Transcript Highlights:

• Are there any drawbacks of this high voltage as you guys are evaluating?
• but Are there any drawbacks other than supply chain, or is that the only thing that you guys are evaluating

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Of the state, and they do use something called a medical quality review committee that really evaluates
• Medicare's investigation into my mother's death found that the doctor failed to appropriately evaluate

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee heard three bills. SB 514, by Senator Harrell, clarified that medical quality review committees used by managing entities are treated like other medical review committees for purposes of civil liability and public records protections. The committee adopted a Harrell amendment removing the word “malpractice” from the title, heard support from the Florida Hospital Association, Florida Association of Managing Entities, and Florida Smart Justice Alliance, and then voted 11-0 to report the bill favorably. The committee then took up SB 734, by Senator Yarborough, which would repeal the current wrongful death exception that bars certain parents and adult children from recovering non-economic damages in medical negligence cases. The bill drew extensive testimony from families describing deaths they said were caused by medical negligence and from supporters including AARP and the Florida Justice Association, while opponents from the health care, insurance, and business sectors argued it would raise malpractice premiums, increase litigation, worsen physician shortages, and reduce access to care. After debate, the committee voted 9-2 to report the bill favorably. Finally, SB 538, by Senator Bradley, was presented as the state courts legislative package. It updates court operations by clarifying duty judge requirements, removing a location limit on duty hearings, repealing a cap on arbitrator compensation in court-ordered non-binding arbitration, and allowing alternative judicial authentication of oaths and acknowledgments when a court seal is unavailable. The bill received supportive waiver forms from the Florida Bar ADR section and several judges, and was reported favorably on an 11-0 vote. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• necessary and economical, and the commission may consider those technologies and their costs when evaluating

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The amendment would cover any financial audits, program evaluations, and special reviews that the OLA
• President, your jobs committee, and we would re-evaluate it as a committee and move forward.
• <02:28:27.120> it<02:28:27.280> as<02:28:27.520> a re-evaluate it as a re-evaluate
• I believe should have been evaluated I believe should have been evaluated through<03:11:09.920><
• <03:22:21.600> that audits and two program evaluations that audits and two program evaluations

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the scientific The public to evaluate the scientific basis for decisions.
• And then we evaluated them. Did they go out and visit their larger employers?
• And then we evaluated them. coverage. And then we evaluated them.
• help clarify real-world implications of policies and cases, and strengthen the board's ability to evaluate
• help clarify real-world implications of policies and cases, and strengthen the board's ability to evaluate

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• necessary and economical, and the commission may consider those technologies and their costs when evaluating

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Energy, Industry and Mining Committee met and took up the engrossed committee substitute for House Bill 4012. Counsel explained that the bill shortens several Public Service Commission timelines for certificates of public convenience and necessity, including deadlines for final decisions and final submissions, with different timeframes for smaller water/sewer projects and very large projects. The bill also requires applications to justify the need for a facility, including consideration of alternatives such as advanced transmission technologies, and adds requirements for electric transmission lines of 200 kV or greater, including a showing that costs are commensurate with benefits to West Virginia ratepayers and commitments to provide off-take facilities when requested. Comparable changes were also described for siting certificates, including a reduced decision timeline. After questions and no amendments, the vice chair moved to report the bill to the full Senate without recommendation as to passage, but with a recommendation that it be re-referred to the Energy, Industry and Mining Committee. The committee approved the motion by voice vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislation to evaluate and streamline rules and regulations to speed preparedness for and recovery from

Bills: SR5, SB5, SB11, SB12, SB25, SB26, SB28, SB35, SB5, SB11, SB12, SB25, SB26, SB28, SB35, SB5, SB11, SB12, SB25, SB26, SB28, SB35, SR5

Keywords: redistricting, Senate procedures, public input, Texas Legislature, amendments, Texas Senate, congressional districts, legislative procedures, legislative transparency, Senate rules, public hearings, committee procedures, hemp regulation, consumable products, cannabinoids, occupational licenses, criminal offenses, SB 11, Texas attorney general, election crimes

Transcript Highlights:

• These are close to being evaluated.
• So the team has had to step up evaluation teams with each and every one of these grants.
• So the team has had to step up evaluation teams with each and every one of these grants.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the March 18 minutes, and then received a series of updates on health-related projects and Department of Health and Human Services budget matters. Representatives from CHI St. Alexius in Bismarck and Williston, and Altru in Grand Forks, reported progress on behavioral health expansion projects, including demolition and construction milestones, updated timelines, funding status, staffing plans, and barriers such as an unbudgeted air handler replacement in Williston. Members asked about original completion dates, use of telehealth, recruitment of psychiatrists and other staff, and whether the new beds might reduce the need for patients to travel to Jamestown State Hospital. The projects were described as on track overall, with completion expected in 2027 for the larger builds and earlier openings for some phases in Williston. The committee then heard from HHS leadership on technical line-item transfers and the Salaries and Wages Block Grant. Donna Ockland explained that recent transfers were administrative corrections to place spending in the proper budget lines and did not involve new spending, and she reviewed FTE counts and vacancies across the department. Questions focused on behavioral health staffing changes and the use of consultants in the Rural Health Transformation Program. Pat Rainer outlined the rural health program’s first-year grants and priorities, including workforce retention, rural rotations and housing, community wellness initiatives, behavioral health promotion, safety net services, hospital equipment, suicide prevention training, technology, and EMS support. He said North Dakota’s plan was drawing positive national attention, but the department still needed to obligate roughly $199 million by September and was working with CMS on timing and compliance. The committee also received an update on certified community behavioral health clinics from Elena Zeller. She said North Dakota had been accepted as a demonstration state, with certification efforts underway in Williston, North Central, Fargo, and Dickinson. Members asked about care coordination, service growth, staffing, and whether certification would expand to all clinics; the department said it was still collecting baseline data and evaluating impacts before making future recommendations. Finally, Rebecca Askins reviewed SNAP payment error rates, explaining that the 2025 rate was finalized at 9.89 percent and that the department is working on training, system changes, and quality assurance steps to get below 6 percent. Members pressed on the causes of monthly variability, the performance of the SPACES system, and accountability for ongoing errors, and the department said it expects improvement over the next 6 to 12 months.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we urge you to pass it swiftly so that Massachusetts can begin the work of evaluating implementation
• It allows for a transparent process by which the issue can be evaluated against Massachusetts-specific
• If we want to improve on that, we need to carefully and objectively evaluate the cost versus benefits

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing opened a hybrid hearing focused on housing production bills, with Chairs Julian Cyr and Rich Haggerty emphasizing Massachusetts’ housing shortage and the need to produce more than 200,000 units over the next decade. The committee then heard testimony on a wide range of proposals, including social housing, starter homes and the “missing middle,” accessory dwelling units (ADUs), single-stair residential buildings, permanent affordability homeownership, and housing for people with disabilities. Several witnesses framed the bills as tools to expand supply, lower costs, and address racial and generational wealth gaps. Representative Connolly testified for H. 1478 on the Massachusetts Social Housing Program, describing publicly owned, mixed-income housing financed through a revolving loan fund. Senator Feeney testified for S. 989 on missing middle starter homes, arguing for zoning changes, incentives, and affordability tools to support smaller starter homes and duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes. Multiple witnesses, including housing advocates, real estate representatives, and local officials, supported the ADU trust fund bill and the single-stair study bill, saying they would reduce barriers, support homeowners, and enable more family-sized and infill housing. Some witnesses opposed bills they said would weaken ADU reforms or add new restrictions, while others urged broader deregulation to speed production. A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 1576/S. 1010, the Homes for Lasting Affordability bill, which would create a permanent affordability homeownership program for low- and moderate-income buyers and support small developments with long-term affordability restrictions. Testimony from community land trust leaders, legislators, and housing advocates emphasized that permanent affordability can preserve public investment, stabilize neighborhoods, and help families build wealth over generations. Senator Miranda and Representative Worrell tied the bill to closing the racial wealth gap and expanding access to homeownership for Black and Latino residents. The committee also heard testimony on S. 971, which would reform the Housing Development and Incentive Program to require more affordability in Gateway City projects. The committee additionally heard from Senator Kennedy and disability advocates on S. 1004, which would strengthen the Alternative Housing Voucher Program for people with disabilities by codifying project-based vouchers and aligning the program more closely with other voucher systems. Witnesses described long waitlists and the lack of accessible, affordable units as major barriers that can lead to homelessness or unnecessary institutionalization. No votes were taken during the hearing; the session was devoted to testimony and questions from committee members.

