2249, HB1749, HB3109, HB3228, HB3240, HB1507, HB658, HB1748, HB1851, HB1922, HB2001, HB2798, HB 107, HCR29, SB5, SB262, HB 11, HJR72, HB 106, HB18, HB48, HB27, HB37, HB1481, HB581, HB1696, HB2216, HB 1035, HB1633, HB742, HB754, HB1689, HB1690, HB2669, HB391, HB517, HB 1024, HB1607, HB252, HB1716, HB1562, HB4116, HB1866, HB1741, HB2103, HB2637, HB2884, HB503, HB 1089, HB2986, HB972, HB502, HB29, HB 125, HB145, HB171, HB255, HB50, HB796, HB363, HB 116, HB491, HB589, HB1495, HB368, HB 1285, HB1905, HB1360, HB2002, HB917, HB2723, HB2067, HB 1238, HB2337, HB745, HB 1188, HB1606, HB2003, HB2147, HB2391, HB2355, HB2546, HB2495, HB2818, HB2249, HB1749, HB3109, HB3228, HB3240, HB1507, HB658, HB1748, HB1851, HB1922, HB2001, HB2798, HB 107, HCR29

Keywords: water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection, billing data accuracy, utility validation, water audit validation, water scarcity, water management, infrastructure, public utility, conservation plan, administrative penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 1 is Representative Robbins' House File 2371, describing circumstances in which sensitive exams
• Sections 2 and 3 are the base bill that's being amended.
• These make technical changes to two sections on Environmental Laboratories.
• Article 1, Section 4 is Representative Lings' House File 1429.
• ><c> 1</c><00:01:57.880><c> Section</c><00:01:58.320><c> 4</c> Laboratories Article 1 Section 4 Laboratories

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• He said the question is what the intent was around that section.
• Cassie Aaki on the language for that specific section.
• She gave similar testimony last year about why this section was important in 417, so I will defer to
• Cassie Aaki on the language for that specific section.
• Cassie Aaki on the language for that specific section.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And with section seven of this bill, they will also be out of mind.
• </c><01:39:39.520><c> 1</c> We're first vote is to divide sections 1 We're first vote is to divide sections
• </c> vote to divide the remaining sections vote to divide the remaining sections and<02:26:17.280><c>
• So sections,<02:27:24.000><c> these</c><02:27:24.319><c> sections</c><02:27:24.800><c> move</c><02:27
• :25.040><c> us</c><02:27:25.200><c> in,</c> sections, these sections move us in, sections, these sections

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, as Tanner mentioned, each section has principles...
• Those are the three general sections.
• We have a section for the board, a section for the central office, and a section... ...three general
• sections, right?
• We have a section for the board, a section for the central office, a section for the schools, the resources

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It also creates, as noted, this new fraud section, and that is underway.
• It also creates, as noted, this new fraud section, and that is underway.
• It also creates, as noted, this new fraud section, and that is underway.
• It also creates, as noted, this new fraud section, and that is underway.
• 16.480><c> on</c><00:09:16.720><c> insurance</c> new section is focusing on insurance new section is

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, we're just going to delete that section A subsection B.
• Well, we're just going to delete that section A subsection B.
• </c> under section under section 269B<01:27:27.520><c> subsection</c><01:27:28.080><c> A.
• </c><01:27:35.600><c> A</c> just going to delete that uh section A just going to delete that uh section
• </c> we're going to take is under section we're going to take is under section 269B<01:28:54.320><c>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint Senate committees heard HB 108 HD2, which would allow direct shipment of beer and distilled spirits by certain licensees and require liquor commissions to adopt rules. Most testimony came from craft brewers and distillers in support, who said the bill would help small and fragile producers reach customers, move limited or specialty products that wholesalers do not carry, and maintain relationships with visitors after they leave Hawaii. Supporters also argued that direct-to-consumer shipping would not meaningfully increase underage access because common carriers age-gate deliveries and require adult signatures, and that the measure would supplement rather than replace the three-tier system. Opposition came from the Hawaii Food Industry Association and the Hawaii Liquor Wholesalers Association, which said the bill could create problems with minor access and tax revenue and would allow out-of-state manufacturers to ship directly to Hawaii households. Supporters responded that similar concerns were raised when wine direct shipping was adopted and said the existing shipping and reporting systems can track and tax these sales. Several witnesses, including Maui Brewing, Ola Brew, Koloa Rum, Hana Rum, Koulana Rumworks, Koval Distillery, and the Brewers Association, described their small-batch operations, limited distribution options, and the potential for direct shipping to expand sales and jobs. Committee members questioned witnesses about underage access, tax collection, and the impact on the three-tier system. One witness discussed efforts to protect and potentially scale the Hawaiian spirit Okolehao through geographic and sourcing rules. The transcript does not show a final vote or disposition on HB 108 HD2 in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 19 says no ex post facto law, bill of attainder, nor law impairing the obligation of contracts
• President Pro Tem Stewart and members of the Senate: Pursuant to Article 4, Section 5(B)(2) of the New
• President Pro Tem Stewart and members of the Senate: Pursuant to Article 4, Section 5(B)(2) of the New
• President Pro Tem Stewart and members of the Senate: Pursuant to Article 4, Section 5(B)(2) of the New
• President Pro Tem Stewart and members of the Senate: Pursuant to Article 4, Section 5(B)(2) of the New

