Transcript Highlights:

• as we sit today. ...driving factor in our medical insurance premiums as we sit today.
• I don't know their structure. I don't sit on their boards. I just wanted to clarify that.
• I don't know their structure. I don't sit on their boards. I just wanted to clarify that.
• In practice, this loss of flexibility can lead to higher premiums, In practice, this loss of flexibility
• can lead to higher premiums, fewer benefit-design options, or reduced access to cost-saving tools that

Summary: The House Insurance Committee met on April 29 with a quorum present and took up several insurance and health care-related bills. SB 192, a dental reimbursement bill, was amended to allow dentists to opt in electronically to credit-card payment methods and to clarify applicability and effective date; it was reported as amended. SB 84 would require prostate cancer screening coverage for men over 40 under current clinical guidelines and prohibit cost-sharing; supporters from the American Cancer Society said Louisiana has a high incidence of prostate cancer and that out-of-pocket costs deter early screening. The committee adopted amendments and reported the bill as amended. SB 275, dealing with reimbursement and network participation for certified registered nurse anesthetists, drew support from nursing and hospital groups and was reported favorably. SB 169, a cleanup bill on biomarker testing, was also amended and reported. The committee spent substantial time on SB 401, which creates a temporary prescription drug affordability board to review pricing data on selected drugs and report findings to the legislature. Supporters said the board would improve transparency and help lawmakers understand drug pricing trends; opponents raised concerns about confidentiality, market effects, and the lack of a defined policy outcome beyond reporting. Amendments narrowed the scope, added confidentiality protections, and removed opposition cards, and the bill was reported as amended. SB 387, a major PBM reform bill tied to SB 401, would change PBM compensation, rebate handling, formulary practices, audits, and appeals, while excluding ERISA plans after discussion and amendment. Supporters argued it would curb spread pricing and other practices that raise costs, while opponents from the Pelican Institute and PCMA warned it would interfere with private contracts, reduce flexibility, and could raise premiums or disrupt city, school board, and small-group plans. After extensive debate and a roll call, SB 387 was reported with amendments by a 10-4 vote. The committee also considered SB 241, which requires certain insurance adjusters and public adjusters to include license numbers in written communications. After amendments limiting the requirement to individual licenses and removing one statutory reference, the bill was reported as amended. Throughout the meeting, members and witnesses repeatedly discussed the need for transparency in drug pricing and PBM practices, the role of ERISA and non-ERISA plans, and potential impacts on public employers and consumers.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a lot of the insurance premium.
• <00:04:26.960> Our that our premium is increasing. Our that our premium is increasing.
• nature of the business as premiums nature of the business as premiums collected<00:59:09.839>
• <01:08:22.880> when rate policies at a higher premium when rate policies at a higher premium
• cooperative notfor-profit structure is cooperative notfor-profit structure is the<01:12:35.679><

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:00:15 Department of Insurance Update 00:01:39 Department of Financial Institutions Update 00:37:07 Insurance Industry Update 00:54:50 Credit Union Industry Update 01:10:53, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the September 16 minutes, and then received an update from Insurance Commissioner Sharon Clark and staff on the Department of Insurance. Clark reviewed department activity, including growth in premium volume and licensing, consumer complaints and recoveries, and a rise in fraud referrals. She said the department has 66 open fraud cases and described common schemes such as staged auto accidents, inflated repair or cleanup charges, and roofing scams. She also said the department’s investigators often prepare strong cases but face reluctance from local prosecutors, especially in Fayette and Jefferson counties, to pursue them. Clark reported favorable workers’ compensation news, saying rates will decrease 9.7% next year for the 20th straight year. She contrasted that with a difficult property insurance market driven by storms, reinsurance costs, inflation, labor shortages, and litigation, but said Kentucky’s market remains relatively stable, citing the Kentucky Fair Plan’s small number of policies. She then warned of significant 2026 health insurance premium increases on the exchange: 16.1% for Molina, 23% for Anthem, and 37% for WCare, after CareSource withdrew. She said the rates were reviewed by actuaries and found fair, but that the biggest pressure point is the scheduled expiration of enhanced premium tax credits, which she said could leave about 90% of exchange enrollees facing a compounded increase. Members questioned Clark about fraud prosecution, the number of people in commercial versus public coverage, and the impact of expiring subsidies. Clark said the prosecution issue is mainly with Commonwealth attorneys and that rural counties are more cooperative than urban ones. She also said the health market is individually rated and that older enrollees would be hit harder, while the loss of tax credits could push some people out of the marketplace. One member asked about the attorney general’s recent opinion on SB 188, the PBM bill; staff said attorneys were still reviewing it. Clark closed by noting that Kentucky’s fraud and towing/storage legislation has become a model for other states.

