Transcript Highlights:

• And all of that, too, was supported by the voters of those six cities.
• </c> aquatic centers and libraries so voters aquatic centers and libraries so voters really<01:11:33.280
• </c> the voters the voters uh<01:41:24.599><c> around</c><01:41:25.599><c> um</c><01:41:26.320><c> around
• that by voting no the informs voters that by voting no the voter<01:42:00.080><c> acknowledges</c><01
• </c> that the um uh going to the voters that the um uh going to the voters um<01:42:54.599><c> it</c>

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's stop letting the majority pick their voters and get back to voters picking their elected officials
• and Brown voters, and redistricting just doesn't work.
• This sends an unclear message to our voters, both novice voters and seasoned voters.
• It's not right to present this to our voters in such an unclear manner.
• Why answer to voters when the lines are drawn to eliminate competition?

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> influential information from voters influential information from voters voters<00:05:58.800><c>
• </c><03:43:19.279><c> um</c> party they may be Undeclared voter um party they may be Undeclared voter
• </c><04:28:55.920><c> the</c> who they were and then the voters the who they were and then the voters
• You need to be a qualified voter.
• </c> president of the League of Women Voters president of the League of Women Voters uh<04:45:56.760>

Committee: House Election Law

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm not trying to undermine the will of voters here.
• I'm not trying to undermine the will of voters here.
• Ultimately, this decision still rests solely with the voters.
• There, again, they have to be registered voters within the area.
• Voter signatures...

Bills: SB6132 , SB6181 , SB6154 , SB6189 , SB5903 , SB6037 , SB5983 , SB5995 , SB6016 , SB5820 , SB6064 , SB6077 , SB6101 , SB6013 , SB6066

Committee: Senate Local Government

Keywords: indebtedness limits, inland port districts, federal funding, infrastructure improvements, economic development, city incorporation, local governance, municipalities, state law, government structure, culvert replacement, fish passage, hydraulic project approval, Department of Fish and Wildlife, stream crossing, bank stabilization, flood control, erosion control, emergency permit, expedited permit

Transcript Highlights:

• When you listen to the voters, Democrat voters, Republican voters, and everyone in between, there are
• Voters lose faith in our democracy when presidents lie about the state of our elections.
• That causes voters to lose faith in their democracy.
• The impact of that is that voters lose faith in our democracy.
• We know that 31 states also have bloated voter rolls.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just go back to the voters and ask for new permission for a new use.
• One of the issues here with voter-approved tax rates.
• The voters approved a package of investments.
• I do agree that voters should get what they voted for.
• When we told you why, then you got to go back to the voters and make the case and trust the voters to

Bills: SB3038 , SB3045 , SB3065 , SB3069 , SB3071 , HB2025 , HB2149 , HB3370 , HB4205 , HB4506 , HB5424 , HB5652 , HB24 , HB3687 , HB24

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• It appears to me they simply don't trust the will of voters.
• Instead, they likely force an initiative, which adds confusion to the voters.
• Keep pushing this despite the will of the Washington voters.
• So they're doing all they can to avoid having this put before voters.
• I think we showed Washington voters who’s on their side.

Summary: House and Senate Republican leaders held a media availability on day 59 of the session focused mainly on the House-passed income tax on high earners, the pending operating and transportation budgets, and several late-session tax and policy bills. Republicans argued the income tax was unconstitutional under existing state precedent, would lead to capital flight and broader tax expansion, and was being rushed through without adequate public input. They also criticized the budget process as overspending revenues, relying on gimmicks, and setting up future deficits and tax increases. The leaders said the House was preparing to consider a transportation bond bill requiring a three-fifths vote, along with bills on data centers, pharmaceutical wholesale taxes, K-12 funding, highway construction, direct electric vehicle sales, abortion-related funding, and an electric transmission measure. They said Democrats could pass the bond bill without Republican votes if all 59 House Democrats supported it, but Republicans opposed bonding for maintenance and preservation. They also said the budget could be balanced even if some of the tax bills failed. Much of the discussion centered on the 24-hour House debate over the income tax, which Republicans said they extended to force daylight debate and highlight objections. They said the bill passed by two votes and that several Democrats privately opposed it. Republicans also criticized the use of Climate Commitment Act funds in the budget, saying the money should be returned to taxpayers or used for transportation or the Working Families Tax Credit rather than special interests. In closing, they said House Republicans had been successful in opposite-house cutoff, killing 54% of Senate bills sent to the House and helping produce one of the lowest numbers of bills passed in years.

