Video & Transcript Research : 'testimonies'
Page 168 of 500
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Common interest communities provisions modified 2/24/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- record and proceed with your testimony record and proceed with your testimony and<00:03:06.800><
- wrap up your testimony, I'd appreciate it. it. it.
- proceed with your testimony. proceed with your testimony.
- proceed with your testimony. proceed with your testimony.
- Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Summary:
The committee took up Senate File 1750, an HOA/common interest community reform bill, and first adopted the DE9 amendment after the chair moved it to put the bill in the form the author wanted. The bill was described by supporters as a consumer and homeowner protection measure intended to add transparency, dispute-resolution rights, conflict-of-interest rules, and limits on fees and late charges in Minnesota HOAs, which supporters said have grown rapidly and are not adequately covered by current law.
Supporters, including legal aid, the Minnesota Home Ownership Center, and Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity, said the bill responds to longstanding complaints about HOA abuse, lack of transparency, escalating attorney fees, foreclosure-related problems, and management-company conflicts of interest. They argued the revised bill reflects extensive stakeholder work and would help homeowners resolve disputes without costly escalation while improving fairness and accountability.
Opponents, including attorneys and representatives of HOA management interests, argued the bill is too rigid and one-size-fits-all, would raise costs for all homeowners, and could make associations harder to govern. They said fee caps, contract restrictions, procurement mandates, and dispute procedures would increase assessments, reduce flexibility, discourage board service, and create more legal and administrative burden, especially for smaller or financially strained communities. No final vote on the bill itself was taken in the portion provided; the bill was laid over for possible inclusion.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Education Policy and Administration (02/05/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- <00:43:43.559>
thank testimony thank testimony thank you<00:43:45.280>Becky Becky Wilson - <01:35:17.159>
and be um thank you for your testimony and be um thank you for your testimony - So I think that's my testimony, and I hope I was clear.
- So I think that's my testimony, and I hope I was clear.
- So I think that's my testimony, and I hope I was clear.
Summary:
The committee heard testimony on House Bill 662, which would require public schools to include discussion of abortion procedures and show specified videos in health education classes. The prime sponsor argued the bill would ensure students receive medically accurate, age-appropriate, and nonpolitical information about abortion, saying the topic is important for informed decision-making and should be taught consistently statewide. He said the videos were intended for grades 9-12, that parents could opt out, and that the requirement was meant to supplement, not sway, students’ views. He also acknowledged the bill could be seen as limiting local control over curriculum and said the intent was to prevent the topic from being missed due to scheduling disruptions.
Committee members questioned the sponsor about local control, the need for a video mandate, the source of his statistics, whether the bill could be biased or inflammatory, and whether the requirement should apply every year in high school. The sponsor said the videos were only a starting point, could be replaced by others, and were meant to be informational. He also said the bill was not intended to influence students’ decisions about abortion. Several supporters testified in favor, including representatives of New Hampshire Right to Life and others who said students should be told the “truth” about abortion and its consequences. They emphasized graphic or emotionally difficult aspects of abortion and argued that young people need this information to make informed choices.
Opponents and skeptical witnesses raised concerns about prescribing curriculum, eroding local control, and the appropriateness of the material for younger high school students. The New Hampshire School Administrators Association said the bill was overly prescriptive, that health education standards are already set by the State Board of Education, and that the topics in the bill are not part of the current standards. That witness recommended the committee consider retaining the bill for further work or making it less prescriptive. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.
LA
Louisiana 2026 Regular Session
Administration of Criminal Justice Apr 28th, 2026
Administration of Criminal Justice
Transcript Highlights:
- Danette and Officer Brooks for your testimony.
- I always appreciate your testimony.
- Thank you, ladies, for your testimony. The board is now clear.
- Thank you for your testimony. The board is clear.
- One's too many, but I appreciate your testimony.
Summary:
The committee first deferred HB 374 without objection. It then heard SB 46, which creates the crime of unlawful operation of a group home aimed at protecting vulnerable adults living in unsafe, unlicensed residences where operators control residents’ assets. The Attorney General’s office described severe neglect and exploitation in some homes, while the Louisiana Fair Housing Action Center opposed the bill over concerns it could create confusion, criminalize legitimate recovery or disability housing, and chill protected housing arrangements. After discussion, including assurances that the bill was narrowly targeted at bad actors, the committee reported SB 46 favorably.