Transcript Highlights:

• With that, 10:05, presentation from PERS regarding the history, benefits, contracts, and premium structures
• Can you imagine a $5 health insurance premium? Five-dollar health insurance premium back then.
• There's no premium to it.
• the monthly premium of that enhanced coverage option, once that's determined, and the monthly premium
• the monthly premium of that enhanced coverage option, once that's determined, and the monthly premium

Summary: The Employee Benefits Committee met to hear presentations on state employee health insurance, compensation, leave policies, labor market conditions, and prevailing wage issues, then later took up committee rules and bill-draft jurisdiction. PERS reviewed the history and structure of the state health plan, noting the state has paid the full family premium since 1979, described cost-control and benefit-enhancement changes over time, and explained current plan options, wellness incentives, employer wellness discounts, and the upcoming bid process for the 2027-29 contract. HRMS then presented compensation comparisons showing state classified pay generally trails private and regional markets, with larger gaps at higher-level jobs, and reviewed benefits and leave policies, including the new enhanced annual leave and new-hire leave, the state’s unpaid family leave structure, and varying tuition reimbursement practices. Job Service reported on labor force trends, low unemployment, high labor force participation, job openings, and wage growth, and OMB said there are no state prevailing-wage requirements beyond federal Davis-Bacon rules for federally funded projects. The committee then considered a proposed amendment to Joint Rule 211 to better align the health insurance mandate review process with recent statutory changes. Members discussed how the rule should reference both the committee’s required actuarial reports and the Legislative Council cost-benefit analysis, and the amendment was adopted on a roll call vote. The committee also discussed how its jurisdiction decisions affect whether a bill draft receives actuarial analysis, with staff explaining that a decision not to take jurisdiction means the bill is not treated as impacting the relevant retirement or health plans for purposes of that analysis. After that, the committee began reviewing bill drafts for jurisdiction. The first draft, bill draft 33, would automatically renew pre-tax elections for dental and vision coverage during open enrollment instead of requiring annual re-election. Members debated whether it had any actuarial impact, noting the state does not pay those premiums directly, and the discussion was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• schedule for evaluating all structured schedule for evaluating all structured decision-making<01
• , really started using locality premium, really started using locality premium, but<01:43:35.360>
• , entry rate, and the locality premium, entry rate, and the locality premium, that<01:43:56.639><
• locality premium made a big difference. locality premium made a big difference.
• <01:48:07.119> were nursing and the locality premiums were nursing and the locality premiums

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call- 00:00:14 Staff Report on the Firefighter Commission Minimum Training Standards and Administrative Spending- 00:02:02 Response from the Kentucky Fire Commission-00:32:06 Judge Testimony on Child Removal-00:42:47 Update on Child Removal and Reunification-01:11:19 Staffing at Kentucky Veteran Centers-01:40:15 Adjournment-02:05:55, 958, all

