Video & Transcript Research : 'testimonials'
Page 165 of 500
NV
Transcript Highlights:
- We have no callers for opposition testimony.
- Chair, we have no callers for neutral testimony.
- Chair, we have no additional callers for neutral testimony at this time. Thank you.
- To provide testimony in support of Senate Bill 175, please press star 9 now to join the queue.
- To provide testimony in neutral for Senate Bill 175, please press star 9 now to join the queue.
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Floor Session Apr 21st, 2025 at 12:30 pm
North Dakota Senate Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- And outside of that, there has been no testimony. I've been working on this bill for months.
- Arnold's testimony in neutral, you will see the three examples that the insurance commissioner used,
- So when I look at page two of the testimony the previous speaker was referring to, where it's showing
- There is testimony in here in the opposition from March, from There is testimony in here in the opposition
- The Senate removed Section 3 because in testimony we heard that this was being done.
Summary:
The Senate reconvened and handled several House messages and conference committee appointments before taking up a series of bills. It appointed conference committees on Senate Bill 2265 and House Bills 1454, 1448, and 1524. The chamber also adopted a Senate amendment to House Bill 1216, delaying its effective date for the copay accumulator prescription drug bill to January 1, 2026, with later renewal timing for non-PERS plans.
House Bill 1216 then came up for final passage. Senators debated whether allowing copay accumulator programs to count manufacturer coupons toward deductibles would help patients with expensive drugs or unfairly shift costs to insurers and other policyholders. Supporters said it would help people afford life-saving medications and that the coupon payments go to pharmacies, not insurers; opponents argued it could raise premiums and create perverse incentives for drug pricing. The bill passed 29-18. The Senate also concurred in House amendments to Senate Bill 2160, which changes health insurance benefits under the Uniform Group Insurance Program to move from a grandfathered to a non-grandfathered plan, with supporters emphasizing added benefits and flexibility and opponents warning of higher costs and irreversible changes. That bill passed concurrence 33-14 and final passage 39-8.
The Senate next concurred in House amendments to Senate Bill 2339, the wildfire mitigation bill, which requires utility mitigation plans to be updated every two years, incorporate national electric standards, and creates a rebuttable presumption of reasonable care if the plan is followed. The bill then passed final passage 46-1. The chamber also adopted conference committee reports and passed House Bill 1460 on adult foster care and monitoring devices, House Bill 1440 on cigar lounge tobacco use, and Senate Bill 2374 on insurance-related provisions including property insurance arbitration, managed repair programs, and surplus lines issues; SB 2374 also added a study on towing and recovery coverage. The session ended with announcements of upcoming conference committee meetings and adjournment until April 22, 2025.
US
US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session
An oversight hearing to examine Native American education, focusing on Federal programs at the U.S. Department of Education. Apr 2nd, 2025 at 01:30 pm
Indian Affairs Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- I would remind everyone on the panel that we do have your full written testimony.
- It will become part of the official. records, so I'd invite you to keep your oral testimony here today
- Our written testimony goes into detail for most of these programs, but I want to quickly highlight the
- In this testimony, Brent Gish, who is NIA's Director of Education, is going to be speaking Brent Gish
- Senator, as Madam Chair, as you heard from my testimony I'm a fan of DOE.
Keywords:
Native education, Department of Education, federal funding, testimony, treaty obligations, public schools, educational policies, Indigenous students
Summary:
The meeting focused on the responsibilities of the U.S. Department of Education towards Native students, highlighting the importance of federal education programs that satisfy treaty obligations to Native communities. Various witnesses testified about the impact of educational policies designed to support Native students who primarily attend public schools. Concerns were voiced over recent proposals that could potentially undermine these programs, citing the role of federal funding in ensuring successful educational outcomes for Native youth. The chair of the committee emphasized the need for continued federal support and attention to the unique educational challenges faced by Indigenous populations.
FL
Transcript Highlights:
- Seeing no questions, is there public testimony on the bill? Dr.
- Is there public testimony on the bill?
- Seeing none, is there public testimony on the bill?
- Seeing none, we have no public testimony.
- Seeing none, is there public testimony on the amendment?
