Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, thank you for your testimony.
• And seeing none, thank you for your testimony. Thank you, sir.
• We'll proceed to testimony. The chair calls Phil Geiger. Mr.
• Thank you, sir, for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. House Bill 5469.

Bills: HB565, HB3743, HB4310, HB5083, HB5129, HB5195, HB5331, HB5469, SB21, HB3185, SB 21

Keywords: constitutional amendment, fiscal impact, state budget, ballot measure, transparency in voting, management-to-staff ratio, state agencies, employee regulations, government efficiency, workforce management, public information, governing board, transparency, confidentiality, access rights, privacy, identifying information, state agency, consent, occupational license

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, we will reserve your right to close and proceed to testimony. Thank you.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you very much.
• Okay, we will proceed with testimony.
• Thank you all for your testimony.
• Thank you all for your testimony. The chair calls Hillary Davis with HHSC.

Bills: HB1531, HB2667, HB2809, HB2865, HB3589, HB3151, HB3748, HB3750, HB4419, HB4643, HB3597, HB4129, HB4130, HB4131

Keywords: workplace violence prevention, health and safety code, Chapter 331, facility definition, home and community support services agency, home health agency, home health care, nursing staff, registered nurses, health care workplace safety, hospital, nursing facility, ambulatory surgical center, freestanding emergency medical care facility, mental hospital, Texas health care regulation, provider compliance, occupational safety, senior living, referral agencies

Transcript Highlights:

• For each bill, we will allocate 4 minutes for testimony and 4 minutes for questions.
• If you can make your way to the testimony table and to your bill, Representative Hu.
• We don't have any more time for testimony, so we'll move on to discussion.
• Larson, thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you, Carol, for your time and your testimony. Thank you, committee. Thank you all.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have public testimony on it.
• That is the end of public testimony.
• I'm showing no other public testimony on the amendment.
• Also any debate having no other public testimony.
• I'm showing no further public testimony. Senators, we are in debate debate.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the opportunities and challenges of the IIJA implementation in mind, I look forward to receiving testimony
• Johnson for five minutes for his testimony. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
• The other programs certainly are the safety program that I mentioned in my testimony.
• Carroll's testimony, again, things are happening and we need to be able to be responsive, to be able
• In my testimony I mentioned we call it an office of environmental quality of where the state DOT pays

Keywords: Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act, IIJA, bipartisan infrastructure, funding flexibility, NEPA, environmental reviews, bureaucratic delays, federal funding, infrastructure investment

Summary: The committee meeting focused on the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act, discussing the ongoing implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). Chairman Capito highlighted the bipartisan nature of the legislation and the necessity of refining existing provisions to ensure effective delivery of transportation projects. Notable emphasis was placed on the need for flexibility in funding to address inflation impacts and delays caused by bureaucratic hurdles, especially relating to environmental reviews under NEPA. Witnesses from state transportation agencies provided valuable insights into real-world challenges faced in project execution, ultimately underscoring the importance of continuous federal support for infrastructure development. The discussion also touched on the broader implications of federal funding freezes by the previous administration, which have reportedly hindered several ongoing and planned projects. This issue raised significant concern among committee members, who urged the need for reliable funding and the removal of unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles that could cause delays in project implementation. The meeting concluded with a commitment from the members to work collaboratively to overcome these challenges and ensure a smooth path forward for critical infrastructure investments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Representative, for your testimony.
• testimony testimony um<02:22:31.720> previous<02:22:32.120> testimony<02:22:32.760>
• suggested<02:22:33.439> that um previous testimony suggested that um previous testimony suggested
• , or I know you've already had extensive testimony on this already had extensive testimony on this, and
• <05:11:45.680> specifically the testimony specifically the testimony specifically around<05

