Video & Transcript Research : 'House Concurrent Resolution 31'

Page 16 of 500
LA

Louisiana 2026 Regular Session

House of Representatives May 6th, 2026

Louisiana House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • House Concurrent Resolution by Representative Baham to adopt joint rules of the House and the Senate,
  • House Concurrent Resolution by Representative Carver to continue the senior task force on prevention
  • House Concurrent Resolution by Representative Baham to adopt joint rules of the House and the Senate,
  • House Concurrent Resolution by Representative Carver to continue the senior task force on prevention
  • House Concurrent Resolution by Representative Baham to adopt joint rules of the House and the Senate,
Bills: HR244, HR245, HR246, HR247, HR248, HR249, HR250, HR251, HCR101, HCR102, HR223, HR224, HR225, HR226, HR227, HR229, HR230, HR231, HR232, HR234, HR235, HR236, HR237, HR238, HR239, HR240, HR241, HR242, HR243, HCR94, HCR95, HCR96, HCR97, HCR98, HCR99, HCR100, SCR31, SCR33, SCR35, SCR37, SCR56, SCR57, SB171, SB251, SB252, SB353, SB367, SB433, SB461, HR170, HR191, HR206, HR207, HR208, HR217, HCR11, HCR53, HCR60, HCR66, HCR68, HB66, HB153, HB165, HB326, HB387, HB454, HB455, HB484, HB513, HB603, HB660, HB719, HB762, HB766, HB793, HB802, HB816, HB833, HB940, HB947, HB950, HB975, HB1028, HB1039, HB1051, HB1053, HB1080, HB1201, HB1215, HB1228, HB1251, HB1252, SCR2, SB26, SB28, SB29, SB30, SB41, SB44, SB64, SB84, SB87, SB93, SB98, SB107, SB118, SB142, SB192, SB195, SB199, SB219, SB222, SB234, SB241, SB255, SB275, SB277, SB292, SB294, SB306, SB314, SB482, SB233, SB326, HR171, HCR49, HCR65, HCR72, HR37, HCR64, SCR19, SCR3, SCR6, SCR18, SCR11, SCR22, HB64, HB68, HB92, HB130, HB258, HB633, HB801, HB89, HB341, HB451, HB456, HB579, HB595, HB621, HB818, HB841, HB1064, HB1101, HB1191, SB47, SB82, SB106, SB206, SB210, SB248, SB305, SB376, SB397, SB441, SB2, SB19, SB24, SB50, SB70, SB96, SB101, SB103, SB104, SB114, SB122, SB159, SB160, SB173, SB180, SB182, SB260, SB412, SB418, SB424, SB442, SB460, SB476, SB1, SB23, SB32, SB42, SB43, SB46, SB51, SB110, SB113, SB150, SB154, SB161, SB218, SB220, SB221, SB253, SB289, SB310, SB351, SB399, SB404, SB502, HCR32, HB955, HB284, HB617, HB730, HB926, HB1125, HB1194, HB1203, HB798, HB998, HB1084, HB1223, HB646, HB824, HB901, HB79, HR20, HR74, HB59, HB306, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB911, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1234, HB1240, SB89, SB68, SB149
KY

Kentucky 2026 Regular Session

House Standing Committee on Appropriations and Revenue.(2-10-26)