Summary:
The Education and Employment Committee met with a quorum and took up seven bills, all of which were reported favorably. First, HB 1367 on school attendance was presented as a response to rising chronic absenteeism; it would standardize attendance definitions and reporting statewide, and it passed 18-0 after supportive testimony from education and business groups. HB 949 would prohibit student use of wireless devices during the school day, while allowing district policies for designated use areas and existing medical/disability exceptions; members discussed classroom disruption, bullying, public safety, and accommodations, and the bill passed favorably. The committee also approved PCS for CS for HB 1135, requiring ECGs for student athletes in grades 9-12, with exemptions for religious objections and provisions on cost, liability, and medical clearance; the bill drew extensive emotional testimony from parents and advocates who described children lost to sudden cardiac arrest and was reported favorably after unanimous support.
Members then approved CS for CS for HB 597 on diabetes management in schools, which would allow schools to keep glucagon pens and authorize trained personnel to administer them in emergencies; an amendment clarified charter schools are included as public schools. HB 1309 on reading interventions and instruction would expand reading support and training for grades 4-12 and require district reading plans to include evidence-based interventions; it also passed without opposition. CS for HB 981 on athlete representation and compensation would cap certain NIL agent fees, allow some high school athletes to earn NIL compensation, and create a framework for registered advisors; members raised concerns about predatory practices and coach involvement, but the bill passed favorably after amendment.
Finally, HB 1111 would eliminate the certificate of completion option for students who do not meet graduation requirements, with the sponsor arguing it would better motivate students to earn a standard diploma and improve postsecondary and workforce opportunities. Members discussed the need for stronger supports to help students meet graduation standards, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee adjourned after completing all agenda items.
TX
Texas 89th 2nd C.S.
S/C on Academic & Career-Oriented Education Mar 27th, 2025
S/C on Academic & Career-Oriented Education
Transcript Highlights:
- Awesome testimony, Wyatt. Members, any questions? Yes, uh, Vice Chair Tallarico.
- As a reminder, we've got 2 minutes on all of our testimony. I saw you walk in a little late.
- We'll proceed with public testimony. Sure calls Rebecca Montgomery.
- We'll begin with public testimony. Uh, we have a number of folks registered here.
- Appreciate your testimony. Next, the chair calls Miguel Solis.
Bills:
HB117
TX
Texas 89th Regular
S/C on Academic & Career-Oriented Education Mar 27th, 2025
S/C on Academic & Career-Oriented Education
Transcript Highlights:
- There will be a time limit of two minutes per witness during the public testimony period.
- As a reminder, we've got two minutes on all of our testimony.
- Chairman Gim, we'll reserve your right to close, and we'll proceed with public testimony.
- We'll begin with public testimony.
- I appreciate your testimony. Next, the chair calls Miguel Solis.
Keywords:
early childhood education, task force, governance, Texas Education Agency, child care, education policy, virtual education, hybrid learning, school funding, average daily attendance, education technology, remote learning, education legislation, workforce development, adult education, high school diploma, industry certification, pilot program, gifted education, education support
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee Jun 24th, 2026
Utilities and Energy
Transcript Highlights:
- We’ll open it up for additional testimony in support.
- Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today.
- Moving on with additional testimony in opposition.
- At this time, we'll turn to opposition testimony.
- There was some testimony about qualms with the standards.
VT
Vermont 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Session - 2026-04-29 - 11:00AM
Vermont Senate Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- >
individual <01:02:07.280>that testimony from an individual that testimony from an individual - We had the National Organization for Rare Diseases give testimony.
- We had the National Organization for Rare Diseases give testimony.
- Department of Health give testimony. Department of Health give testimony.
- And with that, give testimony on that.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you so much for your testimony. Thank you.
- bill and and the test and the testimony bill and and the test and the testimony for<00:31:08.399
- But good to see you and I appreciate the testimony.
- <00:59:20.720>
Are you so much for your testimony. Are you so much for your testimony. - Are there any questions your testimony.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Ways and Means (03/18/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony.