The committee next took up HB 276, which sets a statewide minimum bail amount for certain sexual offenses against minors. Testimony from a victim’s mother and an anti-trafficking expert supported the bill as a way to keep dangerous offenders detained and protect children, while members debated whether the original $50,000 minimum was too low and could be treated as a benchmark. The committee amended the bill in committee to raise the minimum to $1 million and to add human trafficking involving a victim under 18 to the covered offenses, then reported HB 276 favorably as amended.
Members then heard SB 42 and SB 110, both addressing AI-generated child sexual abuse material. SB 42 expands the definition of child sexual abuse material to include digital and AI-generated depictions, while SB 110 prohibits using a child’s image to train AI to produce such material. The Attorney General’s office and survivor advocates supported the measures as necessary updates to keep pace with technology and protect children; the committee reported both bills favorably. HB 998, dealing with forensic medical exams and reimbursement for domestic violence victims, especially strangulation cases, was also heard and amended to remove human trafficking references and set implementation steps; advocates said the bill would improve evidence collection and reimbursement, and it was reported favorably with amendments. Finally, the committee heard SB 51 on fraudulent representation of military service or awards, which was supported as a tool to address stolen valor and was reported favorably, and HB 323 on notification and reporting of inmate deaths, which was presented as a transparency measure after a family testified about learning of a relative’s death from the news rather than the facility.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- I do want to get to the testimony, but Senator Ward, you have a brief question.
- Please identify yourself for the record and for the tape, and we welcome your testimony. Okay, yes.
- I would encourage you to read the testimony, and maybe I can come back at a future time. Thank you.
- We are now going to delay the rest of this testimony until next Tuesday.
- [Music] to uh delay the rest of this testimony to uh delay the rest of this testimony until<00:58:23.160
LA
Louisiana 2026 Regular Session
House and Governmental Affairs Apr 29th, 2026
House and Governmental Affairs
Transcript Highlights:
- Carter's testimony?
- Thank you for, thank you all for your testimony. No further questions.
- Let's get some testimony, or do we have some cards?
- I think under the testimony, I'll just voluntarily defer.
- I think under the testimony, I'll just voluntarily defer. Okay. All right.
Summary:
The House and Governmental Affairs Committee met on Senate Bill 123, a proposed constitutional amendment to create a legislative process for removing judges for cause. Senator Morris said the bill was needed because of uncertainty in the current Constitution about whether impeachment applies to judges, given the Judiciary Commission’s role in judicial discipline. He argued the measure would provide a clearer, higher-threshold accountability mechanism, and the committee adopted a technical amendment renumbering provisions and later clarified that the bill uses a majority vote in the House and two-thirds in the Senate, consistent with impeachment-style thresholds.
Much of the hearing centered on testimony from Anna Carter and her family, who supported the bill after the murder of Jacob Carter in New Orleans. They described his death and other cases they said showed judges releasing dangerous offenders despite repeated violations, missed electronic-monitoring check-ins, and other warning signs. They argued the bill would create a last-resort accountability tool when judicial decisions or supervision failures lead to preventable harm. Several committee members expressed sympathy and said the testimony highlighted serious problems in the justice system, though some also suggested the bill should address district attorneys, electronic-monitoring oversight, or broader systemic issues.
Opposition came from members who warned the proposal was overly broad, could become a political tool, and might conflict with existing constitutional provisions governing impeachment and judicial discipline. They argued the Judiciary Commission and Supreme Court already provide a disciplinary framework and that the bill could chill judicial independence or create due-process concerns. The ACLU’s Sarah Whittington also opposed the bill, noting technical inconsistencies in the draft, questioning why impeachment had not been tried first, and arguing the measure singled out judicial discretion while leaving other elected officials’ discretion untouched. The committee took no final vote on the bill during the hearing, but did adopt the technical amendment.
TX
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Judiciary (01/29/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- With that, I'll conclude my testimony.
- <00:15:22.560>
I with that I'll conclude my testimony I with that I'll conclude my testimony - If you have written testimony, you can turn that into the clerk if you would, if you wish.
- I handed in my testimony, and I'm going to read my daughter's.
- My written testimony has also been submitted online.
