Transcript Highlights:

• Just to be clear, this bill is about limiting the acceptance of campaign contributions and the expenditures
• I mean, we place limits on dollar amounts federally. We place limits on when we can raise funds.
• We place limits on, so you're OK with placing limits, funds from corporations.
• So you're OK with the idea of placing limits at times.
• What are, what are the limits? Say it again.

Bills: HB18

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a 1-minute per testifier time limit.
• So the amount of money that's contributed or land that is contributed is just a part of the entire need
• or land that is money that's contributed or land that is contributed<00:05:10.800> is<00:05:11.440
• then for land contributions. then for land contributions.
• still paying the cash contribution. still paying the cash contribution.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint House committees on Housing and Education heard HB 1713, HD1, which would repeal school impact fees and transfer remaining balances in the school impact fee and certain fair share accounts to the school facilities special fund. The Department of Education testified in opposition, while the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, the Attorney General’s office (with comments and suggested constitutional amendments), the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the School Facilities Authority, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, NAP Hawaii, Avalon Development Company, Mark Development, Maui Chamber of Commerce, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Landis Research Foundation, BIA Hawaii, and others testified in support. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii offered comments. The DOE said the bill would weaken a key tool for matching school facilities to residential growth, while supporters said the current program leaves funds unused or restricted in ways that limit their effectiveness. A lengthy discussion followed about the difference between the older school impact fee program and the separate fair share agreements tied to land use entitlements and change-of-zone approvals. DOE Deputy Superintendent Jesse Suki explained that fair share funds are tied to the district where they were collected, may be too small to build a full school on their own, and are held until needed for projects such as Core Ridge, Central and West Maui, and other planned schools. Committee members pressed DOE on why funds had remained unspent for years, how much money was in the accounts, and whether the department had reviewed audit findings about the program. Members also questioned whether homeowners ultimately bear these costs through developers passing them along. The committee did not take a vote during the portion of the meeting provided. The discussion ended with members and DOE debating whether the current statute should remain in place, whether past entitlements should be affected, and whether the bill should be amended to better address remaining construction-related obligations and the use of collected funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• In reaction to that bill, federal law had limited state and local tax deductions for individuals to $10,000
• that bill, federal<00:04:13.040> bill<00:04:13.400> which<00:04:13.640> had limited
• limited limited state<00:04:18.720> and<00:04:18.840> local<00:04:19.200> tax<00
• was acknowledged as lawful was to allow those entities, such as partnerships and S corporations and limited
• liability companies, help limited liability companies, help depending<00:05:18.000> on<00:05:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• contribution in two legislative campaign contribution in two places.<00:02:44.000> That's<00:
• There are two sections to contributions.
• or accept a legislative contribution or accept a legislative campaign<00:04:20.400> contribution<
• affirmative act a campaign contribution affirmative act a campaign contribution within<00:04:53.919
• contribution. So that's the delineation. contribution. So that's the delineation.

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The Senate Rules Committee met on February 13 to continue work on proposed Senate Rule 15-9, a rule prohibiting campaign contributions. Members discussed two parts of the rule: one barring any solicitation, offer, delivery, or acceptance of campaign contributions in areas under the control of the President of the Senate at any time, and another barring senators from knowingly soliciting or accepting contributions by affirmative act during regular or special session. Senator Rothfuss suggested clarifying the session-related language by adding the word “legislative” before “campaign” in paragraph B, while leaving paragraph A broad. The chair explained the distinction between the two provisions and opened the meeting for public comment, but none was offered. Senator Rothfuss moved to adopt the rule and offered the amendment; Senator Guru seconded it. The amendment passed unanimously, and the committee then voted to adopt the rule as amended, with Senators Guru and Rothfuss voting aye and the chair announcing the vote passed before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• system funding level has contributions system funding level has only<00:04:38.840> marginally
• In 2008, a limit of 300 sick days toward retirement was put into place.
• participating in TRS FYI in 2008 a limit participating in TRS FYI in 2008 a limit of<00:09:59.839
• <00:13:52.160> to contribute to contribute to TRS<00:13:54.040> this<00:13:54.199> results
• <00:15:25.560> and offered Beyond TRS coverage limits and offered Beyond TRS coverage limits