- <03:01:27.479>
my committee for taking my testimony my committee for taking my testimony my - your testimony<03:03:52.640>
okay <03:03:52.880>now testimony okay now testimony okay - <03:09:54.560>
I mean I from all testimony I mean I from all testimony I hear<03:09:57.399 - <03:24:43.000>
you're your testimony you're your testimony you're welcome<03:24:45.199>
Summary:
The committee heard testimony on House Bill 224, which would redirect most money from New Hampshire’s renewable energy fund back to electric ratepayers. The bill sponsor argued the measure would lower energy costs, noting recent utility rate increases and estimating annual savings of roughly $2.5 million to $7.3 million for ratepayers. Supporters said the fund has accumulated money that should be returned to customers rather than used for subsidies, and they emphasized that the state has already rebated similar funds from RGGI for years.
Opponents, including Rep. Kat McGee, argued the renewable energy fund is a successful, nonlapsing dedicated fund that supports local clean-energy projects, energy resilience, emissions reductions, and private investment. McGee said the fiscal note overstated the benefit of rebates and understated the loss of investment, claiming the average annual rebate would amount to less than $10 per customer while the program has helped leverage significant private dollars and nearly 10,000 projects. She urged the committee to reject the bill as a poor deal for the state and ratepayers.
Committee members questioned the fiscal note, the size of the rebate, whether the bill would set a precedent for other dedicated funds, and whether the program’s incentives amount to picking winners and losers. The Department of Energy testified neutrally, explaining how the renewable energy fund works, including renewable energy credits, alternative compliance payments, and the fund’s use for renewable energy initiatives. No vote was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.
AZ
Arizona 2026 Regular Session
06/02/2026 - Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Elder Abuse
Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Elder Abuse
Transcript Highlights:
- You can use names in this place because this is Senate testimony.
- You can use names in this place because this is Senate testimony.
- And unfortunately, I'm not here to give expert testimony.
- I appreciate your testimony. Okay, we got two more people.
- I appreciate your testimony. Okay, we got two more people.
Summary:
The Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Elder Abuse opened by explaining it was gathering testimony on elder abuse, especially alleged misconduct involving court-appointed systems such as guardians ad litem and fiduciaries, to identify gaps in law and oversight and develop legislative fixes. The chair limited each witness’s time, asked for names and contact information for follow-up, and repeatedly noted that some allegations might warrant referral to law enforcement, the attorney general, or county attorneys if basic criminal elements were present.
Several witnesses described alleged abuse in guardianship, conservatorship, and fiduciary cases. Dr. Holly Lauder said her mother, who had Alzheimer’s disease, was subjected to allegedly deficient psychological capacity evaluations that ignored treating doctors and family input, leading to a fiduciary arrangement that later resulted in neglect. Kevin Axson described his mother’s probate case, saying a guardian ad litem and conservator were appointed after a family financial dispute, that the guardian ad litem and fiduciary had little contact with his mother, and that the estate was burdened with substantial fees and a $200,000 bond requirement. Frieda Alvarado testified about a 94-year-old client, Samuel Armento, saying he was isolated, medicated without his request, and treated without dignity after a fiduciary and care team took control. Bill Chalmers, Johnny Hamilton, and Kathy Hamilton also testified about Sam Armento’s case, alleging isolation, excessive fees, conflicts of interest, and poor oversight by fiduciaries and caregivers.
Other witnesses raised broader concerns about Arizona probate practices. David Redkey said he has been under a long-running conservatorship despite earning degrees and maintaining capacity, and alleged that court-appointed professionals and fiduciaries overcharged his estate and blocked efforts to terminate the arrangement. Susan Wolfe described the Peyton case, alleging that a wife’s conservatorship and related court actions led to the loss of assets, exclusion of witnesses, and large fees for a relatively small monthly care bill. Dr. Lewis Heller, an OB-GYN and disciplinary committee member, said the medical evaluations he reviewed showed the people involved were competent and that the conduct he observed was unethical and possibly criminal. Renee Self testified that she lost her role as trustee and spent large sums defending her father’s estate, alleging that the probate process stripped her father of assets and limited her access to him despite APS findings that her actions were in his best interests.