Summary: The Legislative Oversight and Investigation Committee met without a quorum, so no votes were taken. Staff presented a study of the Kentucky Fire Commission focused on firefighter minimum training standards and administrative spending. The presentation explained that Kentucky’s training standards are built from NFPA guidelines, that the commission currently requires 115 hours for volunteer firefighters and 300 hours for paid firefighters, and that those reduced hours were adopted by removing electives and other non-NFPA content. Staff also said the commission’s IFSAC certification testing for firefighter 1 and firefighter 2 aligns with NFPA standards, but the commission cannot require local departments to train or certify firefighters. Staff recommended that the commission formally promulgate regulations establishing the reduced training hours and work with KCTCS to better separate administrative costs for certain programs so compliance with the statute can be demonstrated. The finance portion of the report said the commission is funded by general fund appropriations for State Fire Rescue Training and by an insurance premium surcharge that supports the Firefighter Foundation Program Fund. Staff reported that the commission stayed within the 5% administrative cap tied to the overall surcharge allotment, but could not confirm compliance with a separate 5% cap for specific programs because KCTCS accounting does not break out those costs in enough detail. Staff suggested the General Assembly may want to clarify what counts as administrative cost in statute. Members asked about investment returns, local fire department funding, and whether training documentation is required; staff said some of those topics were outside the study scope and that IFSAC testing relies on chief certification that a candidate is ready to test. Representatives from the Fire Commission then responded, saying they agreed with the report’s recommendations and would work to clarify the 5% issue with legislators and KCTCS. They explained that the reduction in training hours was intended to remove electives, better align with NFPA standards, and address the difficulty volunteer departments have in getting members to complete lengthy training. Commission officials said training is documented through rosters and annual compliance reviews, and that IFSAC-certified firefighter testing is based on demonstrated skills rather than a required number of training hours. They also said the difficulty in tracking the second 5% cap stems from the way KCTCS’s PeopleSoft system records reimbursements as single transactions, making it hard to isolate administrative costs by program.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right, and Senator, you did mention that this kind of fundamentally changes the structure.
• You know, clearly, it wasn't how we structured the bill initially.
• It, you know, again, it's going to be certainly positive and get the job done if we can structure it
• I don't ignore the fact that this will result, as we've heard, in some increases in premium costs.
• They collect premiums and deductibles, then turn around and pass on the financial burden onto...

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several bills focused on health care access, oversight, and affordability. The first major item was SB 306 by Senator Becker, a prior authorization reform bill. Becker and supporters, including the California Medical Association and California Hospital Association, argued that prior authorization delays care, adds administrative burden, and can lead to serious patient harm. The bill was substantially amended late in the process to have DMHC and CDI identify services and drugs to exempt from prior authorization based on utilization data, with safeguards for fraud, waste, abuse, and patient safety. Health plans and insurers opposed the measure as written, saying prior authorization remains an important utilization-management tool and raising concerns about the 90% threshold, drug inclusion, and how modifications are counted. The committee also heard SB 35 by Senator Umberg, which would let cities or counties inspect unlicensed sober living homes if DHCS does not act promptly on complaints. Supporters said the bill would address weak enforcement and protect residents, while one behavioral health directors group opposed it unless amended. Members generally supported the measure, citing problems with unlicensed facilities and the need for local enforcement backup. The committee then heard SB 62, which would codify California’s updated essential health benefits benchmark if approved by the federal government. Senator Wiener said the package would add hearing aids, durable medical equipment, and infertility treatment including IVF, acknowledging that premiums could rise but arguing the benefits were worth it. Health Access California and other advocates supported the bill, while the California Family Council opposed it. The committee also took up SB 596 by Senator Menjivar, which would tighten the rules for hospitals claiming an on-call list as a defense to nurse staffing ratio penalties. Supporters, including nurses and SEIU, said hospitals have used vague or ineffective on-call practices to avoid accountability and that the bill would improve enforcement and patient safety. Hospital groups opposed it, arguing that staffing is highly dynamic, that hospitals need flexibility to manage acuity and emergencies, and that the bill could increase costs and interfere with collective bargaining arrangements. Finally, the committee heard SB 40 by Senator Wiener, the Insulin Affordability Act, which would cap insulin copays at $35 for a 30-day supply and restrict step therapy unless a plan covers at least one insulin in each drug type. Supporters, including physicians, diabetes advocates, nurses, students, and patient groups, said insulin is life-saving and too often unaffordable, forcing patients to ration or choose between medication and basic needs. There was no formal opposition testimony, though one member questioned why insulin remains so expensive. The committee also began discussion of SB 363, but the transcript cuts off before that bill’s full presentation or any action on the measures. No votes are recorded in the portion provided, and several bills were noted as consent items earlier in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• premium of those benefits. premium of those benefits.
• , evaluate current eligibility structures, evaluate current eligibility structures, identify<00:58
• structured structured bargaining<01:01:53.839> tight<01:01:54.960> pass<01:01:55.359><
• situation, function, structure. situation, function, structure.
• should have different benefit structure should have different benefit structure than<01:19:59.440

Bills: HF4479, HF4368, HF4889

Keywords: higher education, public university, college campus, postsecondary institution, Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, University of Minnesota, town hall, town hall meeting, elected official, legislator, public forum, constituent meeting, campus access, free meeting space, parking fees, civic engagement, public outreach, chapter 135A, HF4368, Minnesota State

