Transcript Highlights:

• Floor amendment: I move the following amendment.
• Senator Bolick, I move the committee amendment as amended be adopted.
• Senator Bolick, I move the committee amendment as amended be adopted. Explanation.
• We are on the RAGE Committee amendment as amended."
• "I move the Committee Amendment as amended be adopted, or do we already do that?"

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, seeing none, I do see we have an amendment. Representative Nelson, to your amendment?
• Okay, seeing none, I do see we have an amendment. Representative Nelson, to your amendment?
• Okay, seeing none, I do see we have an amendment. Representative Nelson, to your amendment?
• Okay, seeing none, I do see we have an amendment. Representative Nelson, to your amendment?
• Okay, seeing none, I do see we have an amendment. Representative Nelson, to your amendment?

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee approved the January 21, 2025 minutes and then heard a presentation from the Minnesota Chamber Foundation on its report about Minnesota’s environmental permitting system. The presenters said the report was based on research by Barr Engineering and the Policy Navigation Group and argued that permitting delays can discourage investment and make Minnesota less competitive for manufacturing, mining, energy, clean tech, and other industrial projects. They highlighted that Tier 1 permits are generally issued quickly, but Tier 2 air and water permits often take much longer than the state’s 150-day goal, with some median timelines ranging from 419 to 771 days for Tier 2 air permits and similar delays for industrial water permits. The report also said Minnesota’s permit timelines were longer than peer states and estimated that reducing delays could increase annual output by $260 million to $910 million and support 960 to 3,400 additional full-time-equivalent jobs per year. Committee members asked about which businesses fall under Tier 2 permits, the economic impact of permitting delays, and whether the Chamber had discussed the report with the governor or MPCA. The presenters said Tier 2 permits typically involve higher-emitting facilities such as manufacturing, utilities, mining, and other industrial operations, and that the economic estimates were based on modeling rather than exact lost-job counts. They also noted that the governor had been briefed and that MPCA had been invited to the hearing but did not attend. The committee then took up House File 8, which Chair Heintzeman said is intended to improve permitting efficiency while maintaining environmental standards. He described provisions that would reduce the number of 60-day wetland application extensions, require MPCA to issue permitting efficiency reports twice a year, break out data on missed timelines by municipal versus industrial applicants, treat failure to meet the 150-day Tier 2 deadline as a final action subject to judicial review, and require quicker notice when applications are incomplete. He also outlined sections that would allow separate construction and operating permits, expand expedited permitting, and change environmental assessment worksheet petition rules. The bill was moved to be re-referred to the Labor and Workforce Development Committee, and the discussion began, but the transcript ends before any final vote on the bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and that is the amendment.
• Questions on the amendment? Any appearance forms on the amendment? Any debate?
• We'll show that amendment adopted without objection. We're back on the bill as amended.
• I don't have any appearance forms on the amendment. Is there any debate on the amendment?
• All in favor of the amendment say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The amendment is adopted.

Summary: The Committee on Regulated Industries met with a quorum and took up four bills. SB 288 on rural electric cooperatives was presented as a negotiated glitch bill to narrow statutory language so co-ops can choose generation and power purchases based on cost and reliability without exposure to special-interest litigation, while preserving consumer protections. A representative from the Florida Electric Cooperatives Association waived in support, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee then considered SB 364 on public accountancy, which was described as a modernization and efficiency measure to expand CPA licensure pathways without lowering standards. An amendment correcting a drafting error and restoring automatic mobility language was adopted without objection. Jason Harrell of FICPA waived in support, while one speaker appeared to discuss a utility issue unrelated to the bill. CS for SB 364 was reported favorably. Chair Bradley’s SB 200 on utilities addressed utility-scale solar decommissioning and storm protection plans. The bill would authorize counties to adopt solar decommissioning ordinances, direct DEP to develop best practices, and require the PSC to consider whether storm protection plan benefits exceed costs. County and AARP representatives waived in support, and the Small County Coalition spoke favorably, saying the bill was a needed step that did not restrict solar development. SB 200 was considered favorably. The committee also heard SB 126 on the Florida Public Service Commission, a strike-all bill focused on PSC reform and utility affordability. The amendment would add CPA and financial analyst expertise, require stronger PSC order support, tighten intervention standards, set return-on-equity and review criteria, require consideration of executive compensation and affordability, and direct the PSC to weigh risk from storm and cost-recovery mechanisms. PSC staff answered extensive questions about utility hardening, storm recovery, and rate-setting. Supporters said the bill would improve accountability and affordability, while others urged stronger enforceable affordability standards and restoration of the return-on-equity cap. Despite concerns, the bill was reported favorably as CS for SB 126.

