Transcript Highlights:

• I grew up in a small orange brick shotgun rent house in a little town called Hope, Arkansas.
• , Secretary Rubio. and to Congress members of the United States.
• There's been a series of cases involving certain individual IDF units.
• people of the country he goes to represent the United States in.
• Like me, you care deeply about the bonds between the United States and Israel.

Committee: Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Keywords: Israel, Hamas, Panama Canal, U.S. foreign policy, terrorism, diplomacy, Chinese influence

Summary: The committee meeting was focused on various key issues, including the implications of recent violence in the Middle East and U.S. foreign policy in relation to Israel and Panama. Members discussed the need for diplomatic efforts between the U.S. and Israeli officials following the recent attack by Hamas. Governor Huckabee emphasized the importance of maintaining a strong U.S.-Israel relationship and reiterated the need for accountability for terrorist organizations involved in violent acts against civilians. Senators shared their concerns regarding the ramifications of U.S. actions in Panama and the presence of Chinese influence, highlighting the significance of the Panama Canal in terms of trade and security.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair and members, Brett Barrow, with United Contractors and the National Electrical Contractors
• We're usually there leaving the house at 4 in the morning.
• Marina Espinoza with the California Housing Consortium.
• position from the California Housing Consortium.
• As a result, we were disallowed from our house. We've been in the auto with our children.

Summary: The committee heard a series of labor-related bills, with most measures focused on worker training, privacy, wages, and safety. AB 296 would require schools or districts to host apprenticeship fairs at least once a year, with flexibility on how they are run and whether programs outside the county can participate. Supporters said it would help connect students to skilled trades and address workforce shortages; school administrators opposed the bill as an unfunded mandate that could be impractical for elementary schools. The bill was later moved on call, with the committee noting it could not vote until quorum was established. AB 1221 and AB 1331 both addressed workplace surveillance. AB 1221 would restrict invasive monitoring tools, require notice to workers, limit the use and sharing of worker data, and require human review before discipline based on surveillance outputs. Labor groups supported the bill as a response to AI-driven monitoring, while business groups raised concerns about broad definitions, security cameras, investigations, and data-access provisions. AB 1331 focused more narrowly on privacy in off-duty and private spaces, limiting surveillance in places like restrooms, break areas, vehicles, and homes; hospitals and business groups opposed it as too broad and potentially disruptive to safety, cybersecurity, and facility monitoring. Both bills were advanced by committee vote. The committee also heard AB 1181, which would require firefighter turnout gear to be free of cancer-causing chemicals such as PFAS by 2027, and AB 1198, which would require prevailing wage rates on public works to reflect the wage in effect when the work is performed rather than when the project was first advertised. Firefighter representatives strongly supported AB 1181, while the chemical industry asked to continue working on scope and timelines. AB 1198 drew support from labor and contractor groups but opposition from local governments and housing groups concerned about mid-project cost increases; it was passed to Appropriations after a roll-call vote. Other measures approved included AB 1235 on skilled-and-trained workers for CSU construction, AB 1251 on ghost job postings, AB 552 on locating the Agricultural Labor Relations Board office outside Sacramento, AB 1110 on updating Cal/OSHA workplace posters, AB 1136 on expanding high road training partnerships, and AB 1234 on wage claim enforcement. AB 692, which would ban employer debt agreements that require workers to repay training or other costs if they leave a job, drew strong support from nurses and labor advocates and opposition from business and health care groups; it was also passed on a roll-call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Please note that the House is permits.
• </c> for House Bill 1838 relating to visas. for House Bill 1838 relating to visas.
• </c> of House Bill 1838. of House Bill 1838.
• House Bill 1838 creates public safety.
• </c> Amy Wakeake Wesley Wesley United Amy Wakeake Wesley Wesley United Methodist<00:22:07.679><c> Church

Bills: HB1838 , HB1870 , HB2445 , HB2540 , HB1886 , HB1839 , HB2269 , HB1939 , HB2037 , HB1635 , HB1941 , HB1576 , HB2568 , HB2267 , HB2590 , HB2266 , HB2597 , HB2499 , HB2500 , HB2502 , HB2607 , HB2137 , HB2357 , HB1782