Summary:
The committee first heard House Bill 199, which would extend the statute of limitations for civil actions seeking damages from PFAS contamination from six years to 20 years. The prime sponsor and other supporters argued that PFAS contamination in southern New Hampshire has long-term and often delayed health and property impacts, making the current six-year period too short for victims to discover harm, connect it to exposure, and seek relief. Supporters described contamination in places such as Merrimack and surrounding communities, cited health concerns including cancer, developmental issues, and other illnesses, and said a longer period would better preserve legal rights while still requiring proof of causation. The Department of Environmental Services said it was not taking a position but acknowledged the contamination and ongoing work to address it. The Business and Industry Association opposed the bill, arguing that evidence becomes stale over time, memories and documents fade, and a longer window would make it harder to determine causation when other exposures or intervening factors may be involved.
Committee members questioned both sides about causation, the difficulty of proving PFAS-related illness, and whether a 20-year period was necessary if a plaintiff already knows of the injury and its source. Supporters responded that PFAS effects can emerge slowly, that scientific understanding continues to develop, and that current knowledge is still incomplete. Opponents said the existing discovery rule already starts the clock when harm and causal connection are known, and that extending the period would reduce clarity and fairness in litigation. After testimony and questions, the chair closed the hearing on HB 199.
The committee then opened House Bill 268 FN, which was described as a technical measure to confirm that the Board of Tax and Land Appeals may hold hearings in its Concord hearing rooms. The sponsor indicated the bill reflects current practice and does not require additional facilities. With only one witness listed and no apparent opposition, the discussion was brief and focused on why the authorization should be placed in statute rather than left to practice.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Financial Services Jun 21st, 2026 at 11:00 am
Joint Committee on Financial Services
Transcript Highlights:
- We have about nine hours of testimony. The first day of school today.
- We have about nine hours of testimony here today, but April Fool's Day, right?
- We don't need to hear about any bills because it's time later on that we'll hear testimony.
- I'm here, but I am not on the panel for testimony today.
- Thank you for your testimony. I think that's it. Thank you very much.
Summary:
The committee held an informational opening hearing for the Financial Services Committee, with Chair Murphy and Senator Feeney introducing new and returning members and explaining that no bills were being heard that day beyond brief introductory testimony. Commissioner of Banks Mary Gallagher thanked the committee for last session’s money transmission modernization law, and several members echoed appreciation for her office’s work. The hearing then featured a long series of stakeholder introductions and overviews of their priorities for the session.
Testimony covered a wide range of financial, insurance, housing, health care, and consumer issues. Banking and mortgage groups discussed housing affordability, foreclosure delinquencies, flood insurance, regulatory changes, and the impact of federal policy shifts. Insurance representatives raised concerns about auto and homeowners market pressures, labor rates, tariffs, rebates, e-titling, third-party litigation funding, and public adjuster restrictions. Consumer and advocacy groups highlighted debt collection reform, earned wage access, retirement savings access, public banking, and consumer protections in financial services. Several speakers also emphasized the need for committee expertise and offered themselves as resources for future bills.
Health-related organizations focused on insurance mandates, prior authorization, behavioral health access, pharmacy benefit manager reform, community health center funding, maternal health and midwifery reimbursement, and anesthesia reimbursement parity. Other groups, including credit unions, retailers, auto dealers, dental and medical associations, and behavioral health providers, described their roles in the Commonwealth and previewed legislation or policy areas they expect to follow this session. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and ended after testimony from the sign-up list and a few late additions.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- It just removes uh one of the provisions after we had received some some testimony in our at our last
- It just removes uh one of the provisions after we had received some some testimony in our at our last
- in our at received some some testimony in our at our<00:03:35.840>
last <00:03:36.120>hearing - Senator McEwen thanked Senator Draheim for the comment and said they did hear compelling testimony in
- Senator McEwen thanked Senator Draheim for the comment and said they did hear compelling testimony in
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee Jul 9th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Moving to additional testimony and support.
- And, sir, I wanted to thank you for your testimony today. You're right.
- And, sir, I wanted to thank you for your testimony today. You're right.
- We will now turn to additional support testimony.
- Seeing none, is there any me-too testimony in opposition?