Transcript Highlights:

• So thank you for agreeing to make that amendment as well.
• We do have some concerns regarding how this legislation would impact current, ongoing legislation dealing
• Okay, a motion to move as amended. Great.
• I'm Ryan Woolsey with the Legislative Analyst's Office.
• The legislative analyst is not.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Elections and Constitutional Amendments heard several election-related measures. SB 884 by Senator Umberg proposed expanding polling-place buffer zones, limiting certain law enforcement activity near polling sites, increasing ballot drop boxes and vote center access, and extending the vote-by-mail receipt deadline; supporters said it would protect voters from intimidation, while county election officials opposed it as operationally difficult and costly. The bill was amended in committee to allow county supervisors discretion over expanding the buffer zone and to permit law enforcement entry for crimes against persons or property. It was ultimately passed out of committee on a 4-1 vote after members’ roll calls were completed later in the day. SB 1164 by Senator Cervantes would expand California voting-rights protections by codifying and broadening anti-dilution and anti-suppression rules, adding preclearance for some jurisdictions, and directing courts to favor voting access; it drew strong support from civil rights and voting-rights groups, while one city raised concerns about effects on pending litigation. The committee advanced the bill to Judiciary on a 4-1 vote after later roll call completion. The committee also considered SB 900 by Senator McNerney, which would streamline political advertisement disclosures by shortening required disclaimer language, allowing standard abbreviations, and increasing the number of top funders disclosed on political mailers from three to five. Supporters from the outdoor advertising industry and campaign finance reform groups said the bill would preserve transparency while making disclosures more readable; it passed unanimously and was sent to Appropriations. In contrast, SB 1225 and its companion SCA 3 by Senator Niello would transfer responsibility for drafting ballot titles and summaries for initiatives and referenda from the Attorney General to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Supporters argued this would improve neutrality and public trust, while opponents said the current elected Attorney General system is accountable and efficient; both measures were advanced on narrow votes after roll calls were completed later. Finally, SB 1360 by Senator Cervantes, part of the California Voting Rights Act of 2026 package, would expand language-access requirements for election materials by lowering the threshold for coverage, adding a petition process, and extending protections beyond current federal language categories. Voting-rights and immigrant-advocacy groups strongly supported the bill, while county election officials opposed it unless amended, citing concerns about the precinct-based determination model and implementation details. The committee passed SB 1360 to Appropriations on a 5-0 vote after the later roll call. The committee also approved a consent calendar of seven measures at the start of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Show the amendment is not adopted. Please read the next amendment.
• Late-file amendment barcode 229914. Next amendment.
• Show the amendment fails. Please read the next amendment.
• amendment.
• amendment.

Summary: The Senate took up Committee Substitute for Senate Joint Resolution 2F, a proposed constitutional amendment to expand homestead property tax relief, lower the assessment cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, and limit county and municipal ad valorem tax revenues to specified uses. Senator Avila presented the measure as a major property tax reform intended to provide relief to homeowners and restrain local government spending, while opponents argued it would shift costs to fees, services, and state appropriations and could harm local budgets, public safety, schools, and other services. Several senators also raised concerns about the ballot language and the lack of a completed fiscal analysis. The chamber considered and rejected multiple amendments. Senator Sharif’s income-based “circuit breaker” amendment failed, as did Senator Smith’s sunset clause amendment and Senator Berman’s amendment to rewrite the ballot statement for greater accuracy. During questioning, Avila said the revised language was meant to preserve flexibility for local governments and that future legislatures could set implementing procedures and, if necessary, prohibit certain local expenditures by general law. He also confirmed that the proposal would not affect refinancing or portability, and said the measure would not prevent local governments from continuing to fund many services such as libraries, parks, animal control, code enforcement, mosquito control, public housing, county health departments, and elections. Debate on final passage was extensive. Supporters described the proposal as overdue relief for homeowners and a way to force local governments to prioritize spending, while critics called it a risky tax shift that could reduce local revenue by billions and force cuts or higher fees. Some senators emphasized concerns about public safety funding, mental health and social services, and the accuracy of the ballot summary; others argued the measure would give voters a chance to decide on property tax reform. After debate, the resolution was rolled over for third reading and the Senate continued discussion, but the transcript provided does not include a final vote on the joint resolution.