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate State and Local Government Committee met and first took up Senate Bill 193, described as a simple measure to restore a wallet card for jailers to carry when outside the jail. The chair noted the fiscal impact was essentially zero, there were no questions, and the committee voted to pass the bill 9-0. The committee then heard Senate Bill 9, a proposal focused on the Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS). The sponsor argued TRS remains underfunded despite large state contributions, cited rising unfunded liability and negative cash flow, and said the bill is intended to standardize and limit what sick leave, personal leave, and annual leave can count toward retirement calculations. The bill would generally cap TRS retirement credit at 10 sick days and 2 personal days per year, prevent annual leave from being rolled into sick leave, require more uniform reporting and oversight from participating districts and agencies, and shift costs to districts that offer benefits beyond TRS limits. The sponsor also said the bill would add 30 maternity leave days, allow voluntary supplemental contributions for Tier Four teachers, and include a floor amendment directing the state auditor to audit TRS and report on agency leave policies. During the presentation, the sponsor emphasized fairness, transparency, and accountability, and used a hypothetical high-salary administrator to illustrate how leave payouts can increase retirement benefits and create additional unfunded liability. Senator Mills thanked the sponsor and said members had been working to understand the issue, but no committee action on Senate Bill 9 was completed in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And contributions overall are 4.65%.
• Contribution increases would be ideal.
• We've been talking about employee contributions and employer contributions to help get us through this
• That is very limiting.
• fusion technology, and we can't limit ourselves and therefore limit the success of the company by only

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:13.519> towards still provide uh contributions towards still provide uh contributions
• along capital improvements contributions along capital improvements contributions along with<00:16
• operating cost and capital contribution operating cost and capital contribution for<00:25:57.200
• The city far beyond our city limits.
• So those are city limits there as well.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, the reason I mentioned Social Security is there's the limit, the earnings limitation while reemployed
• , suspending the earnings limitation, suspending the earnings limitation, there<00:08:44.080>
• <00:14:18.760> rates lowers the employee contribution rates lowers the employee contribution
• <00:14:25.200> from<00:14:25.400> 10.25% contributions from 10.25% contributions from 10.25%
• this employee can get the contributions this employee can get the contributions they're<00:32:29.480

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There, they have a very severely limited discovery period.
• by a limited liability company and whether that member may continue to use contributed office space
• by a limited liability company and whether that member may continue to use contributed office space
• Each person's testimony will be limited to three minutes.
• Each person's testimony will be limited to three minutes.

Summary: The Texas Ethics Commission met on March 11, 2025, first in executive session and then in open session. The chair announced that, in light of Texas Attorney General Opinion KP-484, the commission would conform its practices to the opinion and move to repeal tolling rules for sworn-complaint deadlines. The chair also said the commission would dismiss 36 pending sworn-complaint cases in which the 120-day settlement deadline had been exceeded, even though the delay had been tolled under prior TEC rules. The commission then set future meeting dates for June 12 and September 17 and approved prior meeting minutes. The commission adopted a new criminal-referral rule clarifying that, once jurisdiction over a complaint is accepted, commissioners may vote to make a criminal referral. It also adopted revised advisory-opinion rules, with a clarifying amendment from a commenter, and republished proposed changes to the definition of “principal purpose” for political committees after staff recommended a 49 percent political-activity threshold and further public input. The commission published for comment proposed changes to ethics training rules, facial-compliance review procedures, late-filing waiver and reduction rules, and sworn-complaint procedures, including tighter discovery limits, a default-order set-aside process, and removal of tolling language inconsistent with KP-484. It also republished Chapter 28 rules on Speaker-candidate reporting. The commission adopted several advisory opinions. It declined to give an affirmative defense on whether certain school-district communications were political advertising because related litigation had already addressed the issue. It reaffirmed that a House member may use donated district-office space if it is not reimbursable with public funds and was accepted before the contribution moratorium. It also concluded that a judge may use political funds for travel to a Navy-hosted event as a local dignitary, that legislators’ use of a corporate aircraft for a border-region fact-finding trip could be permissible but would likely trigger reporting obligations, that a TCEQ commissioner’s revolving-door restrictions apply only to matters actually placed before the commissioner, and that a part-time legislative staffer may not take outside employment assisting a registered lobbyist. The commission then heard and acted on numerous fine-waiver appeals, granting several full waivers or reductions and approving staff recommendations on others, and terminated a number of inactive campaign treasurer appointments. Finally, the executive director briefed the commission on the 2025 legislative session, noting that staffing requests are tied to Sunset recommendations and that the House had preliminarily recommended about half of the commission’s appropriations requests.