Transcript Highlights:

• To date, we have over 70,000 external users of GTC, and we are regularly evaluating and ...implementing
• So if they later make changes, you don't So if they later make changes, you don't go back and re-evaluate
• , we would like to essentially use the funding asked here of $100,000 to conduct a professional evaluation

Keywords: 928, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• possibly present with risk factors for developing hearing loss through screening, audiological evaluation
• possibly present with risk factors for developing hearing loss through screening, audiological evaluation
• This expands this in terms of when a screening is done to move into further evaluation and garner further

Bills: HR295, HR296, HR297, HR298, HR299, HR300, HR301, HR302, HR303, HR304, HR305, HR306, HR307, HCR115, HCR116, HCR117, HR286, HR287, HR288, HR290, HR291, HR292, HR293, HR294, SCR61, SCR68, SB121, SB250, SB348, SB444, SB485, HR252, HR253, HCR96, HCR103, HCR108, SB268, SB283, SB414, HCR98, HR179, HR223, HR225, HR274, HCR89, HCR26, HB250, HB265, HB339, HB427, HB445, HB463, HB468, HB606, HB639, HB649, HB665, HB746, HB781, HB853, HB861, HB872, HB886, HB916, HB937, HB1054, HB1068, HB1117, HB1237, HB74, HB108, HB956, HB1085, HB1137, HB75, SB39, SB99, SB111, SB112, SB124, SB134, SB174, SB189, SB190, SB201, SB233, SB236, SB258, SB270, SB273, SB288, SB307, SB313, SB320, SB321, SB325, SB326, SB331, SB339, SB341, SB345, SB346, SB347, SB353, SB357, SB359, SB387, SB393, SB401, SB415, SB419, SB422, SB426, SB435, SB437, SB440, SB451, SB464, SB470, SB487, SB488, SB495, SB504, SB505, SB518, SB523, HR84, HB646, HB998, HB1191, SB78, SB81, SB97, SB100, SB109, SB123, SB125, SB208, SB385, SB479, SB56, SB163, SB197, HB901, HR20, HR74, HR168, HCR65, HCR71, HB284, HB302, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, HB134, HB258, HB359, HB782, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB149, SB382, SB441

Keywords: Energy Caucus, Louisiana House of Representatives, energy policy, fossil fuels, oil and gas, natural gas, renewable energy, solar, wind power, nuclear power, legislative caucus, industry group, economic development, state legislature, House resolution, energy sector, victims' services, criminal justice, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Act No. 370

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it's just during the selection and evaluation process. But how does it slow you down?
• I think it's just during the selection and evaluation process. But how does it slow you down?
• That commission is charged with examining, evaluating, and establishing compensation for elective officials