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 758, which would establish a study committee on airport operation hours and possible noise abatement measures, including whether New Hampshire should prohibit departures between midnight and 6 a.m. The sponsor said the committee would examine the pros and cons and consult stakeholders. The Bureau of Aeronautics testified neutrally, noting that New Hampshire has 25 public airports, 12 with federal funding and grant assurances that may require them to remain open during those hours, and that cargo operations, including at Manchester, commonly occur overnight. Members also discussed existing noise abatement programs and how mitigation is determined by noise contours and FAA funding decisions. No vote was taken; the chair closed the hearing after testimony. The committee then heard House Bill 489, allowing voluntary emergency workers to use rear-facing blue lights on private vehicles when responding to emergencies. The sponsor said the bill corrects an oversight in existing law, would not cost the state or towns money, and would improve visibility and safety, especially in rural areas. Supportive testimony from a volunteer responder emphasized that blue lights help cut through fog, snow, and nighttime conditions, and that the bill would only add a single rear-facing blue light to existing red, amber, and white emergency lighting. The New Hampshire State Police opposed the bill, arguing that expanding blue lights to private vehicles would confuse the public and desensitize drivers to blue lights, which are associated with law enforcement. The hearing closed without action. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 533, which the sponsor and State Police clarified is actually two separate changes: one authorizing civilian automotive equipment inspectors to assist with vehicle inspection work, and another expanding language in motor carrier enforcement to include new entrant safety audits and compliance reviews. The State Police explained that civilian inspectors are hired and trained through the department and that any findings of state-law violations would be referred to troopers; they also said the new motor carrier language was requested to satisfy federal audit concerns about right of entry. The New Hampshire Motor Transport Association said it had no position if the civilian inspectors were not doing commercial truck inspections, but would oppose the bill if they were. Members asked about the difference between audits and compliance reviews, and the State Police said audits are for newer carriers and are non-enforcement, while compliance reviews look for violations. The chair then closed the hearing on HB 533. After a brief reset, the committee opened House Bill 594, which would repeal an alternate definition of “way” for the driving-after-suspension statute. The sponsor said the change was requested by the Department of Justice. Representative Erica Leon opposed the repeal, explaining that the prior language was intended to avoid criminalizing people who mow lawns or perform similar work near property edges while suspended, but she worried the repeal could create a loophole allowing driving on places like highway medians. Members questioned whether the issue was limited to mowing or broader vehicle use on property edges, and Leon said she would work with agencies to clarify the language so it protects lawful mowing without allowing misuse. No vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm proceeding with the requester's testimony a moment.
• I'm proceeding with the requester's testimony a moment.
• Seeing none, thank you for your testimony.
• <01:12:05.760> thank testimony thank testimony thank you<01:12:07.880> right<01:12:08.840
• I want to make my testimony as clear as I can.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on House Bill 233, which would impose transparency and reporting requirements on the New Hampshire Vaccine Association. The prime sponsor, Representative Comto, said the bill and a proposed amendment were intended to increase public access by requiring a physical meeting location, making meetings available online, and publishing a complete list of vaccines and pharmaceutical products purchased. She argued the association should be more transparent because it is involved in vaccine purchasing and public trust is important, especially given controversy around vaccines. Committee members questioned the sponsor about the association’s legal status, who sets vaccine requirements, whether other private entities would be covered, and whether the proposal should instead apply more broadly to all meetings or include recordings. The sponsor said the association was created by the legislature, that childhood vaccine requirements come from DHHS and CDC-related processes, and that she would be open to broader recording requirements. Some members raised concerns about misinformation and whether requiring answers to public questions could be problematic in a contentious policy area. Patrick Miller, executive director of the Vaccine Association, and attorney Mark McHugh testified in opposition. They described the association as a not-for-profit voluntary corporation created by statute in 2002 to serve as a funding mechanism for the state’s universal childhood vaccine purchase program, with no policymaking role and no public funding. They said the association already posts notices, agendas, minutes, and allows public webinar access and comments, while also providing annual audits and reports and other statutory reporting. They argued HB 233 would impose unnecessary administrative costs on a private entity, interfere with its limited charitable purpose, and ultimately increase costs borne by insurers, employers, and consumers. No vote or final action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• After some testimony, the Senate removed that phrase, at email or telephone, that we had added, but it
• According to testimony, the permanent.
• We took testimony from the bill.
• <00:56:16.240> So, came up afterward during testimony.
• So, came up afterward during testimony.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House first took up S. 298, the Vermont Voting Rights Act. Members explained the Senate’s further proposal of amendment, including changes to language about how the State Ethics Commission may respond to ethics inquiries, a directive for the Secretary of State and Ethics Commission to work out a shared process for the candidate financial disclosure form by January 30, and a technical PAC-related wording change. The committee reported an 11-0-0 vote in favor, and the House concurred in the Senate proposal of amendment. The chamber then suspended rules to take up S. 328, the omnibus housing bill, and heard detailed committee reports from General and Housing, Ways and Means, and Appropriations. The bill addresses common interest community resources, a service-supported housing advisory council, expansion of the 10% for Vermont program to 12.5%, an off-site construction accelerator pilot, VHFA’s rental housing revolving loan program, special assessment districts, municipal housing planning requirements, and several reports on housing-related issues. Ways and Means described revenue impacts from the cash-balance expansion and revised the off-site construction pilot and loan program language; Appropriations removed a section already included in the budget and adjusted advisory council per diem funding. The House adopted the amendments, ordered third reading, suspended rules to place the bill in all remaining stages, passed it in concurrence with proposal of amendment, and messaged the action to the Senate forthwith. The House then suspended rules to take up S. 197, relating to payment reform for primary care. The House Health Care Committee recommended a strike-all amendment, saying the health care system is in crisis, premiums are rising, access to primary care is limited, and clinicians are burdened by documentation and administrative work. The committee vote on its amendment was 10-0-1, and the bill was also referred to Ways and Means and Appropriations because of fiscal implications. The transcript cuts off as the House was beginning consideration of the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• we heard some very compelling testimony we heard some very compelling testimony yesterday<00:47:
• >> Thank you for your testimony. >> Thank you for your testimony.
• <01:59:50.400> So provide a little more testimony. So provide a little more testimony.
• Will you be submitting your testimony? Will you be submitting your testimony?
• <03:07:22.720> and And as I listened to the testimony and And as I listened to the testimony