No formal committee votes or legislative actions were taken in the excerpt, but members repeatedly expressed concern, asked for documents and transcripts, and indicated they would follow up with witnesses and consider stakeholder meetings to craft legislation addressing oversight, transparency, and accountability in guardianship and fiduciary systems.
HI
Hawaii 2026 Regular Session
JDC, JDC DEFER Public Hearings 03-20-2026
Transcript Highlights:
- We do have a two-minute time limit on testimony.
- Often members will ask questions, so if you can hang around after your testimony, that would be great
- >> Um, we submitted written testimony, but >> Um, we submitted written testimony, but I<00
- We submitted written testimony in support of this. >> Okay. Thank you.
- written testimony in support of this. written testimony in support of this.
Summary:
The Judiciary Committee first considered Governor’s Message 574, confirming Michael Tenoi to continue serving on the Commission to Promote Uniform Legislation through June 30, 2028. Several supporters testified, and Tenoi said he valued working with Hawaii and national commissioners and hoped to focus on emerging issues such as artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and data security. The committee recommended advise and consent and adopted the measure, with a photo taken afterward.
The committee then heard HB 1519 on campaign contributions, which would require disclosure of compensated officers and immediate family members of certain state contractors and grantees. The Campaign Spending Commission and State Procurement Office supported the bill but asked for clarifying amendments; several advocacy groups supported the measure but urged stronger language, including removing branch-of-government limits and narrowing loopholes. The chair proposed amendments to remove monetary thresholds, limit the bill to paid officers, add appropriations for the Campaign Spending Commission and State Procurement Office, define “officer” more broadly, and note that false-name contributions are already felonies. The committee voted to pass HB 1519 with amendments.
HB 2250, the claims against the state bill, drew testimony from the Attorney General and multiple departments in support, but members raised extensive questions about why many claims would be paid from the general fund, how corrective action is being pursued, and the handling of several specific claims, including wrongful imprisonment, a cesspool citation, Department of Corrections deaths, a large special education settlement, a charter school lease dispute, and an outdated check. Because of those outstanding questions, the committee postponed decision-making on HB 2250 until Tuesday, March 24, at 10:30 a.m. in Room 016. Later, the committee also considered Governor’s Message 725, confirming Daniel M. Gluck as an associate judge of the Intermediate Court of Appeals; the committee recommended consent and adopted the measure.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Utility executive compensation 3/17/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- I have provided<00:09:59.519>
expert <00:10:00.000>testimony <00:10:00.560>in <00 - testimony in two recent Minnesota<00:10:02.000>
rate <00:10:02.320>cases, <00:10:02.959 - My testimony will be brief here." mind uh some equity concerns. Um so mind uh some equity concerns.
- to provide testimony and can answer<00:20:53.679>
any <00:20:54.000>questions. - You heard in his testimony making.
Summary:
The committee heard House File 76, as amended by the adopted A1 amendment, and the chair moved the bill to be re-referred to the general register. The bill would limit the amount investor-owned utilities can charge ratepayers for executive compensation, capping recoverable pay for the top 10 executives at the governor’s salary. Representative Greenman argued the measure would protect customers from paying for lavish executive pay and said it would not affect what executives are paid, only what can be recovered from ratepayers. She cited recent Public Utilities Commission action and ongoing rate cases as evidence the issue is real and recurring.
Supportive testimony came from a Minneapolis resident describing financial hardship and rising utility bills, a local worker who said customers have no choice of utility provider and should not fund monopoly executive pay, and advocates from the Energy and Policy Institute and Utility Reform Now, who said ratepayers should not subsidize excessive compensation and that the bill is a targeted reform. Xcel Energy and CenterPoint Energy opposed the bill’s premise by defending the current regulatory process. Their representatives said the PUC already reviews executive compensation in rate cases, generally allows only limited recovery, and has used that process for decades. Xcel also emphasized its affordability programs and said executives help secure savings and investments for customers.
Members discussed whether the legislature should set a bright-line rule or leave the issue to the PUC. Representative Greenman said the bill is needed because the PUC process can take years and the legislature should establish a clear standard for all investor-owned utilities. Some members supported the bill as a response to an affordability crisis and the lack of consumer choice, while others said the legislature should focus on broader energy-cost issues and existing regulatory tools. The committee did not take a final vote on the bill in the portion of the meeting provided, but the amendment was adopted and the bill was moved for re-referral to the general register.