Summary: The committee approved the April 9 minutes and then took up House File 4479, which would require public postsecondary institutions to make space available for town halls and similar official events by elected officials, with limits intended to keep the events on the official side and not campaign-related. Representative Frederick said the bill is meant to prevent universities from creating barriers such as fees or parking charges and to ensure a neutral, accessible venue for community conversations. The bill was laid over for possible later action. The committee heard supportive testimony from Jim Dimmick of Minnesota State University, Mankato, who argued that town halls should be public, open, moderated, and dialogic rather than speeches, and said universities should be centers for public discourse. He also said charging fees can undermine neutrality and that using partisan student groups to sponsor events can create the appearance of bias. Minnesota State official Mr. Omen said campuses often host these events, fees are set locally to cover costs, and student government sponsorship can sometimes avoid charges; he also noted the fee at Mankato is discounted and depends on room size. Several members raised concerns about the bill. Representative Scott, Chair Robbins, Representative Schwarz, Representative Allen, and others argued that campuses should not be required by statute to give legislators special treatment, that fees and parking costs cover real expenses, and that universities should remain focused on education rather than political events. Questions also focused on who would decide what room size is reasonable, how disputes would be handled, and who would pay for security if protests or safety issues arose. Representative Frederick responded that room selection would be a good-faith partnership with the university, that the bill does not require a town hall or guarantee a specific room, and that security funding is not spelled out in the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• , right, if you want to pay the premium, right, if you want to pay the premium, you<01:18:12.480>
• possible so that our insurance premiums possible so that our insurance premiums are<01:35:32.880
• structure that these programs have. structure that these programs have.
• governance structure, and fiscal goals. governance structure, and fiscal goals.
• > for<06:02:10.320> the your premium that the premiums for the your premium that the premiums

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 47, sponsored by Sen. Regina Birdsell at the request of the Insurance Department. The bill would codify the department’s interpretation that a birth mother’s health insurance is the primary coverage for a newborn, unless the mother has no insurance or coverage under an employer-sponsored plan. Birdsell and Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the measure is a clarification of existing practice and intended to protect vulnerable newborns; a question from Rep. Miles clarified that if a young woman is on her parents’ policy, the newborn would generally be covered under that family coverage. The hearing on SB 47 was then closed. The committee then took up Senate Bill 121, introduced by Grant Bosi for Sen. Kevin Avard, which would require insurers to notify the Insurance Department when they stop writing an entire line of business or, in some cases, Medicare Advantage plans. Commissioner Benton Court said the bill arose from disruption in the Medicare Advantage market, where consumers, brokers, and the department were confused by carriers changing or ending offerings; he said the department wanted a simple notification requirement so it could better advise consumers. Members discussed network adequacy, county-based service areas, and the fact that the bill would make notice a condition of licensure, with possible fines or license action for noncompliance. Witness Paula Rogers of AHIP said her group supported the bill if amended, and the department indicated it would support a change from a 120-day notice period to 90 days to align with state rules; the committee planned to work on an amendment in subcommittee. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 247, introduced by Rep. Brian Cole, which would prohibit network exclusion of pharmacies that refuse to dispense prescriptions when PBM reimbursement is below acquisition cost. Cole argued the bill is meant to stop pharmacies from being forced to sell drugs at a loss, describing PBMs as middlemen and saying the measure is a compromise that protects local pharmacies. Members questioned whether consumers would pay more and whether pharmacies voluntarily enter PBM contracts; Cole responded that the bill would let pharmacies refuse unprofitable fills while consumers could still obtain the drug through mail order or other channels. He also said the issue has changed over time because the practice now affects a much larger share of generics and is concentrated among a few PBMs. The hearing remained open as questions continued, with no vote taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So thank you for investing in that, in that new salary structure.
• So figure 2 is a breakdown of $100 in qualified monthly premiums.
• About $3 is due to the premium tax, and $3.75 is the premium surtax.
• The report shows how the New Mexico premium assistance program works.
• HCAF revenue from the premium surtax has far exceeded the insurance subsidy needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2013, a premium was 3.6 million and it has increased yearly.
• Laura Yeoman: This will naturally result in us having higher premiums.
• Neither of those have lowered premiums and they have been in law for decades.
• Laura Yeoman: Premiums are even less significant to physician assistants.
• Premiums are going up 73 David Marco Junior: percent at South Florida's hospital.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to walk through the structure of the document first, and then we'll go down the sheet row
• That's the structure of the document, just so you all have that context.
• But I'm telling you, we've got a structure already ready to go.
• of the current programmatic structure of residencies.
• In addition to this, I'll start with page three, which talks about structured literacy.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Still the premiums are the same or they go up, but then we have to fight to get the medication we need
• is Navitus keeps 20%... ...concerns with how the original contract was structured is Navitus keeps 20%
• And so if we take this away in some way, I mean, I think it's really important that you structure the
• wording that it needs to be structured because I don't want to take away your ability to negotiate the
• They're going to get questions as, okay, well, does that mean that my premium is going down by 11%?