Summary:
The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy heard several bills focused on utility rates, wildfire safety, carbon capture, methane reduction, large energy users, low-income energy programs, and clean energy supply chains. Early items included SB 613, which would direct state agencies to prioritize reducing methane emissions from imported fossil fuels, and SB 614, which would allow California to move forward with carbon dioxide pipeline safety rules and potentially lift the state’s moratorium on new CO2 pipelines. Both bills drew support from advocates and industry-related witnesses, with no opposition registered at the time they were presented, and the committee indicated it would vote once quorum was established.
After quorum was called, the committee took up SB 57, which would require the Public Utilities Commission to establish tariffs for large energy users such as data centers to prevent cost shifts to other ratepayers and address stranded infrastructure costs. Supporters argued the bill would protect affordability and encourage clean energy use, while opponents, including utilities and business groups, warned it could create uncertainty and interfere with existing regulatory processes. The committee also heard SB 256 on wildfire mitigation and emergency response, including undergrounding, PSPS communication, and removal of abandoned lines; supporters emphasized the need for stronger action after recent fires, while utilities raised concerns about duplicative requirements and public disclosure of sensitive infrastructure information. Both SB 57 and SB 256 were approved on roll calls.
The committee then heard SB 647, which would expand and standardize oversight of low-income energy savings programs and performance metrics, with strong support from community advocates and some neutral or “tweener” positions from utilities that sought further work on data collection and implementation. SB 787 followed, proposing a state strategy to coordinate supply chains and workforce development for clean energy industries including EVs, building decarbonization, and offshore wind; it received broad support and no opposition. The committee also considered SB 332, a study bill on utility ownership models and affordability reforms, which drew strong support from consumer and climate advocates but opposition from utilities and business groups concerned about bias, investor signals, and executive compensation provisions. The consent calendar was later approved, and several bills were reported out with votes or held open for absent members to add on.
FL
Florida 2026 5th Special Session
Ethics and Elections Apr 22nd, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Thank you for your testimony.
- I'm sorry, is there testimony, public testimony? Is there debate? Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr.
- Thank you for your testimony. Sir, you've taken your time. Thank you for your testimony.
- Thank you for your testimony. Suzanne Lewis.
- So I'm going to ask Honey Harris, we don't have time for your testimony.
Summary:
The committee first took up 127 gubernatorial appointees grouped in blocks and, after brief testimony in favor of several nominees, voted to recommend confirmation of the block nominees to the full Senate. The committee then moved through a series of University of West Florida and other board nominations, hearing from each nominee about their background and priorities, with most emphasizing service, local ties, student success, military partnerships, and university growth. Several nominees also answered questions about governance, faculty hiring, diversity, and the university’s strategic direction.
For the University of West Florida Board of Trustees, the committee heard from Paul Bailey, Rebecca Matthews, Rachel Moyah, Ashley Ross, Christopher Young, and Adam Kissel. Bailey stressed his local roots, legal background, and support for UWF’s pre-law program and military connections; Matthews highlighted her education and state-government experience, current role as board chair, enrollment growth, fundraising, and alignment with state directives; Moyah cited her education and school board experience, fiscal discipline, and recent positive financial and enrollment figures; Ross emphasized fundraising, workforce needs, cyber opportunities, and support for the governor’s higher education agenda; and Young focused on business accountability, audit oversight, rural access to education, and expanding military-related opportunities. Each of these nominees was questioned about issues such as diversity, “woke” culture, faculty ideology, and the role of the board, and each was ultimately recommended for confirmation by roll-call vote.
Adam Kissel’s nomination drew the most extensive debate and public testimony. Kissel described his background in free speech advocacy, federal education policy, philanthropy, and higher education reform, and said he would support UWF’s growth, free-speech protections, military and veteran engagement, and stronger graduation rates. Senators pressed him on prior writings favoring privatization of public higher education, comments about replacing administrators with AI, his work with the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025, and how his views fit with serving on a public university board; he said his long-term libertarian views did not conflict with his short-term support for UWF receiving more resources. Public testimony was split, with supporters praising his free-speech credentials, military focus, and alignment with the governor’s reforms, while opponents questioned his commitment to public higher education and whether he could be trusted to learn the university from the ground up. After debate, the committee voted to recommend Kissel’s confirmation to the full Senate.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- We appreciate your testimony. Thank you.
- OK, thank you for your testimony, Ms. Any questions of the witness? Representative Paul.