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Elementary and Secondary Education Jan 15th, 2026
Elementary and Secondary Education
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
Committee to Study Long-Term Managed Care (09/24/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- I think the question that was raised during testimony is if we change from to a managed care system,
- I think the question that was raised during testimony is if we change from to a managed care system,
- I think the question that was raised<00:12:21.519>
during <00:12:21.839>testimony <00:12 - is if we change raised during testimony is if we change from<00:12:24.399>
to <00:12:24.639>- So I think that what we heard in testimony from the county, Hillsborough County in particular, and I
Summary:
The Committee to Study Long-Term Managed Care approved the prior meeting minutes as amended after correcting the first paragraph. The chair then outlined the committee’s plan to produce a preliminary report by October 1, with additional meetings to follow, since some questions remain about the federal One Big Beautiful Bill (OB3) and its effects on Medicaid financing and managed care.
The main discussion focused on New Hampshire nursing home funding and how ProShare and MQUIP work. Members reviewed Medicaid rates, supplemental payments, intergovernmental transfers, and the role of federal matching funds. The chair and Mr. Litman concluded that OB3’s phase-down of payments above the Medicare rate likely would not directly eliminate ProShare or MQUIP in New Hampshire, but uncertainty remains about intergovernmental transfers and about how these payments would function if the state moved nursing facilities into managed care. Mr. Litman said managed care would likely require waivers for supplemental payments, and Texas was cited as an example of a state operating under such waivers.
The committee also discussed dual eligibles, DNIP, PACE, and the possibility of carving out HCBS from nursing facility services. DHS said its managed care contract would allow the state to use MCOs for DNIP, with the goal of better coordination between Medicaid and Medicare, while PACE would likely require more study and might be more feasible in populated counties. Members also reviewed OB3’s new presumptive eligibility provisions and a state waiver request modeled on Washington’s approach, plus a separate grant for transitioning people from facilities back to the community. The rural health transformation fund was discussed as a possible source for workforce, telehealth, mobile integrated health, and other support investments, but not for direct construction or major building renovation. County representatives emphasized that any county role in PACE or DNIP would require significant vetting, infrastructure, capital investment, and a realistic timeline. The meeting ended with the chair saying the draft report would outline issues and possible alternatives, but not recommendations yet, and the committee adjourned without taking further action.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- We will reopen public testimony.
- We will reopen public testimony.
- Chair Kolkhorst, members, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Hearing none, public testimony is closed. I believe Ms. Powell is not here.
Bills:
HB18, HB37, HB 116, HB388, HB879, HB913, HB 1151, HB2216, HB2358, HB2809, SB577, SB1590, SB1782, SB1887, SB2744
Keywords:
rural health, hospital funding, healthcare access, mental health services, financial stability, perinatal bereavement, healthcare, hospital training, bereavement support, maternal care, fetal demise, stillbirth, neonatal death, parent-child relationship, involuntary termination, family law, child welfare, child protection, HB 388, HB388
Summary:
The committee first reopened testimony on House Bill 2216, which would strengthen child welfare requirements by expanding “active efforts” to help families avoid removal and support reunification, while also raising standards related to removals and terminations. Supporters from child welfare and family defense groups said the bill would better protect families and align Texas more closely with ICWA-style principles, but several warned it would require significant new funding, staffing, and community services such as mental health care, housing, child care, and substance use treatment. The committee then left HB 2216 pending.
The committee next heard Senate Bill 1782, aimed at boarding and group homes. Senator Miles said the bill closes enforcement gaps left by prior law by requiring retention of background-check records and creating misdemeanor penalties for failing to conduct or keep them, or for knowingly hiring people with serious convictions. Harris County sheriff’s investigators testified in support, describing illegal boarding homes, operators who evade permits and background checks, and exploitation of vulnerable residents; the bill was left pending. The committee also took up Senate Bill 481 on emergency preparedness for nursing facilities and assisted living facilities, adopted a new committee substitute that softened some requirements and removed the fiscal note, and left the bill pending.