Committee: House Economic Development & Technology

Summary: The committee opened testimony on House Bill 1838, relating to visas. Testifiers from the State Health Planning and Development Agency, the legal clinic, the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the ACLU, CARES, and immigrant-rights groups strongly supported the bill, saying it would bring Hawaii into compliance with federal law, standardize and speed up certification for U and T visa applicants, and better protect survivors of crime and trafficking. Supporters emphasized that delays in certification can leave eligible survivors waiting years for federal visa access and can undermine public safety by discouraging victims from reporting crimes. The chair announced there were 103 testimonies in support and one in opposition, and the committee then moved on without taking a vote on the bill in the hearing. The committee next heard House Bill 1870, concerning protected locations and immigration enforcement. Testimony from the Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, ACLU of Hawaii, educators, students, and community advocates supported limiting immigration enforcement at schools and other essential-service sites, arguing that families should be able to access education, health care, shelters, libraries, and social services without fear. The Department of Education said it had already issued guidance in March 2025 for how staff should respond when law enforcement comes onto campus, and the Public Charter School Commission noted implementation would need to occur at the school level. Testifiers said the bill would create standardized protocols and protect students and families from fear and disruption; the chair reported 142 testimonies in support, one in opposition, and five comments. The committee then took up House Bill 2445, relating to student safety and law enforcement on campus. The Department of Education again said it had already rolled out statewide guidance and described its process for staff to notify administration, verify law enforcement identification and purpose, and route matters through the complex area superintendent and attorney general, while noting emergencies would be handled differently. A committee member questioned whether the procedures were sufficiently standardized and whether staff were trained for unusual situations. Student and community testifiers supported the bill, saying schools should remain safe havens and that clear procedures are needed if federal immigration enforcement appears on campus. The Department of Law Enforcement testified in opposition to parts of the measure, raising concerns about masking requirements, vehicle markings, officer safety, doxxing, retaliation, costs, and possible supremacy-clause conflicts, and suggested more exemptions and a compromise approach. The chair reported 106 testimonies in support, two comments, and no opposition for the bill before moving on to the next measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• States and outside of the United States as well.
• You know, you have foreign dividends that are taxed in the United States.
• You know, you have foreign dividends that are taxed in the United States.
• I understand the United States Supreme Court has upheld the worldwide reporting.
• Nurses witnessed firsthand how public support programs like food, housing, and housing assistance, Medi-Cal

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined California’s taxation of multinational corporations, especially the Water’s Edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. Chairs opened by framing the issue as a review of whether current rules fairly and sufficiently tax foreign subsidiary income, given profit shifting concerns, budget pressures, and the long history since Water’s Edge was adopted in the 1980s. The first panel from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and Franchise Tax Board explained the mechanics of unitary taxation, apportionment, and the Water’s Edge election, and provided filing data showing Water’s Edge filers are a small share of returns but account for a large share of corporate tax liability. FTB witnesses said the agency already administers both methods and could handle a shift to mandatory worldwide reporting with education and outreach, though revenue estimates are difficult because foreign affiliate information is not directly available. Committee members asked about foreign government pushback, administrative burden, industries with more profit shifting, revenue uncertainty, and whether companies would leave California. LAO and FTB witnesses said pushback from foreign governments was plausible, but they did not expect major business flight because California’s tax is largely based on sales rather than physical presence. They also said worldwide reporting could reduce profit shifting but might increase revenue volatility and litigation risk. A second panel of academic and tax policy witnesses argued that Water’s Edge is a loophole that rewards aggressive tax planning, that worldwide combined reporting would better capture income tied to California, and that modern federal and international rules such as NCTI/GILTI, CAMT, and Pillar Two reduce compliance concerns and make a return to worldwide reporting more feasible. They also said California’s current system can create selection effects and may under-tax large multinationals. In the next panel, a California Budget and Policy Center witness urged eliminating the Water’s Edge election, calling it a costly loophole that benefits large global corporations over smaller domestic businesses and deprives the state of billions in revenue that could support health care and other services. A Silicon Valley Leadership Group witness gave historical context for why Water’s Edge was adopted and began outlining concerns about compliance, double taxation, and the risk of overreaching beyond income truly connected to California. No bill was voted on or advanced; the hearing was informational only, with members using the testimony to weigh the policy trade-offs and possible transition periods if the Legislature were to change the current rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm joined by House Co-Chair Adrian Madaro.
• Today we are joined by Representative Wells and Leader Donato from the House.
• Excuse me, House 3110, an act banning offshore tax avoidance.
• Great to see so many of my colleagues, both in the House and Senate.
• That's House Bill 3057, an act establishing a tiered corporate minimum tax.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Revenue