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and considered several bills, mostly dealing with open meetings, public records, election administration, and local government notice requirements. Senate Bill 1 by Sen. Jenkins would authorize electronic voting under the Open Meetings Law and apply retroactively to validate prior electronic votes; after brief discussion and support from the Louisiana Municipal Association, it was reported favorably. House Bill 1052 by Rep. Spell would exempt certain child advocacy center and multidisciplinary team work product, forensic interviews, and related sensitive records from public records disclosure to protect child abuse investigations; testimony from child advocacy organizations emphasized the need to prevent misuse of records and preserve court-controlled access, and the bill was reported favorably. Senate Bill 289 by Sen. Abraham, concerning confidentiality of certain university records and negotiations, was amended to clarify protections for proprietary research, donor confidentiality, and limited confidentiality for industry negotiations, then reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 218 by Sen. Talbot, allowing alternative certification programs for election officials if approved by the State Board of Election Supervisors, and Senate Bill 220, a technical correction regarding the official journal of the state, were both reported favorably. Senate Bill 161 by Sen. Seaball, repealing a requirement that certain high-salary unclassified state employees register vehicles in Louisiana, was also reported favorably after questions about its scope and purpose. The committee then took up House Bill 1193 by Rep. Sawyer, which authorizes the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority to use indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity construction contracts for maintenance and emergency work. CPRA officials said the model would speed small repairs and pre-construction tasks, improve efficiency, and mirror a similar DOTD approach; an amendment narrowed the public-records language and excluded design-build contracting. Members raised concerns about public records transparency and inclusion of minority and small contractors, but the bill was reported favorably as amended. House Bill 249 by Rep. Green, a constitutional amendment creating an independent compensation commission for elected officials and tying adjustments to CPI, drew extensive debate over removing the legislature from setting salaries, the appointment structure, and whether the state could afford automatic increases. After opposition from several members and a roll-call vote, the bill failed to be reported, 6 yeas to 9 nays. Because HB 249 failed, the companion enabling bill, House Bill 248, was deferred. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 997 by Rep. Edmondson, which would let parishes, municipalities, and school boards use their own websites as an alternative to newspaper publication for public notices. Supporters from the Police Jury Association argued the bill would reduce duplicative costs, preserve all existing notice requirements, and simply add a third option alongside newspaper publication and newspaper-hosted digital publication. An amendment narrowed the bill to parishes, municipalities, and school boards, removing other political subdivisions. Members questioned transparency, enforcement, record retention, and whether the change would undermine newspapers; supporters said courts would still enforce notice requirements and that local governments already maintain the records. The bill remained under discussion at the end of the transcript, with no final action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, you have a bill to ban health insurers from using AI for their review, evaluation, determination,
• Your bipartisan bill, Senate File 75, allowed the Department of Transportation to research and evaluate
• Department of Transportation to research Department of Transportation to research and<00:22:37.520> evaluate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the economy that led to us being, you know, closer to a deficit, I think we would probably need to evaluate
• the economy that led to us being, you know, closer to a deficit, I think we would probably need to evaluate
• I would just note is, when we do forecast, the nature of a forecast is that we're continuously evaluating

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we evaluate where we are.
• And as soon as we learn a project is lagging, we evaluate whether to reallocate the money, because again
• appendix includes our legislative priorities, which we discussed last week, the mortgage program evaluation

Bills: SB48, SB64, SB100

Keywords: State Fairgrounds District, fairgrounds bonds, public financing, bond authorization, gross receipts tax, gaming tax, tax-backed bonds, infrastructure funding, Albuquerque fairgrounds, State Fair Tid, economic development, municipal bonds, revenue pledge, capital projects, New Mexico finance, special education, office of special education, deputy secretary, public education department, IEP

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, Representative, many of our grants do have evaluation systems with it.
• We're looking at required... evaluation studies so that we can see how they're working.
• To evaluate programs and things.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Transparency, and Accountability mission of the judiciary is partly served by the Judicial Performance Evaluation
• We have some increasing contract costs there for $75,000 on our data evaluation.
• It allows the records custodian to evaluate each one of those documents, make redactions when appropriate

Transcript Highlights:

• And another aspect that they evaluate is we're in this unique position where we have different partners
• inform upcoming traffic and revenue work at the Level 2 level, more comprehensive, more detailed evaluations
• with, and did a FOIA for the formal adoption of the purpose and need, the need statement, and the evaluation