The committee then heard House Bill 388, which would require the Texas Department of Insurance to create a single standardized coordination-of-benefits form for dual health plans to reduce errors and surprise bills; it was left pending. Senate Bill 1590 would move paternity registry searches for adoptions to an electronic process with a 10-day target, and House Bill 2809 would track child suicide attempts in managing conservatorship and require related reporting and parental notice; both were left pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 1887, which would prohibit administering mRNA-containing products for immunization for 10 years, with exceptions for cancer and genetic disorders. Supporters argued the bill was needed for safety, informed consent, and medical freedom, while opponents from the medical, research, and public health communities said mRNA vaccines are well-studied, save lives, and that the bill would harm access, research, and Texas’s biotech economy. The bill remained under discussion as testimony concluded.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony. Thank you. Thank you.
- Thank you for your testimony. time. Thank you for your testimony. Thank<00:04:57.840>
you. - Thank you very much for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony. bill. Thank you for your testimony.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Also, please limit your testimony to 3 minutes and avoid repeating any testimony that has already been
- Following their testimony, any questions, I'd like to reserve my right to close.
- Thank you for your testimony. Thank you. Cheer calls Margaret Summereve. Good morning.
- That's my testimony. Any questions? Any questions? Chair recognizes the chair of the suit.
- Appreciate your testimony. OK.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
House Veterans and Military Affairs Division 3/5/25
Veterans and Military Affairs Division
Transcript Highlights:
- Chair, and please begin your testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
- <00:09:10.480>
uh your name and begin your testimony uh your name and begin your testimony - Kerr, would you like to state your name and begin your testimony?
- Are there any other testimonies?
- Please begin your testimony. Thank you, Madam Chair and committee. This is a very easy bill.
KY
Kentucky 2025 Regular Session
Senate Standing Committee on Transportation (3-5-25) - Reupload
Transcript Highlights:
- I'm, I have a testimony today. Thank you, Mr.
- Thank you for your testimony. Senator Wilson has a question. Thank you, Mr.
- Chairman, and thank you, Brooks, for your testimony today.
- Thank you for your testimony, Senator Wilson has a question. Thank you, Mr.
- Chairman, and thank you, Brooks, for your testimony today.
Keywords:
Special Guests 00:13
Roll Call 00:39
HB 15 Discussion 01:35
HB 15 Vote 14:03
HB 157 Discussion 17:28
HB 157 Vote 18:42
HB 444 Discussion 19:35
HB 444 Vote 23:12
HB 188 Discussion 25:20
HB 188 Vote 29:37, 958, all
Summary:
The committee met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and then took up several bills out of order. House Bill 15, sponsored by Leader Rudy, would lower the learner’s permit age to 15 while keeping the graduated driver’s license system in place until age 17. Supporters, including a 14-year-old witness, argued it would give teens more supervised driving experience, align Kentucky with surrounding states, and help families and the workforce. Members raised questions about safety, parental supervision, and regional driver’s license office backlogs, but the bill was reported favorably with a committee substitute attached after a roll call vote.
The committee then heard House Bill 444, which would conform Kentucky CDL rules to federal reporting requirements by preventing masking of violations and would lower the age for certain hazmat CDL endorsements from 21 to 18 for in-state use only, excluding school bus endorsements. The sponsor and supporters said the change would help address truck-driver shortages and support delivery of propane, agricultural products, and other hazardous materials. A question was raised about possible insurance cost increases, but the sponsor said companies would decide whether to hire younger drivers and that the bill was intended to keep trucks moving. The bill was reported favorably with expressions of opinion that it should pass.
House Bill 157, a Department of Agriculture initiative creating a tag bill for commercial vehicles, was briefly presented and reported favorably with a committee substitute. House Bill 188, dealing with driveaway plates for businesses that transport vehicles for others, was also heard. The sponsor said the bill would clarify how many plates a business needs, reduce insurance exposure, and help keep a Warren County driveaway business in Kentucky rather than moving to neighboring states. After questions about how the plates work and a committee substitute changing the issuing authority language, the bill was reported favorably with expressions of opinion that it should pass. The committee then adjourned.