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue, chaired by Senator James Eldridge and Representative Adrian Madaro, opened its hearing with a moment of silence for the late Lowell State Senator Ed Kennedy and reviewed hearing procedures and deadlines. The committee then took testimony on several corporate tax bills, including S. 2033/H. 3110 on offshore tax avoidance, H. 3248 on a manufacturing tax exemption, H. 3057 on a tiered corporate minimum tax, and S. 2041 on a corporate tax haven blacklist, along with a separate business interest deduction bill. No votes were taken during the hearing. Supporters of S. 2033/H. 3110, including labor unions, health care workers, educators, public health advocates, seniors, and several legislators, argued that Massachusetts needs new revenue to offset federal cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, health care, education, and other services. They said the bill would raise roughly $400 million annually by increasing the share of offshore profits included in the state tax base from 5% to 50%, and they framed it as a fairness measure that would require large multinational corporations to pay more while leaving most local businesses and workers unaffected. Testimony emphasized risks to MassHealth, PCA services, adult dental care, hospitals, schools, and public health programs if new revenue is not raised. Opponents, including the Mass Taxpayers Foundation and the Council on State Taxation, argued the proposal is poor tax policy and likely unconstitutional because it would tax foreign-source income without allowing foreign tax credits or a comparable apportionment method. They said Massachusetts should take a broader, coordinated approach to federal tax changes rather than a standalone bill, and warned of litigation risk and possible double taxation. Supporters such as MassBudget and former tax counsel Don Griswold countered that the bill is a reasonable rough-justice approach, consistent with federal and neighboring-state treatment, and that it would primarily affect a small number of very large multinationals. On S. 2041, the Global Business Alliance opposed the proposed tax haven blacklist, while supporting a separate bill allowing business interest deductibility.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> &gt;&gt; and the constitution of the United &gt;&gt; and the constitution of the United States States
• </c> &gt;&gt; constitution of the United States. &gt;&gt; constitution of the United States.
• We have not flagged in that house.
• providing housing, providing medical care,<00:27:04.640><c> etc.
• </c><00:31:12.640><c> and</c> and maintain the housing and and maintain the housing and infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:

• It supports over 250,000 dispute hearings annually across 23 district offices and houses millions of
• Next up, again within the Cal/OSHA proposal, is an emerging technologies unit.
• It suggests our office that paying attention to this unit over the next couple years would be prudent
• It also will allow various division programs or units within a division, for example, within Cal/OSHA
• change proposals... ...the Bureau of Investigations Unit within Cal/OSHA.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration held a May Revise hearing focused on state administration proposals, with the chair noting no actions would be taken and all items would remain open. The committee heard presentations on a range of budget proposals, including technical adjustments for the Governor’s Office of Service and Community Engagement and the California Workforce Development Board, security and election-related funding for the Secretary of State, modernization and loan-backfill requests for the Department of Consumer Affairs, and multiple Employment Development Department updates covering EDD Next, UI and DI/PFL benefit estimates, workforce funding, and an EMT training reappropriation. Several items drew discussion from the LAO and committee members. The LAO generally supported technical or modernization items such as PERB’s implementation requests, GoServe’s College Corps adjustment, the Secretary of State’s security and HAVA grant items, and the Board of Pharmacy modernization proposal, but raised concerns about the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s proposed $10 million General Fund backfill and interest-free loan language. For EDD, the LAO flagged the size of the DI/PFL benefit adjustment and the unusual structure of the document management system proposal within EDD Next, while EDD said the changes reflected higher participation and benefit levels after SB 951 and ongoing modernization needs. The Department of Industrial Relations drew the most extensive questioning. It proposed funding for legal unit reclassifications, EAMS and Cal/OSHA data modernization, a new Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, a COYA reappropriation, and trailer bill changes requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and adjusting the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board timeline. Members pressed DIR on high vacancy rates, long wage theft and workers’ compensation backlogs, low collection rates for fines, and the need for clearer workload and outcome measures. DIR said the requests were intended to improve efficiency, support audits and corrective action plans, and better address emerging workplace risks, while the LAO said the workload drivers behind delays remain unclear. The hearing also included support for CalHR’s employee assistance program consolidation and CDT’s proposal to expand “Poppy,” a statewide generative AI assistant for state employees.