Transcript Highlights:

• they simply don't trust the will of voters.
• Keep pushing this despite the will of the Washington voters.
• To a certain extent, you're right: the voters have to decide.
• So they're doing all they can to avoid having this put before voters.
• I think we showed Washington voters who's on their side.

Summary: House and Senate Republican leaders held a media availability on day 59 of the session focused mainly on the House-passed income tax proposal, the pending operating and transportation budgets, and several late-session tax and policy bills. Republicans said the income tax was a major, rushed change to the tax code, argued it was unconstitutional under existing state precedent, and criticized Democrats for blocking referendum options and for what they described as a tax-first approach to affordability and budgeting. They also said the budget conference process was likely to produce another deficit and warned of future tax increases if spending is not restrained. On transportation, Republicans discussed a bond bill needed to support the transportation budget and noted it requires a three-fifths vote in the House, which Democrats could reach on their own. They said they generally support maintenance and preservation but are skeptical of bonding for those purposes. They also identified other bills likely to move at the end of session, including a data center tax, a wholesale pharmaceutical tax, a K-12 funding bill, a highway construction bill, a direct electric vehicle sales bill, and an electric transmission bill. Republicans repeatedly framed the income tax as a “millionaires tax” that could later expand to more taxpayers, and said the 24-hour floor debate was intended to slow the process and force daylight scrutiny. They also criticized the use of Climate Commitment Act funds in the budget, saying the money should be returned to taxpayers or used for transportation or other public needs rather than special interests. In closing, Stokesbary said House Republicans had defeated a majority of Senate bills sent to the House and had helped stop several major Democratic priorities, including an agriculture unionization bill and other tax and regulatory measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:06:00.000><c> And</c><01:06:00.120><c> they</c> gets lost to the voter, right?
• And they gets lost to the voter, right?
• </c><01:07:55.680><c> to</c> most important thing for the voters to most important thing for the voters
• It deals with your cost about giving information to the voters. I think again, it's germane.
• </c> voters. I think again, it's germane. voters. I think again, it's germane.

Summary: The conference committee first discussed HB 1099, which creates a committee to study private business providing special education services and local school district reimbursement. Members explained that the issue is broader than special education alone, involving residential placements, foster care, court-ordered placements, and questions about which entity pays for education and care costs when students are placed in residential facilities. The House proposed an amendment to expand the study to include students placed in residential facilities by school districts as well as those placed through episodes of treatment or court order, and members agreed the existing commission would not resolve the issue before its July 1, 2026 expiration. Representative Coker raised concern about the phrase “but not limited to,” but members said the broader language was needed to capture placements beyond the existing statutory categories. The committee then agreed to accede to the Senate version of HB 1099 with a committee amendment, and the House voted unanimously to adopt amendment 2026-1845H. The bill was placed on the consent calendar, and the meeting adjourned. The transcript also includes a separate conference committee discussion on HB 1807, concerning mandatory reporting to voters. The main dispute was how to present administrator compensation: the House favored total administrative cost, while the Senate initially preferred average administrator salary. Members debated whether voters would be better informed by totals or averages, and whether the bill should define “administrator” more clearly by reference to DOE rules. The committee reached a tentative compromise to add both an average administrator salary graph and a total administrator cost graph, define administrators by reference to ED 501.02(B), scale the graph more precisely, and list the top 10 highest-paid administrators plus any employee earning over $100,000. Both chambers then gave unanimous support to the revised approach, with the understanding that the draft would be finalized and signed later.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any voter in the county is eligible.
• We had to go back to our city voters.
• Any city, any public water district, any We had to go back to our city voters.
• voters of the water districts and the cities, they decide.
• It was approved by voters in 2021.