Transcript Highlights:

• doesn't have that kind of limit. doesn't have that kind of limit.
• Um so she does put a time limit on that. So um I would encourage member support. Thank you.
• So um I does put a a time limit on that.
• Adding red tape only undermines its purpose and limits opportunities for students in need.
• and contributing to our economy.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• for all taxable years in the aggregate, a lifetime limit.
• <00:02:56.600> to deduction for contributions to deduction for contributions to individual
• <00:03:02.480> for maximum allowable contributions for maximum allowable contributions for
• maximum and deduction and contribution maximum and deduction and contribution amounts<00:03:19.600
• It also changes the effective limit.

Bills: HB2241, HB1163, HB1514, HB1696, HB2021, SB2135, SB2466, SB2727, SB3082, SB3097, SB2861, SCR100, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, SCR162, SB2614, SB3118, SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: renewable energy, income tax credit, solar energy, wind energy, low-income households, energy policy, commercial drivers license, non-domiciled, federal regulations, commercial learner's permit, citizenship, lawful residency, Department of Transportation, workers' compensation, vocational rehabilitation, injury recovery, employment services, return to work, commercial driving, driver's license

Transcript Highlights:

• Just to be clear, this bill is about limiting the acceptance of campaign contributions and the expenditures
• I mean, we place limits on when we can raise funds; we place limits on...
• Yeah, there are no current limits.
• So page one says there's no contribution you can't... make a contribution, or make a reimbursement of
• Does it put any limits on the executive?

Bills: HB18

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Summary: The meeting of the committee focused on the discussions surrounding HB18, which aims to prevent legislators from financially benefiting when they break quorum. Chairman Shaheen emphasized that this bill addresses the integrity of the Texas legislature and responds to constituent concerns about lawmakers being absent and raising funds simultaneously. Throughout the meeting, members discussed the implications of enforcing penalties for breaking quorum and the balance between legislative strategy and financial transparency. Various representatives expressed their views, with some supporting the bill for enhancing accountability, while others argued that it imposes unfair restrictions on a constitutional tactic historically used by minority factions.

Transcript Highlights:

• If the 75-word ballot label restriction is the issue, then increase the word limit.
• limit from local candidates to $1,500.
• limit from local candidates to $1,500.
• challengers receive most large contributions from special interests.
• And so I'm clearly in support of a more reasonable $1,500 limit. Thank you.

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on April 30, 2025, beginning as a subcommittee until a quorum was established. The committee first approved six bills on consent, including AB 950, AB 953, AB 1214, and three committee bills. It then heard several measures dealing with election administration, ballot transparency, and campaign finance, with most authors accepting committee amendments and several bills being held on call for absent members. AB 930 by Assembly Member Ward would extend the deadline for counting timely postmarked vote-by-mail ballots from three to seven days after Election Day and update recount procedures, including online posting of recount results and clearer rules for recount requests. The bill was supported by county election officials and passed out of committee with a due-pass recommendation, though it was initially held on call. AB 459 by Assembly Member DeMaio proposed allowing electronic signatures for initiatives, referenda, and recalls; the Secretary of State and labor groups opposed it over security, implementation, and cost concerns, and the committee ultimately rejected the bill after reconsideration. AB 699 by Assembly Member Stephanie would change how local tiered tax and bond measures are described on ballots by allowing more detail to be placed in the voter guide; housing, school, and local government groups supported it, while taxpayer and realtor groups opposed it as reducing ballot transparency. AB 1188, presented on behalf of Assembly Member Ortega, would list the top three funders supporting and opposing statewide initiatives and referenda directly on the ballot; transparency advocates and labor supported it, while county election officials and business groups raised concerns about ballot length and processing costs. Both AB 699 and AB 1188 passed out of committee with amendments and were held on call. The committee also heard AB 827 by Assembly Member Berman, which would standardize and extend the deadline for curing vote-by-mail signature problems, add a link to cure forms in ballot-tracking notifications, and make other changes to improve ballot curing. It drew no opposition in the hearing and passed with a due-pass recommendation. AB 351 by Assembly Member McKenna would raise the Levine Act contribution threshold for local officials to $1,500 and add CPI adjustments; supporters said it would reduce administrative burdens and reflect modern campaign finance realities, while good-government groups and the League of Women Voters opposed it as weakening anti-corruption protections. The committee initially failed AB 351, then granted reconsideration, but the transcript ends before a final disposition is clearly completed. Finally, AB 1079 by Assembly Member Farías would eliminate the automatic appellate stay in California Voting Rights Act and Fair Maps Act cases; it was supported as a way to prevent delayed remedies in voting rights cases, opposed by the City of Santa Monica over impacts on ongoing litigation, and passed with amendments. After taking up the held items, the committee recorded final votes on the bills, including passage of AB 930, AB 699, AB 1188, AB 827, and AB 1079, and rejection of AB 459.