Transcript Highlights:

• Paul, 45th Legislative Day, St.
• the committee on rules and legislative the committee on rules and legislative administration<00:
• There is an amendment at the desk. The clerk will report the amendment.
• Muller moves to amend House File 3378, the first engrossment. The amendment is coded A6.
• The amendment has been withdrawn. No further amendments at the desk. Third reading.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• part of the legislative process.
• And so... ...that the legislative process, that don't trust that part of the legislative process.
• And so we've made amendments throughout this entire legislative process, as we will continue to do.
• And so we've made amendments throughout this entire legislative process, as we will continue to do.
• The most recent amendments.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, can I move the bill and the amendment? amendment? amendment?
• In a moment, I will ask Senate Counsel to walk through the specifics of the legislation and the amendments
• legislation and the amendments I'm legislation and the amendments I'm offering. offering. offering
• <01:05:12.840> so this amendment after we do amendments so this amendment after we do amendments
• your amendment? your amendment?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I would like to testify today in support of this legislation with amendments.
• So, as the legislation is written without the amendments, who benefits the most from this?
• No, I'm supporting this bill with the amendment added back into the legislation. Right. Got it.
• <01:55:02.560> legislation stating that the amendment legislation stating that the amendment
• friendly but a critical amendments to ensure<01:59:37.199> the<01:59:37.440> legislation

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 47, sponsored by Sen. Regina Birdsell at the request of the Insurance Department. The bill would codify the department’s interpretation that a birth mother’s health insurance is the primary coverage for a newborn, unless the mother has no insurance or coverage under an employer-sponsored plan. Birdsell and Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the measure is a clarification of existing practice and intended to protect vulnerable newborns; a question from Rep. Miles clarified that if a young woman is on her parents’ policy, the newborn would generally be covered under that family coverage. The hearing on SB 47 was then closed. The committee then took up Senate Bill 121, introduced by Grant Bosi for Sen. Kevin Avard, which would require insurers to notify the Insurance Department when they stop writing an entire line of business or, in some cases, Medicare Advantage plans. Commissioner Benton Court said the bill arose from disruption in the Medicare Advantage market, where consumers, brokers, and the department were confused by carriers changing or ending offerings; he said the department wanted a simple notification requirement so it could better advise consumers. Members discussed network adequacy, county-based service areas, and the fact that the bill would make notice a condition of licensure, with possible fines or license action for noncompliance. Witness Paula Rogers of AHIP said her group supported the bill if amended, and the department indicated it would support a change from a 120-day notice period to 90 days to align with state rules; the committee planned to work on an amendment in subcommittee. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 247, introduced by Rep. Brian Cole, which would prohibit network exclusion of pharmacies that refuse to dispense prescriptions when PBM reimbursement is below acquisition cost. Cole argued the bill is meant to stop pharmacies from being forced to sell drugs at a loss, describing PBMs as middlemen and saying the measure is a compromise that protects local pharmacies. Members questioned whether consumers would pay more and whether pharmacies voluntarily enter PBM contracts; Cole responded that the bill would let pharmacies refuse unprofitable fills while consumers could still obtain the drug through mail order or other channels. He also said the issue has changed over time because the practice now affects a much larger share of generics and is concentrated among a few PBMs. The hearing remained open as questions continued, with no vote taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• do a floor amendment.
• This amendment, as you said, would separate people that fought for the First Amendment.
• First Amendment stands for.
• Amendment rights.
• This is for the amendment, not the bill. For the amendment.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We did initially have a support of amended position.
• So we appreciate the amendments that have brought us to neutral.
• Do pass as amended to Senate Appropriations. The roll. Do pass as amended to Senate Appropriations.
• those amendments are being technically taken in this committee.
• I will be accepting the committee amendments.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:27.239> to Minnesota Constitution be amended to Minnesota Constitution be amended to
• <00:02:38.239> must expenditures that the legislator must expenditures that the legislator
• <00:12:26.680> from will handcuff future legislators from will handcuff future legislators
• So I will not make that amendment today. We do not have an amendment deadline.
• So I will not make that amendment today. We do not have an amendment deadline.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• amendment 18? amendment 18?
• amendment 18 is a friendly amendment. amendment 18 is a friendly amendment.
• . amendment. amendment.
• floor<00:40:19.040> amendment My amendment is House floor amendment My amendment is House
• . amendment. amendment.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House convened with an invocation and Pledge of Allegiance, established a quorum, excused absent members, suspended rules to allow co-sponsorships and vote modifications, and approved the journal from February 26, 2026. The clerk then reported several bills on second reading, including measures on state personnel, domestic violence, fish and wildlife resources, open records, workforce investment, data centers, guardians ad litem and domestic relations, along with Senate Concurrent Resolution 9 on a Medicaid pilot feasibility study and Senate Joint Resolution 23 declaring Kentucky a “food is medicine” state. The main floor business was House Bill 2, the Medicaid reform and appropriation bill. The sponsor described it as a response to rising Medicaid costs and federal changes, saying it would improve transparency, oversight, fraud prevention, and program operations. He said the bill would apply mainly to the Medicaid expansion population and include community engagement, cost-sharing, eligibility safeguards, stronger managed care oversight, transportation and dental delivery changes, waiver program prioritization, greater legislative access to CHFS data, a transparency dashboard, periodic auditor review, and limits on certain weight-management drug coverage. A House committee substitute was adopted, and a floor amendment on phasing in a marginal medical loss ratio requirement over four years was offered as a friendly amendment and adopted. The House then debated House Floor Amendment 1, which would have removed state-mandated co-payments and limited cost sharing to the federal minimum, while also prohibiting reporting medical debt to credit agencies. Supporters argued the amendment would protect low-income Kentuckians from barriers to care and prevent medical debt from worsening poverty. Opponents said the bill’s co-pays were intended to encourage appropriate use of care, especially to reduce non-emergency emergency room visits, and noted that providers and MCOs could waive or work around some charges. After a roll call vote, the amendment failed 20-39. After the amendment vote, the House continued discussion of the bill, with the sponsor defending the co-payment structure as a way to promote personal responsibility and sustainability while preserving access to primary care. The transcript ends during further debate on House Bill 2, and no final passage vote is shown in the provided excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, if a verbal amendment is proposed and then from there it is sent up to, let's just say, legislative
• So let's put the amendment on.
• Questions on the amendment? No questions on the amendment. Not seeing any questions.
• Second by, can you second your own amendment? It's my second amendment. Roll call, please, Mr.
• As amended. As amended. Thank you, Rebecca, for all your hard work.