Committees: House Local Government , House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Transcript Highlights:

• 158, which started out as requesting the Office of Elections to convene a working group on automatic voter
• First up on SCR 158 is Judith Mills Wong for the League of Women Voters of Hawaii in support.
• And automatic voter registration is a tool that can be used in the hands of bad actors.
• :05:05.360><c> a</c><00:05:05.680><c> tool</c> automatic voter registration is a tool automatic voter
• </c> can take advantage of automatic voter can take advantage of automatic voter registration<00:05:17.600

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard Senate Concurrent Resolution 158, which had been amended from an automatic voter registration-related request to a resolution urging the administration to follow the law and comply with federal court orders. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support, including from the League of Women Voters of Hawaii, the Democratic Party of Hawaii, the Hawaii State Teachers Association, Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, Hawaii women lawyers, and others. One witness spoke against automatic voter registration, warning it could be exploited by bad actors, though the chair clarified that the amended resolution was focused on court orders rather than AVR. Members asked questions about whether states or Congress can enforce compliance with court orders and whether there were historical examples of presidents refusing to follow them. The response emphasized separation of powers, checks and balances, and the importance of state support for the rule of law. The committee then voted to accept the proposed SD1 for SCR 158; the measure passed with one no vote recorded from Senator Awa. The committee also took up SCR 154, a resolution supporting implementation of applicable United Nations Human Rights Council universal periodic review recommendations. No testimony was received on that measure, and it was deferred. In a later decision-making agenda item, the committee considered a measure directing the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to include circuit and district court facilities in planning new correctional centers and to establish a release procedure away from residential communities and public spaces; the committee recommended passage as amended, and the measure passed without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Voter turnout from municipal elections has attracted only 7 to 12 percent of Dallas registered voters
• It will also reduce the number of elections that Dallas voters engage in, helping reduce voter fatigue
• D with 66% of voters in support.
• It was very confusing for the voters because they thought the machines were broken.
• The voters should decide whether or not they should have that nomination.

Bills: SB38 , SB287 , SB291 , SB292 , SB508 , SB618 , SB901 , SB1436 , SB1494 , SB1626 , SB1719 , SB1999 , SB1333 , SB 38

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Grant local governments with these voter Grant local governments with these voter account<00:48:
• </c><00:52:42.200><c> fund</c> property tax payers and the voter fund property tax payers and the voter
• I think a voter, when you go and petition a voter for their support, they anticipate that you're going
• </c><01:48:18.239><c> for</c> were trying to protect the voters for were trying to protect the voters
• > support</c> and petition a voter for their support and petition a voter for their support um<01:49:

Committee: Senate Elections

Transcript Highlights:

• The wide range of disabilities and, quite frankly, some of the limitations.
• So once they become citizens, we provide them with voter registration resources from the Secretary of
• 20:47.120><c> you're</c><01:20:47.360><c> automatically</c> If we were able to give that person the voter
• /c><01:21:05.040><c> person</c><01:21:05.920><c> the</c><01:21:07.360><c> the</c><01:21:08.000><c> voter
• </c> give that person the the voter give that person the the voter registration<01:21:09.199><c> requirements