Transcript Highlights:

• , you know, the limitation on liability for those who reject from the fund.
• , you know, the limitation on liability for those who reject from the fund.
• This limits the recovery amount to 50%. I'm wondering why it's 50% and not 100%.
• <01:07:02.960> so needs to be supplemental contribution so needs to be supplemental contribution
• together and and allow for contributions together and and allow for contributions from<01:07:10.520

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint committees heard testimony on HB 982 HD1, a wildfire-related measure aimed at creating a wildfire recovery fund and a financing structure to address future catastrophic wildfire liability. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, the Division of Consumer Advocacy, and the Public Utilities Commission submitted comments and were available for questions. Supporters included IBW Local 1260, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, Clearway Energy Group, Hawaiian Electric, Par Hawaii, and others, while Charter Communications and the Hawaii Association for Justice opposed or raised concerns. Life of the Land supported the bill but urged changes to the definition of a catastrophic wildfire and noted concerns about prudency review language. IBW Local 1260 asked to restore language from the original draft, and Charter warned the bill could impair existing contract and indemnity rights unless amended. A major focus of the hearing was Hawaiian Electric’s position on the HD1 version. Hawaiian Electric strongly supported the original bill but objected to the HD1 requirement for an additional $500 million shareholder contribution, arguing it was not feasible and could delay or prevent the fund from operating. The company said the bill would help protect customers and improve credit ratings by creating a dedicated revenue stream and a bankruptcy-remote financing structure, which it said would lower borrowing costs over time. Members questioned how the $1 billion securitization amount was chosen, whether credit rating agencies had indicated it was sufficient, and how the bill would work in bankruptcy; Hawaiian Electric said the amount was a balance among interests, not based on a specific agency directive, and that it would follow up on bankruptcy questions. Opponents and skeptics raised concerns about liability caps, the new claims process, and unclear language on damages above the fund’s limits. The Hawaii Association for Justice argued the bill limits victims’ remedies and gives too much authority to the new entity without clear guardrails. Committee members also pressed Hawaiian Electric on comparisons to California, the feasibility of the shareholder contribution, and whether alternative capital-raising or divestiture options had been considered. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided; testimony and questioning continued with follow-up information requested from Hawaiian Electric and others.