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I would also say, just to highlight a couple other sections of the bill that are important, section four
• I would also say, just to highlight a couple other sections of the bill that are important, section four
• I would also say, just to highlight a couple other sections of the bill that are important, section four
• I would also say, just to highlight a couple other sections of the bill that are important, section four
• Next is the two repeal sections.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On page two, section one, it changes sections eight and nine from the original bill.
• </c><00:21:29.720><c> one</c> on page two section one on page two section one um<00:21:31.880><c> it<
• </c><00:24:34.400><c> four</c> that does would make that section four that does would make that section
• I bringing attention to that section.
• </c><00:30:40.840><c> in</c> bill because I think that section in bill because I think that section in

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Pro Tem: It's a Section 2 ruling.
• Pro Tem: The Supreme Court changed section of the Voting Rights Act. Mr.
• Pro Tem: The Supreme Court changed section of the Voting Rights Act.
• </c><00:14:48.720><c> 2</c> changed the interpretation of Section 2 changed the interpretation of Section
• Pro Tem: The change they made to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Mrs.

Bills: HB1

Keywords: HB1, Alabama, elections, primary election, special primary, runoff, congressional districts, redistricting, reapportionment, district boundaries, federal court, injunction, judgment, Governor proclamation, nominee certification, party nominee, general election 2026, election calendar, voting rights, congressional race

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me, let me ask you a question, you, um, Under section 107.104 of the Family code.
• If you look at Section 9.204, and I'm a little confused where Section 2 underneath it comes from, it
• As far as Section 6, again, this section enlarges the scope of relatives who can file a petition for
• The first section that I would like to look at, and I have nobody here.
• The next section, I'm very glad that 11 is gone.

Bills: HB116

Keywords: film industry, incentives, economic development, state funding, media production

Transcript Highlights:

• It actually shouldn't have been deleted; it should have been changed to the correct section, so we've
• It actually shouldn't have been deleted; it should have been changed to the correct section, so we've
• There's a section I referred to in my written testimony.
• There's a section I referred to in my written testimony.
• <01:03:41.480><c> 54</c> sections 54 sections 54 b-161<01:03:44.319><c> or</c><01:03:44.559><c> 514</