- And Neil, we appreciate your testimony. Any questions of the witness?
- Thank you for your testimony. Members' questions.
- We do appreciate your testimony. Any questions? Thanks for your testimony.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Also, please limit your testimony to three minutes and avoid repeating any testimony.
- That's my testimony. Any questions? Members, any questions?
- Appreciate your testimony.
- All right, I appreciate your testimony. Is there anyone else who wishes to testify?
- I appreciate you; your testimony is very impactful. So thank you.
Bills:
HB511, HB972, HB 1035, HB2481, HB2723, HB2742, HB2894, HB2962, HB3077, HB3093, HB3307, HB3684, HJR67, HJR72
Keywords:
ad valorem taxation, caregiver exemption, Medicaid, long-term services, tax relief, assisted living, housing support, property tax exemption, caregiver support, residence homestead, tax exemption, unpaid caregiver, state tax code, property tax, caregiver, waiting list, intellectual disability, developmental disability, ad valorem tax, family support
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
House workforce panel considers HF1216 3/18/25
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- Thanks for your testimony and thank you for your service to our country. Appreciate it.
- Thanks for your testimony and thank you for your service to our country. Appreciate it.
- Thanks for your testimony and thank you for your service to our country. Appreciate it.
- Thanks for your testimony and thank you for your service to our country. Appreciate it.
- Not seeing any, we'll close testimony and thank you again to the testifiers.
FL
Florida 2026 Regular Session
Environment and Natural Resources Mar 17th, 2025
Environment and Natural Resources
Transcript Highlights:
- Any public testimony on the bill as amended? Richard Pinsky...
- Showing none, we do have some public testimony.
- Showing none, we do have some public testimony.
- I see no other public testimony, senators who are in debate.
- Showing no public testimony, any debate? Any debate?
Summary:
The Committee on Environment and Natural Resources met with a quorum present and considered a series of environmental, water, waste, boating, and land-use bills. SB 834 on recreational fishing vessel licenses was briefly explained as aligning licensure rules for freshwater and saltwater captains and was reported favorably. SB 1208 on service lateral assessment and rehabilitation would require periodic CCTV inspections, a seven-year assessment cycle, and a long-term public database for sewer laterals; county representatives opposed it over private-property and cost concerns, but the bill was reported favorably. SB 978 on advanced wastewater treatments, as amended, would require DEP reports and a long-term prioritization plan for upgrading large wastewater facilities to advanced treatment; the committee adopted the amendment and then reported the bill favorably.
The committee then took up SB 1822 on auxiliary containers, which would preempt local regulation of certain packaging and define the term in statute. The sponsor argued it would reduce a patchwork of local rules and help businesses, while opponents from environmental groups, local advocates, and some local governments warned it would weaken plastic and foam restrictions, including in parks and coastal communities. Despite substantial opposition and several senators expressing concern, the bill was reported favorably. The committee also approved CS for SB 384 on notice for annexation of state-owned lands, after a technical amendment requiring written or email notice to legislative delegations, and reported it favorably.
SB 1008 on waste incineration would bar new ash-producing incinerators or waste-to-energy facilities within a half-mile of residential, commercial, or school property. The sponsor said the bill was aimed at preventing another fire-related incident like the Doral plant and clarified it was intended to apply only to new facilities, not existing ones; waste-to-energy and county representatives opposed it as too restrictive, while several senators sought clarifying changes. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also adopted a substitute amendment to CS for SB 594 on port channel and turning basin buffer zones, reducing the proposed anchoring setback from 5,000 feet to 2,500 feet and allowing ports to create buffer zones after public hearings and rulemaking; the bill was then reported favorably. Finally, SB 830 on lost or abandoned property, aimed at streamlining removal of migrant vessels that pose navigational and environmental hazards, was reported favorably after brief support testimony.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Judiciary (04/16/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- There's just not forensic testimony.
- We're hearing more and more testimony We're hearing more and more testimony where<01:24:28.560><
- testimony with my sources specifically. testimony with my sources specifically.
- Thank you for taking my testimony.