Summary: The committee met jointly with the Washington-Oregon Legislative Action Committee for an update on the Interstate 5 Bridge Replacement (IBR) program. Members first adopted the proposed committee rules, then received program updates from staff on environmental review, permitting, design, tribal consultation, and public engagement. Staff said the project remains in the supplemental EIS process, with a final supplemental EIS and amended record of decision expected in early 2026, which would allow construction to begin. They also described ongoing work on Coast Guard navigation clearance, Section 106 historic-property coordination, and architectural guidelines for the bridge and five-mile corridor, emphasizing that the visualizations shown were conceptual and that public and partner feedback has already influenced design considerations such as accessibility and shared-use path connections. Members raised concerns about schedule delays, rising costs, and whether the project is being designed to be functional, safe, and economical. Staff acknowledged that the timeline has slipped from earlier expectations and said the delay reflects the complexity of the environmental and federal review process, as well as the need to avoid redoing steps. They said the updated cost estimate is being prepared now that design has advanced to roughly 30 percent, and that it will account for inflation, risk factors, and both fixed-span and movable-span options. Staff estimated a movable span would add more than $400 million and said the first construction work after environmental approval would likely be preliminary freeway and retaining-wall work in late 2026, followed by the bridge procurement. The committee also received funding and tolling updates. Staff reported that major federal grants have been executed, including Mega and Bridge Investment Grant agreements, and that state STIP amendments are advancing to allow access to federal funds. The tolling team described Level 3 traffic-and-revenue work, a bi-state tolling subcommittee process, and possible toll scenarios aimed at supporting either about $1.24 billion or $1.6 billion in toll revenue. Members questioned low-income toll relief timing, truck toll rates, and the effect of tolls on freight users. Staff said low-income discounts are being analyzed for both revenue and operational feasibility, that tribal exemptions and other policy exemptions are under review, and that the commissions expect to move into public outreach on toll rates and policies in 2026, with tolling on the existing bridges currently projected to begin in spring 2027.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today's hearing is an opportunity to evaluate the harm.
• Today's hearing is an opportunity to evaluate the harm California now faces and to begin shaping our
• Additionally, we are evaluating the Medicaid eligibility changes and anticipate significant workload

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held its fifth hearing of the year to examine the newly enacted federal H.R. 1 and its effects on California. Members and the chair described the law as a major threat to state health, food, education, and climate programs, and emphasized that California would not be able to fully backfill the federal cuts. Several members also highlighted the bill’s tax provisions, including temporary deductions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, while warning that the largest benefits flow to higher-income taxpayers and that major cuts to Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and clean-energy incentives are delayed or phased in over time. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance presented detailed overviews of the bill’s likely impacts and implementation timelines. They identified the main affected areas as health care coverage and financing, food assistance, higher education, personal income taxes, and clean-energy/electric-vehicle credits. They explained that H.R. 1 limits provider taxes used to finance Medi-Cal, adds work and redetermination requirements, restricts CalFresh eligibility and increases state costs, changes student loan and Pell Grant rules, extends and modifies federal tax provisions, and phases out many clean-energy credits. Finance also noted major rescissions of Inflation Reduction Act funds, new border and immigration enforcement spending, and the possibility of PAYGO sequestration if Congress does not act to offset the deficit increase. During member questions, the committee focused on likely enrollment losses, administrative burdens, and fiscal exposure for the state and counties. Witnesses said many details still depend on federal guidance, but they estimated significant impacts on Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and graduate/professional student borrowing, and noted that California’s high CalFresh error rate could increase state costs. UC testified that the elimination of Graduate PLUS loans would affect thousands of professional students, especially in health, law, and other high-cost programs. Members asked for follow-up data on county, health, and tax impacts, and staff agreed to provide additional tables and estimates as implementation guidance becomes clearer. Public commenters from counties, early childhood advocates, health coalitions, disability rights groups, immigrant-rights organizations, and other stakeholders urged the Legislature to mitigate the law’s effects. They warned of higher county costs, reduced access to health care and food assistance, increased administrative burdens, and harm to children, immigrants, people with disabilities, and low-income families. Several urged new state revenue solutions and stronger protections for Medi-Cal, CalFresh, child care, and home- and community-based services. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with a commitment to continue monitoring federal guidance and to work on state responses in the budget process.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm joined by Drew Weaver; he's an evaluator at LFC. I have my stopwatch going.
• Like I mentioned, Drew is an evaluator; I'm an economist.
• I'm a program evaluator with the LFC. On slide 10, we've got a brief overview of the five criteria.