Transcript Highlights:

• When I buy a house here...
• One key tool to address this crisis is the acquisition and preservation of existing units of housing
• One key tool to address this crisis is the acquisition and preservation of existing units of housing
• One key tool to address this crisis is the acquisition and preservation of existing units of housing
• housing bond for this particular way to create affordable housing.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• I work in a house. I'm a house associate. Let me say hi. I'm a house associate. I work in a house.
• I'm a house associate. I work in a house. Yeah. Yeah, Yeah. It is good. ¡Gracias por ver el video!
• Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture for Civil Rights.
• The first was as a teenager in the United States Navy.
• I can see that corner of your state from my house, actually, not far down the road.

Committee: Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Testimony in support of House Bill 2844.
• I'm here to present House Bill 1880.
• Further testimony in support of the House Joint Resolutions. House Joint Resolutions.
• Joint Resolution 153 and House Joint Resolution 119. ...in opposition to House Joint Resolution 153
• and House Joint Resolution 119.

Committee: House General Laws

Summary: The Committee on General Laws met with a quorum and first went into executive session on House Bill 3088, where members discussed concerns raised by hospitals about proposed language changes. The bill sponsor said he was still working with hospitals and would continue to refine the measure, but several members objected to voting before seeing the revised language. HB 3088 was nevertheless voted do pass by an 8-4 vote. The committee then approved House Bill 2749 by an 8-4-1 vote, after which it moved into public hearing. The committee heard House Bill 2844, which would prohibit paraquat use in Missouri and require reporting related to its use. Representative Gallick said the bill was intended to be narrow and focused on paraquat’s toxicity and possible links to Parkinson’s disease. Supporters, including the Michael J. Fox Foundation, Missouri Coalition for the Environment, Sierra Club, and others, argued that paraquat is highly toxic, that research links exposure to increased Parkinson’s risk, and that many countries have banned it. Opponents from the Missouri Soybean Association, Missouri AgriBusiness Association, Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Corn Growers, and Missouri Pork Association said paraquat is a restricted-use pesticide already regulated under federal law, is important for weed control and crop production, and that a state ban would set a dangerous precedent and harm farmers. The committee took no final action on HB 2844 during the hearing. The committee also heard House Bill 1880, which would bar school districts and charter schools from selling beverages with more than 100 milligrams of caffeine per container to students. Representative Reuter said the bill was inspired by students from Seckman High School and cited concerns about adolescent caffeine consumption. Student witnesses described energy drink use at school, health effects such as anxiety, heart racing, dehydration, and sleep disruption, and said the bill would help reduce harmful habits. Several members supported the goal but suggested the threshold might be too high, that private schools receiving state scholarship funds should be included, and that school boards might be a better place to address the issue; others noted the bill lacked an enforcement provision. No vote was taken on HB 1880.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bill 13, House Bill 14, House Bill 16, House Bill 17, House Bill 19, House Bill 27, and House Bill 28
• ><c> Bill</c> House Bill 16, House Bill 17, House Bill House Bill 16, House Bill 17, House Bill 19,<00
• </c> 19, House Bill 27, and House Bill 28. 19, House Bill 27, and House Bill 28.
• ><c> Bill</c> House Bill 21, House Bill 25, House Bill House Bill 21, House Bill 25, House Bill 32<00
• To Judiciary: House Bill 18, House Bill 22, House Bill 23, House Bill 30, and House Bill 31.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sections 86 through 887 are on page 48 of House Bill 2, the official House Bill 2.
• </c> 887 so those are on page 48 of House 887 so those are on page 48 of House Bill<00:42:14.800><c>
• <c> Bill</c> Bill 2 the official House Bill Bill 2 the official House Bill 2<00:42:18.760><c> rather<
• </c> class uh or excuse me accounting unit class uh or excuse me accounting unit 7948<00:46:22.880><c
• So this is word for word: House Bill 73 is passed by the House.