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Your signature is an affirmation that the testimony you give is true.
• Courtney, thank you so much for your testimony and your willingness to serve.
• Great job on your testimony.
• Great job on your testimony.
• I know that there's been testimony here.

Bills: HCR95, HB4, HB244, HB615, HB648, HB1049, HB1201

Keywords: sales tax, exemptions, credits, rebates, uniformity, legislative rules, fiscal report, constitutional convention, Louisiana constitution, electoral process, government structure, delegate elections, delegates, state election, ratification, Louisiana, public meetings, broadcast, transparency, government accountability

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so with that said, students begin your testimony.
• And welcome spectators and testimony.
• And if you remember the testimony to my original bill, there was a lot of reticence.
• Um thank you for your testimony<00:47:24.000> last<00:47:24.359> Monday.
• Um the 250th is testimony last Monday.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• State your name and proceed with your testimony. >> Thank you. Uh, my name is Graham Owens.
• State your name and proceed with<00:03:10.000> your<00:03:10.720> testimony.
• with your testimony. with your testimony. >> Thank<00:03:11.680> you.
• Owens for your testimony, not just your testimony, but your conservative think tank.
• Owens for your testimony, not just your testimony,<00:37:13.440> but<00:37:13.680> your

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 936, an author’s bill requiring cost-benefit analysis before agencies move forward with major rulemaking. Chair Nash moved the bill, the A2 author’s amendment was adopted, and the bill was then discussed as amended. The sponsor said the goal was not to eliminate rulemaking, but to require agencies to “show their work” by analyzing costs, benefits, and assumptions before rules are adopted. Supporters, including representatives from Americans for Prosperity and the Pacific Legal Foundation, argued the bill would improve transparency, uniformity, and accountability in rulemaking. They cited federal and other state models, especially Virginia, and said similar requirements already exist in several states. They also pointed to public support for requiring cost-benefit analysis and said the bill could help agencies avoid costly or poorly thought-out regulations, reduce litigation risk, and improve legislative oversight through notice to committees and publication of preliminary and final analyses. Several members raised concerns. Representative Luger Nikolai said cost-benefit analysis is already part of existing law through SONARs and that the legislature, not agencies, should be the first line of review; she also worried the bill would force dollar valuations on qualitative factors such as accessibility. Representative Craft said the bill could allow unelected officials to negate policy choices already made by the legislature if benefits do not exceed costs. Representative Fryberg said the bill appears to require full analysis even for minor housekeeping rules and may overemphasize dollar-based benefits. Chair Nash and supporters responded that the bill is meant to impose a uniform check on agencies and that many current rules already operate without sufficient legislative oversight. The discussion ended with members expressing both support and opposition, and a roll call was requested, though no final vote was included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• your testimony your testimony today<00:08:08.240> seeing<00:08:08.639> no<00:08:08.919
• "Thank you for your testimony."
• "Thank you for your testimony."
• even given your testimony.
• testimony here uh the one question that testimony here uh the one question that I<01:50:58.440> did

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Please proceed with your testimony. Please proceed with your testimony.
• . testimony. testimony.
• Um we're going to on with testimony.
• We've heard testimony, the A7 amendment.
• Um, you know, here with Mitch Magnus's testimony and other testimonies, I read through these testimonies

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I appreciate the testimony. Uh, Mr.
• I appreciate the testimony. Uh, Mr.
• I appreciate the testimony. Uh, Mr.
• I appreciate the testimony. Uh, Mr.
• ,<01:02:36.960> over stated earlier in my testimony, over stated earlier in my testimony,

Bills: HF3642, HF2700, HF3615

Keywords: virtual currency, kiosks, prohibition, customer payouts, cryptocurrency regulation, consumer privacy, data privacy, health data, sensitive data, Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act, personal data, data broker, targeted advertising, geofencing, location tracking, health care privacy, patient privacy, consent, minor privacy, children's privacy