Summary: The Commission on Race and Access to Opportunity met in September 2025, established a quorum, introduced new member Larry Forester, and approved the minutes from the August 26 meeting. The main presentation came from Warren County Public Schools Superintendent Rob Clayton and Assistant Superintendent Sarah Johnson, who discussed the district’s work serving English language learners and multilingual students, including immigrant and refugee families. They said Warren County now serves roughly 5,500 multilingual students out of about 19,000 total, representing about 92 languages and 90 countries, with 57 certified multilingual teachers, a GO Center, migrant and refugee advocates, and the state’s first international high school. The presenters emphasized that the district welcomes immigrant families and that students and parents generally value public education, but they described major challenges tied to accountability and funding. They explained that multilingual students are tested after one year in the system, even though many need more time to become proficient in English and grade-level standards, and they argued that current graduation-rate rules can unfairly penalize schools when transient students enroll briefly and then leave. They also said the cost of serving this population has risen sharply, with special revenue and especially general-fund spending increasing substantially over the past decade, prompting the district to reallocate resources from EL teacher assistants toward translation technology and additional certified staff. Committee members asked questions about how long-term multilingual students compare with the general student body and whether the district’s data show similar graduation outcomes. Clayton said he did not have the specific comparison data at hand but believed students who stay K-12 generally reach proficiency. He and Johnson asked legislators to consider giving students more time before accountability measures apply and to shift some graduation accountability from individual schools to the district level for highly transient populations, while still maintaining accountability. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to begin by pointing out to the voters who we will be reliant upon...
• I would like to start my questions with a focus for the benefit of the voters on exactly why we need
• to go to the voters with this.
• are, and what kind of partnership we have with the voters in terms of that fiscal responsibility?
• Constitutional amendments can only be adopted through approval of the voters.

Transcript Highlights:

• registration and voter roll maintenance.
• So, Now, on the voter registration card, it's going to go back.
• Yeah, that's why it's confused voter registration. Just your past.
• So, this voter registration's now rejected.
• This is on page two, lines 18 through 20, that say voter register.

Transcript Highlights:

• Given the federal cuts, the county wishes to go to the voters to decide to backfill some of the cuts,
• So when would Santa Cruz County want to go to the voters for this tax increase?
• Once again, we're not imposing the tax, we're just giving the voters the authorization to do so.
• I think it's up to the local voters to decide. for it.
• I think it's up to the local voters to decide. Is this worthy of us with all the economy as it is?

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> have been a great timesaver for voters have been a great timesaver for voters who<00:05:43.520><
• </c> voters.
• So, we had to do a lot of voter voters.
• </c><01:14:24.880><c> is</c> other than where the voter is other than where the voter is registered.<
• </c><01:15:36.640><c> put</c> anything other than what the voters put anything other than what the voters

Committee: House Election Law

Transcript Highlights:

• reasonable to the typical voter that everyone should be subject to audits.
• That we saw the voters, and you had mentioned 71, 72 percent of voters voted for this law.
• Should we be accountable strictly to the voters in public confidence?
• Isn't that power that should be within the, you know, the voters?
• Only being read it is the voters able to assess that.

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is what elect will use for voters to know what the proposed constitutional amendment would do.
• And I understand that the language we put in front of the voter sometimes doesn't accurately...
• It is helping the voter understand. Is there anyone else with the question?
• voter can understand what they're voting on.
• That explanation for voters, the second paragraph is the proposed amendment explanation.

Committee: House Privileges and Elections

Summary: The joint meeting of the Privileges and Elections Committees convened with a quorum present to approve explanatory ballot language for three proposed constitutional amendments scheduled for the November ballot. The committee reviewed the amendments on reproductive freedom, the right to vote, and the right to marry, with staff explaining that the committee was only approving neutral voter-facing explanation language, not the constitutional text itself. Members raised questions about wording, ballot order, and whether the explanations were sufficiently clear or potentially leading, especially on the reproductive freedom amendment. For HJ 1/SJ 1, the committee debated the explanation at length, including objections that it was misleading or incomplete and responses from counsel and supporters that it accurately tracked the amendment text. A motion to insert “Question 1” into the explanation was adopted, and the amended explainer language for the reproductive freedom amendment was then approved. The committee then moved through the right-to-vote and right-to-marry amendments, similarly adding question numbers to the explanatory language before approving the amended explanations. Recorded votes showed the amendments to the explanatory language passing on party-line divisions in both chambers, generally with Senate support from the majority and House support from the majority, while several members voted no. After approving the amended explainer language for all three amendments, the committee concluded the meeting and adjourned.