Bills: SB2

Keywords: SB 2, State Highway Project Bonds, highway funding, transportation bonds, state road fund, motor vehicle fees, vehicle registration fees, electric vehicle fee, EV surcharge, plug-in hybrid fee, weight distance tax, road construction, infrastructure financing, Department of Transportation, State Transportation Commission, bonding authority, county road funds, municipal road funds, transportation improvement program, state highways

Transcript Highlights:

• Floor amendments will be shown on the screen on I Legislate and in today's folder in your box.
• of amendment L3. of amendment L3.
• vote on this amendment. vote on this amendment.
• There's no<03:31:21.600> amendment. no amendment. no amendment. >> Yeah.
• House Bill 1389 as amended<04:33:12.240> passes. amended passes. amended passes.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's an amendment at the desk. The clerk will report the amendment.
• Bonner moves to amend House File 2464, the first engrossment as amended. The amendment is coded A6.
• Bonner moves to amend house amendment.
• House File 2464 as amended. Discussion to the bill as amended.
• <00:11:12.480> Third 2464 as amended. Third 2464 as amended.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Appearance cards on the amendment to the amendment. Debate.
• Any questions on the amendment? There's an amendment to the amendment, barcode 645826.
• Let's take up that amendment to the amendment. Thank you.
• Any questions on the amendment to the amendment? Appearance cards to speak on that amendment.
• Oh, was that the amendment? Was that the amendment? Yeah.