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The State Insurance Programs Oversight Subcommittee met on June 17 and reviewed a series of Employee Benefits Division and Office of Property Risk items. Grant Wallace presented March and April formulary changes, including moving to lower-cost generic and preferred drugs, leaving several new-to-market drugs not covered, and adjusting migraine and diabetes medications; the committee approved those recommendations. The subcommittee also approved a cell and gene therapy policy that excludes automatic coverage for those therapies so they can undergo prior authorization and review, with members emphasizing that the policy was intended to create review, not an absolute denial, and that expedited appeals would remain available. Members spent significant time discussing the UAMS pharmacy benefit consultant amendment. Wallace explained that the contract included both basic services and optional services related to coupon and rebate management and prior authorization support, but the written materials created confusion over the dollar amount. After questions about whether the committee was approving a higher amount than the base contract and whether the optional services duplicated work already being done by Navitus, the committee agreed to review the item with a contingency that any use of the optional services would return to the committee for approval. The committee also reviewed and approved the U.S. Able Mutual/Blue Advantage third-party administrator contract, the CompSack employee assistance program contract, and the proposed 2027 employee and public employee rates, which call for a 9.8% increase for state employees and a 4.9% increase for public school employees. On the property risk side, the committee reviewed permanent rules for the property insurance program, a contingency-fee subrogation contract with Denenberg-Tuffley, and renewals for Sedgwick claims management, Actuarial Advantage, and Stevens Capital Management. Wallace said Sedgwick had faced delays after a major winter storm and other weather events, but performance guarantees and communication expectations were being added; members discussed whether a shorter renewal term would be preferable, but the item was reviewed. The committee also approved the 2026-27 captive insurance program rates, which Wallace said would lower the overall rate by 10% while keeping minimum deductibles unchanged. He noted the program had stabilized after a difficult first year and that the rate structure was now based on a more transparent actuarial foundation. The meeting ended with an update that the UnitedHealthcare rebid was nearing completion and would return in August, and the committee adjourned after approving the remaining items.

Transcript Highlights:

• The current health plans, cost sharing, premium rate structure, and impact of any proposed changes.
• So my concern was, with this, are we going to lock people into too rigid a pay structure?
• And then do we want to keep the premium rate structure for single and family coverage and the impact
• I think, but I think looking at is there a premium rate structure for single and family coverage that
• I think, but I think looking at, is there a premium rate structure for single and family coverage that

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The State and Local Government Committee met to reconsider and amend House Bill 1165, which dealt with petition circulation requirements and ballot receipt rules. The committee walked through technical changes requested by the Secretary of State’s office, including moving petition-title language, adding a 15-business-day submission deadline for petition packets, and revising language related to mailed absentee ballots and the presidential executive order requiring ballots to be received by election day rather than merely postmarked. The State Election Director explained that the change was intended to provide clarity and consistency for voters and election officials, while Senator Braunberger objected that it was an unnecessary reaction to an executive order that could be challenged. The committee adopted the amendment 5-1 and then passed the bill as amended on a 5-1 vote, with Senator Braunberger voting no. The committee then took up House Bill 1307, which concerned election authority, home rule powers, and related city and county petition/signature provisions. After questions from members and clarification from the Deputy Secretary of State and a League of Cities representative, the committee agreed the amendment was intended to preserve city petition power and align the bill with changes made in another election bill, while also addressing park district language. The amendment was adopted 6-0, and the bill was passed as amended 6-0. Senator Castaneda was designated as the carrier. Finally, the committee discussed House Bill 1580, a study bill on state employee compensation. Members used language from an earlier draft tied to health plan changes and broadened it to study total rewards compensation, including pay grades, classifications, comparisons among state employees across departments and with similar private-sector jobs, equity funding and bonuses, prevailing wages on state projects, and the impact of changes to health plan benefits and premium structures. The committee agreed to make the language more generic and adopted the amendment 6-0, then passed the bill as amended 6-0. House Bill 1601 was not acted on and was held until after floor session so members could continue discussions and await additional input.