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on March 12, 2025, and heard testimony on several bills, with most measures drawing support from state boards, agencies, and industry groups. SB 102 (restaurants) had one supportive testifier and no questions. SB 1367 SD1 (installment loans) drew support from DCCA and other boards, but the chair raised concerns about a proposed $5 debit-card convenience fee, saying it seemed high and suggesting it might be amended downward; DCCA said it would check with industry on the likely impact. SB 1373 SD2 (administrative licensure action against sex offenders) received broad support from DCCA and multiple professional licensing boards, including psychology, physical therapy, naturopathic medicine, chiropractic, dentistry, massage therapy, nursing, optometry, barbering and cosmetology, the Hawaii Medical Board, and HPD. The committee then heard SB 1142 SD1 (insurance proceeds), which was supported by DCCA, the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, AARP, Hawaiʻi Realtors, and the Hawaiʻi Insurers Council, while State Farm offered comments and the Hawaii Bankers Association opposed. Testimony focused on insurance access after the Lahaina wildfires and the need to address underinsured homeowners. The committee also discussed SB 144 SD2 (stabilization of property insurance), with support from the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, AARP, Hawaiʻi Realtors, and the Hawaiʻi Insurers Council, and comments from the Attorney General and DCCA Insurance Division about revising the financing structure and correcting bill language. Opponents and reservationed supporters argued the bill may not help if applicants can still obtain coverage at very high prices, while supporters said it would expand market capacity and provide a safety net as climate-related losses continue. Finally, SB 253 SD2 (condominium reserves) received support from Hawaiʻi Realtors, CI, and several individual testifiers. Supporters said it would enforce existing disclosure requirements under Act 199 and improve reserve funding transparency, while one individual argued stronger enforcement and an ombudsman-style office would be more effective. The chair reminded testifiers to stay on the bill at hand. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And you can go to the educational section where we eliminate in-state tuition.
• And you can go to the educational section where we eliminate in-state tuition.
• The chair recognizes Vice Chair Bousson to conduct the public comments section. I'm sorry.
• So is this, if I'm reading this right, because it looks like Section 1 is just illegal entry, Section
• It looks like Section 1 is just illegal entry. Section 2 is with another crime on top of it.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee took up SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. Gruters described the measure as a broad crackdown on illegal immigration that would replace a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, create a $250 million grant program for local law enforcement, fund additional Department of Agriculture interdiction staff and facilities, expand pretrial detention for certain unauthorized immigrants, increase criminal penalties, require more cooperation with ICE, and eliminate in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students. He and supporters framed the bill as a way to support law enforcement, deter illegal immigration, and align Florida with federal enforcement efforts. Committee questioning focused heavily on the bill’s education, detention, and enforcement provisions. Senators pressed Gruters and Fine on why the bill did not address employer sanctions or E-Verify, whether the tuition changes would affect students who had grown up in Florida, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, and whether the bill would create practical burdens for prosecutors, jails, and local officials. Gruters said he was open to working on E-Verify in regular session but not to amending this bill, and Fine argued the tuition repeal would apply to undocumented students who had qualified under existing law. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified in support, saying ICE bed capacity was still insufficient and that county jails needed more resources to honor detainers. Mark Schlachman of FSU Law offered historical context, noting prior state-federal cooperation efforts and warning of unintended consequences, while several public witnesses opposed the bill as unconstitutional, costly, and harmful to immigrant families and the economy. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, Florida Policy Institute, AFL-CIO, and immigrant advocacy groups argued the bill would invite litigation, encourage racial profiling, harm the workforce and higher education, and punish law-abiding immigrants and their families. They emphasized that immigration is a federal matter, that K-12 education must be provided regardless of status, and that removing in-state tuition would reduce access to college and hurt Florida’s economy. Some speakers urged the committee to grandfather current students if the tuition waiver is repealed. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote reflected in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We removed some language relating to abortion drugs and speech in sections 4 and 5, and streamlined other
• Listen to what is stated in Missouri law right now: "This section shall not apply to any person..."
• "This section shall not apply to any person who performs or attempts to perform a legal abortion if the
• And if I may, I'm just going to read this to you again, read this section that I read earlier.
• We'll see non-severability clauses in certain sections.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• All the next bill is a Senate bill, SB 2152, proposing amendment to Article 6, section 3 of the Hawaii
• 3 of the Hawaii state section 3 of the Hawaii state constitution<00:29:51.960><c> to</c><00:29:52.040
• So, this is the one on the electronic means—various sections of the Hawaii campaign spending laws—part
• </c><00:35:38.520><c> of</c><00:35:38.600><c> the</c><00:35:38.680><c> Hawaii</c> means various sections
• of the Hawaii means various sections of the Hawaii campaign<00:35:39.359><c> spending</c><00:35:39.720

Bills: HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097

Keywords: HB389, uncrewed aircraft, drone, drones, UAS, unmanned aerial vehicle, misuse of uncrewed aircraft, criminal offense, felony enhancement, drone crime, public safety, police, deputy sheriff, fire department, intoxicated operation, registration number tampering, property damage, bodily injury, Honolulu Prosecuting Attorney Package, Hawaii Revised Statutes

Transcript Highlights:

• this project, and that the balance of funding would be encumbered into fiscal year 2027 pursuant to Section
• This motion would undo the restriction provided in Section 4 of that bill.
• So Section 4 restricted access to PSIF.
• That's found in section 57-814, Idaho Code.
• So it's not setting aside that section of code.

Summary: The Joint Finance and Corporation Committee met with a quorum and first approved a $6.5 million federal supplemental appropriation for the Military Division to replace failing climate control systems in Idaho Air National Guard buildings at Gowen Field. The motion passed with a do-pass recommendation after brief explanation that the work would begin with design and contracting and the remaining funds would carry into fiscal year 2027. The committee then considered Idaho State Police funding tied to the Project Choice Fund. Staff explained three revenue sources supporting a $6.695 million personnel appropriation: a beer excise tax reallocation, a new specialty license plate, and House Bill 967, which would redirect additional liquor account distributions. Members discussed the impact on cities and counties, the need for stable public safety funding, and the fact that the proposal shifts some liquor revenues away from local governments. The appropriation motion passed and received a do-pass recommendation. Next, the committee took up two Idaho Digital Learning Academy-related language items. The first, a trailer to Senate Bill 1362, was adopted by unanimous consent to resolve a potential conflict with House Bill 940 regarding course fees. The second would have allowed IDLA limited access to PSIF after spending down cash balances, but members raised concerns about financial risk and whether the language was necessary; the motion failed in both chambers. The committee then approved language redirecting about $12 million from the Strategic Initiatives Fund to the local highway distribution formula instead of LTAC grants, after debate over local equity versus larger grant projects. Finally, the committee adopted language preventing an automatic transfer out of the Budget Stabilization Fund that would otherwise occur because the fund is at its statutory 15% cap. Members debated whether excess funds should instead flow to the general fund given budget pressures, but the motion passed and received a do-pass recommendation. The committee then adjourned.