Summary: The committee first recessed briefly, then took up HB 570, the prescription drug affordability board (PDAB). The chair and several members discussed the House amendment to repeal the board, which removed the fiscal note. The main concern raised was that the PDAB had not yet produced a clear business case showing value for the taxpayer investment, despite several years of work and four annual reports. Supporters of the repeal said the board’s recent report was largely redundant and that the board should either demonstrate a strong return on investment or be shut down; others cautioned against discarding the program too quickly and urged more time to refine the mission and legislative language. No vote was taken, and the committee appeared to agree to retain the bill for further work, with the possibility of revisiting it in a formal executive session on Tuesday. Members also shifted into discussion of HB 2, beginning with Section 85 on opioid abatement trust fund dollars for shelter programs. Department of Health and Human Services officials explained that the provision would provide $10 million from the opioid abatement trust fund, replacing general funds in the governor’s budget, while also noting an additional $2.5 million prioritized needs request for shelter care that was already fully funded. Committee members asked about shelter bed capacity, job placement efforts, and the remaining balance in the opioid fund; DHHS said there are 934 contracted beds and that case management includes help with housing and employment. Officials also said the current proposed budget includes another $1 million later in HB 2 from the opioid fund. The committee then began discussion of Sections 86 through 87, which would preserve the department’s ability to transfer funds between personnel lines. DHHS said the provision is operationally critical and that losing it would make it extremely difficult to manage the department, though it would not have a direct fiscal impact. The next item introduced was Section 88, extending a suspension related to eligibility for services until July 1, 2027; DHHS indicated that if the suspension were not continued, it would likely increase expenditures for Community Mental Health Centers and potentially others. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Jay Vasquez, on behalf of Communities United for Restory of Youth Justice, strong support.
• It's co-sponsored by Child Care Providers United, SEIU California, United Domestic Workers, and SEIU
• All right, the Child Care Provider United, SEIU California State Council, United Domestic Workers, Local
• stable housing, the best use of my time was to work.
• However, after experiencing housing instability and couch surfing, my mental health declined.

Summary: The committee heard several child welfare, food assistance, child care, and developmental services bills. AB 308 would require a statewide evaluation of regional center safety training and crisis-response services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities; supporters said it would help reduce reliance on law enforcement and improve de-escalation and emergency preparedness. AB 1049 would remove sponsor deeming from the California Food Assistance Program, with supporters from food banks and legal aid arguing the rule creates confusion, chilling effects, and wrongful denials, while one member raised concerns about accountability and fraud. AB 1201 would narrow when a parent’s prior violent felony can bar reunification services, limiting the bypass to offenses involving a child or a child’s other parent/guardian; county and advocacy witnesses said the bill preserves judicial discretion and avoids automatic denials, though a member expressed concern about child safety in violent or criminal environments. AB 2379 would require family child care providers to be notified of constitutional rights and receive multilingual training regarding immigration enforcement; it drew broad support and no opposition. AB 2429 would make ACEs screening optional and reduce required classroom observations in the early childhood mental health consultation program, with supporters saying it would reduce administrative burdens and expand participation. AB 1755 would eliminate CalWORKs’ 100-hour monthly work penalty for two-parent families, and supporters said it would reduce poverty and administrative burden without changing income eligibility. AB 1981, presented later, would advance “true cost of care” child care rate reform, with providers describing the current reimbursement system as unsustainable. AB 2478 would create a streamlined kinship family approval pathway for foster care placements with relatives and other kin, and AB 1969 and AB 1996 would create statewide structures to coordinate cradle-to-career services and reduce child poverty, respectively; both were presented as data-driven, place-based efforts to align services and set measurable reduction goals. Most bills received strong support from county agencies, advocacy organizations, and service providers, with little or no opposition testimony. Members generally praised the goals of the measures but asked questions about implementation, accountability, and child safety in the reunification and benefits bills. The committee took roll calls on the bills it heard, and the votes shown in the transcript were largely unanimous or near-unanimous, with several measures held on call after passing committee votes. AB 1049 was voted out 2-1, AB 1201 and AB 2379 were each voted out 3-0, AB 2429 and AB 1755 were voted out 2-0, and AB 2478, AB 1969, and AB 1996 were each voted out 2-0; the chair repeatedly noted that some bills would remain on call pending absent members. AB 1981 drew extensive support testimony from child care providers and allies, but the committee did not take a final vote in the portion of the transcript provided because no motion was available at that moment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Toyofuku over to the house at noon.
• </c><00:21:45.600><c> States</c> Michael Seabright on the United States Michael Seabright on the United
• Your Committee on Education will hold a public hearing on House Bill 2567, House Draft 1, on Wednesday
• </c><00:26:18.800><c> Bill</c> Rule 21 to hold a hearing on House Bill Rule 21 to hold a hearing on House
• House Bill 2567, House public hearing on House Bill 2567, House Draft<00:26:33.000><c> 1,</c><00:26:

Bills: SB3123 , HB1853 , HB1961 , HB1965 , HB1962 , HB1959 , HB2505 , HB2576 , HB1801 , HB1804 , HB1864 , HB2319 , HB2314 , HB2115 , HB1854 , HB2062 , HB1511 , HB1535 , HB2614 , HB2282 , HB1870 , HB1695 , HB1626 , HB1643 , HB1972 , HB1550 , HB1974 , HB1966 , HB1973 , HB2545 , HB1946 , HB1939 , HB1721 , HB1741 , HB1700

Transcript Highlights:

• State and the United States.
• On the House side, this part of the amendment was my bill, and it did fail on the House side, but members
• States service or a citizen who resides outside of the United States, to provide... ...the United States
• House Bill 459. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. House Bill 459.
• Did you lobby the House or the Senate?

Bills: HB9 , HB177 , HB181 , HB202 , HB225 , HB398 , HB459 , HB540 , HB906 , HB1052 , HB1057 , HB1245

Committee: Senate Senate & Governmental Affairs

Keywords: HB 9, HB9, Act 527, Shreveport, Stuffed Shrimp Capital, state symbol, Louisiana symbols, municipal designation, honorary title, cultural designation, tourism, local pride, seafood, shrimp, stuffed shrimp, cuisine, city branding, Louisiana Revised Statutes 49:170.26, court reporter, official court reporter

Transcript Highlights:

• I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands
• Before a career in law enforcement, Scott enlisted in the United States Marine Corps, serving with the
• Rubio of the United States Marine Corps.
• This House stands adjourned. Majority Leader Aguiar-Curry moves, and Mr. Patterson seconds.
• This House stands adjourned until Monday, January 26th at 1 p.m. Quorum call is lifted.

Transcript Highlights:

• prohibiting an increase in the rent of a tenant residing in a development supported with low-income housing
• Hidalgo, relating to international cooperation agreements between certain state agencies and the United
• relating to the required disclosure of certain financial relationships and civil actions against United
• Senate Bill 1271 by Hancock, relating to the concurrent jurisdiction of this state over United States
• Senate Bill 1324 by Johnson, relating to the establishment of a housing assistance pilot program, to