- <02:20:26.800>
going around her written testimony going around her written testimony going
Summary:
The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on Senate Bill 141, which would create a narrow exception to New Hampshire’s three-year deadline for motions for a new trial when a petitioner has newly discovered evidence, new forensic testing, or new scientific understanding. The prime sponsor’s representative and advocates from the Innocence Project and New England Innocence Project argued the bill is needed to help wrongfully convicted people access the courts, noting that exonerations often take many years and that outdated forensic science has contributed to wrongful convictions. The chair also said he had drafted a proposed amendment for committee review, but it had not yet been formally submitted.
Witnesses supporting the bill emphasized that the measure would not guarantee relief, only allow a petition to be filed and reviewed under existing standards. They discussed examples such as arson science, explaining that some convictions were based on forensic methods later shown to be unreliable. Committee members asked about the scope of habeas corpus, whether the bill would create a new cause of action, and whether additional screening or pleading requirements should be added. The supporters said they would be open to requiring a petitioner to plead innocence, but opposed adding more burdensome preliminary procedures or counsel requirements at the filing stage.
Thomas Farardi, from the Attorney General’s Office, testified in opposition or with caution, saying the bill was a “solution looking for a problem” because existing habeas corpus and coram nobis procedures already provide avenues for relief, and prosecutors can act when credible new evidence arises. He argued the current draft could invite additional litigation and create a new cause of action, and said he favored more screening before cases proceed. The discussion also touched on whether the statute applies in criminal cases, the current three-year limitation in RSA 526:4, and questions about posthumous petitions and petitions by deported individuals. No vote or executive action was taken during the hearing.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee Jul 1st, 2026
Housing and Community Development
Transcript Highlights:
- Let me begin your testimony. I'm sorry about that, Supervisor. Let me begin your testimony.
- Thank you both for your testimony and for being here with us.
- I just want to thank you for the amendments and for your testimony.
- And I just deeply appreciate the testimony from everyone here.
- So just appreciate everyone's testimony here.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee Jul 1st, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- Let me begin your testimony. Thank you. And good morning, Chair and members.
- Thank you both for your testimony and for being here with us.
- I just want to thank you for the amendments and for your testimony.
- And I just deeply appreciate the testimony from everyone here.
- So I appreciate everyone's testimony here.
Summary:
The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing-related bills. SB 996 by Senator Padilla would let manufactured homeowners opt to title their homes as real property, with supporters saying this would improve access to conventional mortgages, consumer protections, and lower-cost financing. SB 866 by Senator Blakespear would require cities and counties to include homelessness-related information in their annual housing element reports, with supporters saying the bill would improve transparency, regional coordination, and accountability around homelessness funding and services.
The committee also heard SB 1090 by Senator Perez, which would impose a temporary moratorium in Altadena on certain state housing density laws after the Eaton Fire. Supporters, including Supervisor Catherine Barger and many Altadena residents, argued the bill would protect fire survivors from speculative investors and give families time to rebuild and return home. Opponents argued the bill could limit tools that homeowners need to finance rebuilding and could reduce future housing production. After extensive testimony, the committee passed SB 1090 to the Assembly Local Government Committee on a 10-0 vote.
SB 1388 by Senator Durazo would create an Affordable Housing Risk Reduction Program to help affordable housing providers reduce insurance costs through technical assistance and risk-mitigation support. Supporters said rising insurance premiums are threatening the viability of affordable housing developments and existing units. The committee also reconsidered and then voted on SB 1092, which was taken up only for reconsideration and final vote; after a split vote, the bill ultimately passed the committee. Final recorded votes showed SB 866 and SB 996 passing unanimously, SB 1388 passing with one no vote and one not voting, and SB 1092 passing 7-5 after reconsideration.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Pet shop sale of cats and dogs 3/10/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- If you could state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. >> Hello, Chair Kaggel,
- If you could just state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony. >> Uh Michael Swanson
- Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
- c> really<00:15:29.199>
referenced because the testimony really referenced because the testimony - uh Norris or your testimony. uh Norris or your testimony.
TX
Texas 89th Regular
Criminal Jurisprudence S/C New Offenses and Changed Penalties May 8th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- If there are no further questions, the chair will move on to witness testimony.
- She'll move on to witness testimony. The chair calls Lily Ortiz. Ms.
- I think I heard testimony that it reduces suicide. You know what it reduces?
- Thank you for your testimony. I appreciate it. The chair calls Timothy Mabry.
- And I again, I thank you for your service and I thank you for your testimony.