Bills: SJR 4, SCR 36, SCR 37, SCR 38, SCR 39, SCR 40, SCR 41, SCR 42, SB 7, SB 30, SB 31, SB 32, SB 33, SB 34, SB 36, SB 37, SB 38, SB 39, SB 1851, SB 1852, SB 1853, SB 1854, SB 1855, SB 1856, SB 1857, SB 1858, SB 1860, SB 1861, SB 1862, SB 1863, SB 1864, SB 1865, SB 1866, SB 1867, SB 1868, SB 1869, SB 1870, SB 1871, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1874, SB 1875, SB 1876, SB 1877, SB 1878, SB 1879, SB 1880, SB 1881, SB 1882, SB 1883, SB 1884, SB 1885, SB 1886, SB 1887, SB 1888, SB 1889, SB 1890, SB 1891, SB 1892, SB 1893, SB 1894, SB 1895, SB 1896, SB 1897, SB 1898, SB 1899, SB 1900, SB 1901, SB 1903, SB 1904, SB 1905, SB 1906, SB 1907, SB 1908, SB 1909, SB 1910, SB 1911, SB 1912, SB 1913, SB 1914, SB 1915, SB 1916, SB 1917, SB 1918, SB 1919, SB 1920, SB 1921, SB 1922, SB 1923, SB 1924, SB 1925, SB 1926, SB 1927, SB 1928, SB 1929, SB 1930, SB 1931, SB 1932, SB 1933, SB 1934, SB 1935, SB 1936, SB 1937, SB 1938, SB 1939, SB 1940, SB 1941, SB 1942, SB 1943, SB 1944, SB 1945, SB 1946, SB 1947, SB 1948, SB 1949, SB 1950, SB 1951, SB 1952, SB 1953, SB 1954, SB 1955, SB 1956, SB 1957, SB 1958, SB 1959, SB 1960, SB 1961, SB 1962, SB 1963, SB 1964, SB 1965, SB 1966, SB 1967, SB 1968, SB 1969, SB 1970, SB 1971, SB 1972, SB 1973, SB 1974, SB 1975, SB 1976, SB 1977, SB 1978, SB 1979, SB 1980, SB 1981, SB 1982, SB 1983, SB 1984, SB 1985, SB 1986, SB 1987, SB 1988, SB 1989, SB 1990, SB 1991, SB 1992, SB 1993, SB 1994, SB 1995, SB 1996, SB 1997, SB 1998, SB 1999, SB 2000, SB 2001, SB 2002, SB 2003, SB 2004, SB 2005, SB 2006, SB 2007, SB 2008, SB 2009, SB 2010, SB 2011, SB 2012, SB 2013, SB 2014, SB 2015, SB 2016, SB 2017, SB 2018, SB 2019, SB 2020, SB 2021, SB 2022, SB 2023, SB 2024, SB 2025, SB 2026, SB 2027, SB 2028, SB 2029, SB 2030, SB 2031, SB 2032, SB 2033, SB 2034, SB 2035, SB 2036, SB 2037, SB 2038, SB 2039, SB 2040, SB 2041, SB 2042, SB 2043, SB 2044, SB 2045, SB 2046, SB 2047, SB 2048, SB 2049, SB 2050, SB 2051, SB 2052, SB 2053, SB 2054, SB 2055, SB 2056, SB 2057, SB 2058, SB 2059, SB 2060

Keywords: economic stabilization fund, state finance, constitutional amendment, budget management, financial security, public safety, university property, peaceful assembly, law enforcement coordination, disruptive protests, balanced budget, federal debt, fiscal responsibility, Texas governance, national budget, Tomato Suspension Agreement, trade, economic impact, tariffs, Texas-Mexico relations

Transcript Highlights:

• Those provisions include the modification of the limitation on business interest, increased dollar limitations
• provisions like the modification of limitation on business interest increased dollar limitations on
• Currently contribute into the DFML trust fund, as opposed to the share that employers currently contribute
• One, do we get back the federal dollars that Massachusetts contributes?
• , but they don't have to contribute themselves.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a public hearing on H. 4975, Governor Healey’s bill to manage the impact of the federal “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OB3) on Massachusetts tax law and state revenues. Administration officials, led by Secretary of Administration and Finance Matt Gorowitz, said OB3 would otherwise reduce FY26 revenue by about $442 million and argued for a phased-in conformity approach that would preserve the current-year budget while still adopting selected federal business tax provisions over time. The proposal would phase in the research and experimental expenditure deduction first, delay other major corporate provisions for two years, extend the pass-through entity excise to income subject to the 4% surtax, add a one-year delay mechanism for future federal tax changes over $20 million, limit opportunity zone benefits to Massachusetts investments, and make smaller technical changes to DFML contributions and casino reporting thresholds. Committee members questioned the rationale for phasing in rather than fully decoupling, the effect on the budget if the bill did not pass, and the treatment of opportunity zones, the surtax, and future federal tax changes. Public testimony was split. MassBudget, Progressive Massachusetts, and several labor and public-sector groups urged the committee to permanently decouple from the federal corporate tax changes rather than delay them, arguing that the bill would still send state revenue to corporate tax breaks, often for investments outside Massachusetts, and that the state should protect funding for schools, health care, human services, and other public services. The Massachusetts Society of CPAs supported the administration’s timing and the research-and-development provisions, citing filing deadlines and the importance of certainty for businesses and startups. Business and tax experts also testified that rushed conformity can create revenue losses and that the governor’s review-and-delay framework was a prudent improvement, though some said decoupling should be the default if the Legislature does not act. Unite Here Local 26 testified against sections 3 and 4, which would raise the slot-machine jackpot reporting threshold from $1,200 to $2,000, arguing the current threshold helps with problem-gambling intervention, preserves slot attendant jobs, and generates revenue. Several union leaders, including the Massachusetts Teachers Association, AFT Massachusetts, SEIU 509, the Massachusetts Building Trades, the AFL-CIO, and 1199 SEIU, urged permanent decoupling, warning that OB3’s federal tax cuts and related spending reductions would worsen budget pressures, harm public services, and shift costs onto workers, patients, and schools. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• That includes the balanced budget limit, more commonly referred to as the pay-as-you-go limit.
• The limit on the rate of growth of appropriations from state taxes, also known as the tax spending limit
• , the limit on welfare spending, and the limit on tax-supported debt.
• In addition to our constitutional spending limits, we're statutorily confined to limit our growth of
• Inflation Consolidated General Revenue Limit.