Bills: SJR36 , SJR3 , SB616 , SB565 , SB384 , SB5 , SJR52 , SJR53 , SJR54 , SJR55 , SCR18 , SCR19 , SCR22 , SB27 , SB29 , SB35 , SB1151 , SB1152 , SB1153 , SB1154 , SB1155 , SB1156 , SB1157 , SB1158 , SB1159 , SB1160 , SB1161 , SB1162 , SB1163 , SB1164 , SB1165 , SB1166 , SB1167 , SB1168 , SB1169 , SB1170 , SB1171 , SB1172 , SB1173 , SB1174 , SB1175 , SB1176 , SB1177 , SB1178 , SB1179 , SB1180 , SB1181 , SB1182 , SB1183 , SB1184 , SB1185 , SB1186 , SB1187 , SB1188 , SB1189 , SB1190 , SB1191 , SB1192 , SB1193 , SB1194 , SB1195 , SB1196 , SB1197 , SB1198 , SB1199 , SB1200 , SB1201 , SB1202 , SB1203 , SB1204 , SB1205 , SB1206 , SB1207 , SB1208 , SB1209 , SB1210 , SB1211 , SB1212 , SB1213 , SB1214 , SB1215 , SB1216 , SB1217 , SB1218 , SB1219 , SB1220 , SB1221 , SB1222 , SB1223 , SB1224 , SB1225 , SB1226 , SB1227 , SB1228 , SB1229 , SB1230 , SB1231 , SB1232 , SB1233 , SB1234 , SB1235 , SB1236 , SB1237 , SB1238 , SB1239 , SB1240 , SB1241 , SB1242 , SB1243 , SB1244 , SB1245 , SB1246 , SB1247 , SB1248 , SB1249 , SB1250 , SB1251 , SB1252 , SB1253 , SB1254 , SB1255 , SB1256 , SB1257 , SB1258 , SB1259 , SB1260 , SB1261 , SB1262 , SB1263 , SB1264 , SB1265 , SB1266 , SB1267 , SB1268 , SB1269 , SB1270 , SB1271 , SB1272 , SB1273 , SB1274 , SB1275 , SB1276 , SB1277 , SB1278 , SB1279 , SB1280 , SB1281 , SB1282 , SB1283 , SB1284 , SB1285 , SB1286 , SB1287 , SB1288 , SB1289 , SB1290 , SB1291 , SB1292 , SB1293 , SB1294 , SB1295 , SB1296 , SB1297 , SB1298 , SB1299 , SB1300 , SB1301 , SB1302 , SB1303 , SB1304 , SB1305 , SB1306 , SB1307 , SB1308 , SB1309 , SB1310 , SB1311 , SB1312 , SB1313 , SB1314 , SB1315 , SB1316 , SB1317 , SB1318 , SB1319 , SB1320 , SB1321 , SB1322 , SB1323 , SB1324 , SB1325 , SB1326 , SB1327 , SB1328 , SB1329 , SB1330 , SB1331 , SB1332 , SB1333 , SB1334 , SB1335 , SB1336 , SB1337 , SB1338 , SB1339 , SB1340 , SB1341 , SB1342 , SB1343 , SB1344 , SB1345 , SB1621 , SJR57

Summary: The Senate met briefly to receive first-reading referrals of a large number of bills, resolutions, and joint resolutions. The measures covered a wide range of topics, including public education, health care, criminal justice, business regulation, transportation, water and natural resources, local government, taxation, elections, and public information. Many of the filings were by Senators Hughes, Perry, Alvarado, Creighton, Hancock, Parker, Zaffirini, Blanco, and others, and included proposals on school safety, health records and billing, election procedures, water planning, housing and rent issues, energy and environmental regulation, and criminal penalties. The chamber also read several concurrent and joint resolutions, including measures designating state symbols and local honors, a proposed constitutional amendment related to gaming by the Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas, a proposal concerning special-session subjects, and resolutions on fiscal restraints and retirement obligations. No debate, testimony, or substantive action on the merits of the measures occurred in this portion of the transcript; the items were simply read and referred to committees. At the close of the proceedings, the Senate adjourned pursuant to a previously adopted motion and announced it would reconvene at 11 a.m. Tuesday, March 4.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> trans transgender inmates housing trans transgender inmates housing placements<01:10:39.560><c>
• </c><01:33:16.000><c> Bill</c> can open up the hearing on House Bill can open up the hearing on House
• </c> she spoke in front of the entire house she spoke in front of the entire house when<01:50:26.239>
• ><c> and</c><02:16:30.840><c> I'm</c> the hearing on House Bill 580 and I'm the hearing on House Bill
• My name is Deborah House.