Summary: The committee heard and voted on a long series of criminal justice, public safety, victim protection, and regulatory bills. Several measures were reported favorably, including SB 1374 on school district reporting requirements, SB 1378 on restitution for leaving the scene of a crash, SB 1072 creating an expedited DNA testing grant program, SB 1140 establishing a Hillsborough County criminal offender substance abuse pilot program, SB 1266 revising public records protections for crime victims and certain law enforcement identities, SB 1546 delaying and refining background screening requirements for athletic coaches, SB 1430 on post-judgment execution proceedings related to terrorism victims, SB 1444 making a broad set of criminal justice changes, SB 240 on domestic and dating violence protections, SB 606 clarifying public lodging and food service removal procedures for nonpaying guests, SB 1450 giving law enforcement discretion in arrests involving people with significant medical conditions, SB 44 increasing penalties for impersonating law enforcement with unauthorized red or blue lights, SB 1000 expanding court-ordered sealing options, SB 1400 requiring platforms to remove altered sexual depictions, and SB 1696 addressing rideshare impersonation and transit service rules. Many of these bills were amended before final passage, often with strike-all amendments or technical changes, and several had support from law enforcement, advocacy groups, or industry representatives. Testimony was generally supportive on the public safety and victim-protection bills, with speakers emphasizing faster DNA testing, better protections for domestic violence survivors, clearer rules for hotel and motel operators, and stronger tools against fraud, impersonation, and trafficking. Some bills drew notable concerns or opposition. SB 1266 prompted questions about whether a 72-hour cooling-off period for officer identities could be extended too broadly, while SB 606 drew concerns that the bill could affect families living in hotels or extended stays during the housing affordability crisis. SB 1444 generated discussion about false reporting language, off-duty carry for prosecutors and judges, and the scope of automatic sealing changes. SB 1000’s expanded sealing relief received broad support but was narrowed by amendments excluding certain offenses such as DUI and indecent exposure. The most contentious measure was SB 1804, which would create a capital offense for trafficking a child under 12 or a mentally incapacitated person for sexual exploitation. The sponsor argued it targets the most severe trafficking cases and includes safeguards such as excluding minors from capital punishment and preserving life imprisonment if the capital procedure is invalidated. Opponents, including the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops and Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, argued the death penalty is unconstitutional for non-homicide crimes, costly, and ineffective, and committee members raised concerns about whether the bill would incentivize traffickers to kill victims to avoid identification. Debate also touched on broader concerns about the death penalty’s constitutionality and whether life imprisonment is a more severe punishment. The transcript ends during that debate, without a final vote on SB 1804 included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Amendment number three is withdrawn, and Senator Midland sends up amendment committee, amendment number
• Any questions on Amendment Number Four? Very well, Amendment Number Four is withdrawn.
• And Senator Middleton sends up Amendment Number Six, Committee Amendment Number Six.
• So members, I've also filed this legislation, Senate Bill 2781. It's in amendment format here.
• The committee substitute replaces the filed version with the Legislative Council version, and amendments

Bills: SB312, SB945, SB946, SB1367, SB1861, SB2044, SB2337, SB2403, SB2819, SJR54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 945, 946, 2044, 2819, 2403, 2337, and 312, with all bills left pending after testimony. SB 945 would restrict insurance companies from denying or limiting coverage based on oil and gas activity or ESG-related goals, and supporters argued it would protect Texas energy producers from politically motivated shareholder activism and insurance discrimination. SB 946 would bar creditors from using social credit, ESG, DEI, or religious/political affiliation as a basis for denying or limiting credit; witnesses said it would prevent viewpoint-based financial discrimination and protect access to capital for Texas businesses. SB 2337 would require proxy advisory firms to disclose when recommendations are based on non-financial factors or when they give conflicting advice to different clients; supporters said the measure would increase transparency and curb ESG-driven influence over shareholder voting. SB 312 would direct public retirement systems to focus on financial returns rather than social or political objectives, with the author saying the bill responds to activist pressure on pensions and would reinforce fiduciary duty. The committee also took up election and ethics measures. SB 2044 would strengthen electioneering restrictions for publicly funded education institutions and personnel, prohibiting use of official resources to promote political agendas; testimony focused on alleged school district electioneering in bond and tax elections. SB 2819 would prohibit county elections administrators from holding certain officer positions appointed by elected officials, addressing potential conflicts of interest. SB 2403, the Texas Ethics Commission sunset bill, would restructure complaint handling with a three-tier violation system, risk-based complaint prioritization, longer response times, bipartisan preliminary review panels, and expanded hearing options; members discussed amendments aimed at dismissing minor complaints, clarifying categories, and adjusting lobbying and penalty provisions, but the amendments were withdrawn during committee consideration. Across the ESG and finance bills, invited witnesses from the American Energy Institute, Heartland Impact, Consumers Research, ADF Action, Texas Civil Justice League, and related groups generally supported the measures, arguing that banks, insurers, proxy advisors, and asset managers have used ESG or reputational-risk standards to discriminate against energy, agriculture, firearms, and religious organizations. No opposition testimony was presented in the excerpt, and the committee closed public testimony on each bill and left them pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• > amendment SCS2981A-1, amendment SCS2981A-1, amendment two,<00:01:41.520> page<00:01:41.920
• But adopting the amendment A2 amendment.
• The amendment to the amendment is adopted. So now on the A6 amendment as amended, Senator Port.
• amendment<00:53:53.040> is The amendment to the amendment is The amendment to the amendment
• The amendments<01:26:21.920> adopted. amendments adopted. amendments adopted.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Amendments. House Bill 102, Protecting Amendments.
• amendment? amendment?
• So, on and against the amendment. amendment. amendment. Further<01:38:28.880> discussion.
• So let's be against this amendment. amendment. amendment.
• President, it's quite an honor to have my last amendment in my legislative career get divided. >> Um,

Keywords: 916, all