Summary: The Commerce Finance and Policy Committee met on House File 3642, which would prohibit virtual currency kiosks in Minnesota. The bill was laid over, and the committee adopted a DE1 author’s amendment. Chair Kaggel and Representative Perryman described the measure as a response to widespread scams using crypto kiosks, especially against older adults and other vulnerable people, and said they would continue working with the Department of Commerce and other stakeholders. Testimony from law enforcement and advocates strongly supported the ban. A St. Cloud police sergeant and a Woodbury detective described cases in which victims lost large sums, said the current safeguards and refund rules are being bypassed, and argued that the kiosks are difficult to investigate because funds move quickly and often overseas. An AARP Minnesota volunteer also supported the bill, saying kiosks are a preferred tool for scammers and that existing protections have not kept pace with the problem. The Department of Commerce said it strongly supports the bill and reported that it has received 120 complaints over three years involving nearly $1 million in reported losses, with 2025 the worst year so far. The main opposition came from CoinFlip’s general counsel, who argued that the problem is fraud generally, not kiosks themselves, and said Minnesota already has consumer protections, including refunds for eligible victims. He urged stronger regulation rather than a ban, citing blockchain analytics, hold periods, and 24-hour customer service as alternatives. Committee members then asked questions about how long kiosks have operated in Minnesota, how many there are, who owns them, and the scale of losses; Commerce said there are hundreds statewide, operated by a variety of companies, and that reported losses are likely undercounts.

Transcript Highlights:

• Merch, we thank you for your testimony. Let's hear other testimony.
• <00:29:03.120> today, we could hear all the testimony today, we could hear all the testimony
• Let's we thank you for your testimony.
• Anybody else in the room have testimony? Anybody else in the room have testimony?
• testimony. What is your pleasure? testimony. What is your pleasure?

Bills: SF0102, SF0113

Keywords: energy transmission, load growth, Wyoming energy authority, transmission planning study, public utilities, regional cooperation, hand count audit, ballots, election integrity, transparency, voting system, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > from<01:03:12.160> the testimony.
• Um, first want to point out testimony.
• Do we have questions for your testimony.
• I'm testifying testimony this morning.
• All right, seeing none, thank you for testimony.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:19:48.960> Fantastic ahead with your testimony. Fantastic ahead with your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony Thank you very much for your testimony and<00:40:20.320><
• ahead with your testimony. ahead with your testimony.
• Go ahead with your testimony.
• proceed with your testimony. proceed with your testimony.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Goldberg and of course Adair Weishar for their testimonies. First of all, on behalf of Dr.
• Adair Weishar for their testimonies. Adair Weishar for their testimonies.
• And I have to say my questions shifted continuously during the testimony.
• So, what I heard at the testimony much.
• testimony today about imperfect bills. testimony today about imperfect bills.

Keywords: 00:00:00 Call to Order/Roll Call 00:01:10 Discussion of 25RS HB 414 00:44:26 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 414 00:50:25 Discussion of 25RS SB 27 00:53:44 Roll Call Vote on 25RS SB 27 00:55:49 Discussion of 25RS SB 93 00:57:57 Roll Call Vote on 25RS SB 93 00:59:29 Discussion of 25RS SB 132 01:37:39 Roll Call Vote on 25RS SB 132 01:40:55 Discussion of 25RS SB 153 01:42:05 Roll Call Vote on 25RS SB 153 01:43:46 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Health Services Committee met with a quorum and took up House Bill 414 with a committee substitute. The bill, described by sponsors and supporters as a continuation of prior maternal-health legislation, was framed as a clarification of medical standards and an effort to improve care for women and families facing complicated pregnancies. Representative Tate, Representative Nemes, Adair Wushar of Kentucky Right to Life, and Dr. Jeff Goldberg of ACOG Kentucky all testified in support, saying the substitute was developed collaboratively to reduce confusion in the law and help physicians provide evidence-based care without fear of criminal penalties. Supporters said the committee substitute was intended to define what is not an abortion under Kentucky law and to spell out medical treatments for conditions such as miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, molar pregnancy, sepsis, hemorrhage, preeclampsia, premature rupture of membranes, and fetal demise. Dr. Goldberg said current statutes contain significant ambiguity and have created unintended barriers to treating pregnancy complications, including emergency situations, and he gave examples of patients who were delayed or harmed because physicians were uncertain about what the law allowed. Representative Nemes said the measure was the result of unusual cooperation among groups that do not usually agree and described it as a first step toward fixing a discrete problem. Representative Wilner raised concerns that the language could effectively require a patient to be in severe distress before treatment is clearly permitted and that it was too prescriptive about how physicians should manage miscarriages. In response, Dr. Goldberg and the sponsors said the substitute was not perfect, was meant as a short-term solution, and was designed to give doctors more confidence in providing routine, medically necessary care for pregnancy complications. The transcript indicates the committee substitute was adopted, but no final vote on the bill itself is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• have a lot of testimony to get to today. have a lot of testimony to get to today.
• > has testimony.
• here today and probably the testimony here today and probably the testimony<04:46:44.798> of<
• That is my testimony. I'm happy project. That is my testimony.
• Appreciate your testimony.

Keywords: 1189, house, all