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on House Bill 148, which Rep. Jim Kofalt said is the same language as last year’s HB 396, vetoed by the governor. He described the bill as allowing, but not requiring, separation by biological sex in three areas: bathrooms and locker rooms, houses of correction, and certain athletic competitions. Kofalt argued the bill would give local school boards and other policymakers discretion to set practical rules, citing concerns about safety, privacy, and a Milford incident involving a biological male in girls’ locker rooms. Committee members pressed him on the lack of a definition of “biological sex,” and he said he did not think one was necessary because males and females are commonly understood. He also said the bill was meant to address situations where outside groups threaten lawsuits and leave local boards with no latitude. Testimony then split sharply. Supporters, including Executive Counselor Karen Hill and several others, said HB 148 would roll back anti-discrimination protections, contradict New Hampshire’s “Live Free or Die” values, and harm transgender and non-binary people. Opponents described the bill as discriminatory and unnecessary, arguing that existing bathroom and sports policies already work and that the bill would invite harassment, invasive enforcement, and legal conflict. Several speakers, including trans residents and parents of trans children, said they had used public restrooms without incident and warned that enforcement would be impractical or abusive. One supporter argued the bill was needed to protect girls’ privacy and safety and cited school sports disputes and a concern about a sex offender at a game as examples of why sex-segregated rules should be restored. Committee members asked questions about how biological sex would be defined, whether the bill was responding to real incidents in New Hampshire, and how any restrictions would be enforced. Kofalt said he was aware of issues in several school districts and at the State House, but did not have detailed documentation for every case. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided; the chair instead moved through public testimony under a strict two-minute limit and noted that follow-up questions would be limited so the committee could hear multiple bills that day.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're still seeking additional funds for housing, not only for those houses but also for our residential
• The United States Supreme Court has looked at that and determined that Congress—the United States Congress—has
• Housing, is there any housing program that you can't apply for? I doubt it.
• I didn't touch on the housing.
• So I heard you all talk about housing earlier.

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> Workers</c><00:02:44.720><c> Rapid</c> Chad Connley, United Steel Workers Rapid Chad Connley, United
• Um so today I wanted to talk house.
• Usually, a state in the United States.
• And the the only into the United States.
• Uh my grandfather uh the United States.

Summary: The committee met on October 23, 2025, approved the September minutes, and heard testimony on a proposed “Kentucky by America” procurement preference bill. Representative Patrick Flannery described the concept as giving preference in public construction and public works contracts to iron, steel, aluminum, and other manufactured goods made in the United States, while emphasizing he wanted to avoid excessive taxpayer costs and was open to changes. Chad Connley of the United Steelworkers and Dustin Reinsteller of the Kentucky State AFL-CIO supported the idea, arguing it would strengthen domestic manufacturing, keep tax dollars in the local economy, and support jobs; Connley said the bill would include waivers for items not made domestically and noted Kentucky has opted out of the GPA trade agreement. Mike Buckington of Metals Innovation Initiative, testifying virtually, also supported the concept and said Kentucky’s metals sector has seen significant investment and can supply most construction needs, while stressing supply-chain reliability and national security concerns. Members generally expressed support but raised questions about implementation. Representative Branscum asked who would grant waivers and how contractors would know the rules during bidding; Flannery said he was open to revising the language and process. Representative Gentry supported the concept but said the bill would likely need editing to avoid harming businesses or markets. Senator Nun suggested aligning the bill’s definition of a U.S. good with industry country-of-origin standards to make compliance easier. Representative KC Carney asked for data on the impact of similar laws in other states, and Connley said he could provide numbers later but did not have them on hand. Senator Boswell supported the concept and asked about the cost threshold for waivers; Connley said the federal standard is a 25% cost increase, while the prior Kentucky version used 10%, and that the threshold is a key detail. The committee then shifted to an informational presentation on building trade apprenticeships. Eric Elie of the Kentucky State Pipe Trades Association, Nick Brown of Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 502, and retired IBEW training director Steve Willinghurst explained how union apprenticeship programs work. Brown described earn-while-you-learn training, with apprentices placed on jobs by signatory contractors and attending classes two nights a week for five years. He outlined the work of plumbers, pipefitters, welders, and HVACR technicians, emphasizing that these trades support construction, industrial facilities, distilleries, and other critical infrastructure. No votes or formal actions were taken on the policy topics beyond approval of the prior minutes.