Bills: SB1, HB500, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, state budget, mental health funding, education funding, infrastructure improvements, public safety, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's costs and initial contributions.
• not meant to be the contribution level. not meant to be the contribution level.
• gradually increasing the contributions gradually increasing the contributions as<00:18:44.960>
• limit limit >> per<00:53:40.160> per<00:53:40.480> one<00:53:40.800> and<
• So the amendment specifically limited them to the same region. amendment limits where they can move to

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of corporations to contribute to politics.
• In California, we need to find ways to limit the power of corporations to contribute to political campaigns
• We have repeated mandates to limit the amount of contributions to candidates, but there is no limitation
• And what happens is, well, I'll use an example: the city of Folsom has had a candidate contribution limit
• It's one of the reasons why we have contribution limits for donors to candidates.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and recognized several birthdays and guests. The body then handled procedural motions, including a successful motion to advance measures reported by the Budget and Fiscal Review Committee and to adopt authors’ amendments, both on 28-8 votes. AB 28 and AB 2539 were moved to the inactive file at the request of the authors. The Senate also confirmed two gubernatorial appointments: Maggie Hallahan to the Bodina Waterways Commission and Kansasaki to the Building Standards Commission, both by unanimous roll call. On third reading, the Senate adopted SR 112, designating June 14-20 as Familial Adenomatous Polyposis Awareness Week, with remarks emphasizing the importance of family health history, early screening, and cancer prevention. The chamber also adopted SCR 181, declaring June 10 Family Justice Center Day in California; supporters described Family Justice Centers as trauma-informed, wraparound service hubs for survivors of domestic violence, elder abuse, child abuse, and human trafficking, and several members and advocates from the California Family Justice Center Network were introduced in the gallery. The Senate then debated and passed SJR 18, a resolution opposing Citizens United and urging limits on corporate and dark-money spending in elections. Supporters argued that unlimited political spending undermines democracy and transparency, while opponents raised concerns about unions, nonprofit advocacy, and the need for broader campaign finance reform; the resolution passed 28-8. The consent calendar and special consent calendar were adopted without objection, with item 93 receiving a 35-0 vote and the remaining consent items passing unanimously. The session concluded with adjournment-in-memory tributes for Larry Mazzola, Sr., a longtime San Francisco labor leader; Steve Zaley, a longtime county and state public servant; and James J. McClain Sr., a retired Air Force master sergeant and postal worker. The Senate announced it would recess and reconvene on Monday, June 15, 2026, at 2 p.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:30:04.360> and actually recommended contributions and actually recommended contributions
• <00:30:09.600> they're calculate their contributions they're calculate their contributions
• The proposed legislation would limit the amount of contingency reserve to 16% of contributions for the
• The proposed legislation would limit the amount of contingency reserve to 16% of contributions for the
• The proposed legislation would limit the amount of contingency reserve to 16% of contributions for the

Keywords: 1191, senate, all