Appropriations & Revenue

Transcript Highlights:
  • >> Do<00:31:03.279> you<00:31:03.440> need<00:31:03.760> any<00:31:04.080>
  • > in<00:31:07.440> House<00:31:07.760> Bill<00:31:08.159> 500<00:31:08.720
  • :31:09.279> sure<00:31:09.440> that<00:31:09.600> that<00:31:09.919> 7.4<
  • That's<00:31:23.440> exactly<00:31:23.840> what<00:31:24.080> we<00:31:24.320>
  • c><00:31:39.120> labor<00:31:39.440> cabinet,<00:31:40.880> sale<00:31:41.200>
Summary: The committee met for a budget-only discussion with no bills scheduled for a vote. Members first welcomed a group of high school guests, then heard from the Cabinet for Health and Family Services on funding issues for child advocacy centers, domestic violence centers, rape crisis centers, and SNAP. DCBS Commissioner Lisa Dennis and budget director Misty Sammons said the victim-services programs were included in the current baseline budget, but it was too early in the budget process to know final funding levels. They said earlier reports of major cuts were based on a misunderstanding, that conversations with the agencies were ongoing, and that they would provide the committee with the agency’s base-budget information. A member also asked about domestic violence shelter funding, and the cabinet explained that prior one-time money had been used to replace lost federal Victims of Crime Act funds. On SNAP, the cabinet said Kentucky does not expect to need additional money for benefit costs because the payment error rate is about 4%, below the threshold that would trigger added state costs. However, they said the federal HR1 change shifting SNAP administrative costs from a 50/50 state-federal split to 75% state and 25% federal will require additional funding to operate the program. Members praised the eligibility and family support staff for keeping error rates low and asked to be notified quickly if more implementation support is needed. Representative Bojanowski asked whether a specific SNAP administrative cost figure was already in House Bill 500; the cabinet said it was not, and that such an item would be an additional budget request not included in the bill. The committee then heard from the Department for Medicaid Services. Commissioner Lisa Lee and Senior Deputy Commissioner Veronica Judy Cecil described Medicaid fraud-and-abuse monitoring, including a new CMS file and guidance on concurrent enrollment across states. They said DMS refers suspected fraud or abuse to the Attorney General’s office and that the relationship is working well. When asked about using AI, they said the department is not yet using AI but does use internal algorithms to flag potential fraud, waste, and abuse. Finally, Eric Lowry of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services discussed fiscal note processing, saying House Bill 2 is a complex Medicaid bill and that the cabinet is working to set up a meeting with the sponsor; he said the cabinet is responding and hopes to meet on Monday. The committee also briefly heard from the Kentucky Department of Education, where Matt Ross said the existing $7.4 million for school-based mental health services is already in the base budget and that no additional language is needed in House Bill 500 to distribute it, though KDE has requested additional funding to raise the overall appropriation to $18 million.
KY
Transcript Highlights:
  • The House Budget Review Subcommittee on Personnel, Public Retirement, and Finance will come to order.
Summary: The House Budget Review Subcommittee on Personnel, Public Retirement, and Finance received a presentation from Jim Barnhard, CIO of the Commonwealth Office of Technology, and David Carter, deputy CIO/CISO, on the state’s citizen identity management project. They said the project is intended to streamline citizen logins across agencies, reduce duplicated identity-management costs, improve security by centralizing authentication, and provide a flexible system that can scale with demand. The presenters described major implementation challenges, including integrating with diverse and legacy applications, and said the chosen software-as-a-service vendor was selected because it can connect to many systems and maintain the service in a federally certified cloud environment. The presenters emphasized that the project scope is limited to login, authentication, identity management, and identity proofing, while leaving authorization decisions to the individual applications and agencies. They said the work is being done in phases, beginning with discovery sessions with agencies, then selecting representative applications for onboarding rather than attempting a “big bang” rollout. They also said the vendor agreement includes professional services and knowledge transfer to reduce long-term dependence on outside support, and that the state has already begun outreach to agencies, including initial work with the Finance Cabinet and the Department of Revenue. Members asked about staffing, current spending, future costs, and whether existing systems or contracts could be reduced. The presenters said the project is being supported with existing staff, with no expectation of a large increase in positions, and that the vendor will carry most of the operational load. They said they did not have statewide spending figures with them but could try to gather them, and explained that the negotiated pricing is intended to be all-inclusive, with fixed costs for the first five years and capped increases in years six and seven. They said centralizing identity services should eventually allow the Commonwealth to stand down some duplicated agency-level licensing and reduce overall operational costs.
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

CPC Public Hearing - Tue Feb 3, 2026 @ 2:00PM HST

Consumer Protection & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:
  • c> a<01:31:06.960> product<01:31:07.280> that<01:31:07.520> had<01:31:08.000
  • <01:31:16.320> or<01:31:16.639> some<01:31:16.960> contractors<01:31:17.600>
  • who who have who<01:31:28.639> bring<01:31:28.800> up<01:31:28.960> these<01:31
  • >> Wish<01:31:35.120> they<01:31:35.280> would<01:31:35.760> they'd<01:31:
  • > um<01:31:41.840> of<01:31:42.320> you<01:31:42.560> know<01:31:42.639><
Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1991, which would change Hawaii’s liquor excise tax structure to an ABV-based system. The Department of Taxation and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii took no position and stood on written comments. Supporters, including the Hawaii Public Health Institute and an individual testifier who described surviving a drunk-driving crash, argued that higher alcohol taxes reduce alcohol-related harms, save lives, and generate additional state revenue. The public health witness cited alcohol-related harms as a major preventable cause of death and said the tax increase would have only a small annual cost for most consumers. Most industry testimony was in opposition. Representatives of Lanikai Brewing Company, Maui Brewing Company, the Wine Institute, and the Hawaii Food Industry Association said the bill would sharply raise taxes on beer and wine, squeeze already thin margins, and threaten local jobs and businesses. They argued Hawaii producers already face high costs for labor, energy, shipping, and compliance, and said an ABV-based tax would be difficult to administer, would require additional testing and labeling work, and could reduce consumer choice. Several industry witnesses urged lawmakers to instead adopt a small-producer or class 18 carveout, with one suggesting a cap tied to 60,000 barrels. Committee members questioned the brewers about alcohol content testing, labeling, and whether smaller producers already measure ABV. Witnesses said many local producers do not certify ABV for in-state sales, that yeast and fermentation can vary by batch, and that an ABV-based system could require more testing than current practice. No vote or final action on the bill was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.