Transcript Highlights:

• providing that coverage and so premiums providing that coverage and so premiums uh<01:13:25.280>
• Um, and I see where where premiums go.
• Um I I I will tell you and in premium.
• And so as you sit around and you hear from your constituents about the premium pressure on your premiums
• <01:41:36.800> pressure constituents about the premium pressure constituents about the premium

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, we are in a structural deficit.
• You know, we are in a structural deficit.
• We support the augmentation to Covered California for the premium subsidy.
• And so we think the timing... ...in the AAA structure or the number of AAAs.
• I'll speak to the Home Care Services fee structure proposal next.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The hearing opened with Department of Finance and Legislative Analyst’s Office remarks on the May Revision, which both described efforts to reduce large out-year operating deficits through a mix of revenue increases, spending reductions, and reserve use. Finance said the May Revision more than halves projected deficits in later years, while LAO stressed that revenues are at unprecedented levels yet the state still faces a significant structural deficit and is drawing down reserves; LAO urged maintaining at least the administration’s level of budget solutions and adding to reserves rather than new ongoing commitments. The chair echoed concern about cuts to vulnerable populations and noted the tension between service reductions and requests for additional administrative positions. The committee then heard a series of California Health and Human Services and HCAI proposals, including additional legal support for CalHHS to respond to federal HR1 changes; a net-zero transfer of positions for a centralized eligibility/data-sharing platform; 988 crisis line implementation funding and continued work with the Trevor Project to train crisis centers to better serve LGBTQ youth; EMS data system maintenance funding; HCAI implementation of AB 1312 hospital charity care screening; SB 660 data exchange framework funding; CalRx biosimilar insulin reappropriation; and a diaper access initiative that would provide free diapers to newborns in participating hospitals and support a future direct-to-consumer purchasing option. Members questioned the diaper program’s universal design, the use of a Public Contract Code exemption, and the selection of Baby2Baby, with the chair expressing concern about optics and the lack of an income threshold. The committee also discussed distressed hospital funding, with HCAI requesting up to $50 million for another round of grants to hospitals in immediate financial distress. HCAI said it receives annual and quarterly financial reports but the data lag limits real-time monitoring, and the LAO recommended stronger program parameters and turnaround plans. Members argued the repeated need for distressed hospital aid reflects a structural problem, not a short-term gap, and raised broader concerns about hospital reimbursement and patient flow. Other items included reverting $19.6 million in unused opioid settlement funds from HCAI to DHCS for General Fund offset, and a Rural Health Transformation Program request to increase HCAI spending authority to cover the full federal award. Later, DMHC presented funding requests to implement PBM licensing and financial review requirements under AB 116, modernize the managed care complaint system, and build an electronic claims settlement data system under AB 3275. The final major discussion focused on the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission, which opposed the May Revision’s proposed reduction of its Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and a $6.7 million cut to community advocacy grants. The Commission argued these programs are core to Proposition 1’s goals of statewide innovation and community accountability, while Finance said the proposal is consistent with Proposition 1’s maximum funding levels and reflects a broader effort to prioritize direct services and use unspent prior-year funds; members pressed for more information and questioned whether the cuts would undermine the new behavioral health framework.

Transcript Highlights:

• And how much is the premium tax? 1.6% of the premium, correct? Correct.
• So if we were to eliminate the premium tax for all of our constituents, that would be good.
• We're constituents and policyholders to reduce their actual premiums.
• that is totally outside of the legislative structure or any oversight of anyone else.”
• that is totally outside of the legislative structure or any oversight of anyone else.

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, offered an invocation, led the pledges, and approved a series of routine motions, including excusing absent members and granting permission for several committees to meet while the House was in session. Members also adopted several memorial and recognition resolutions, including H.R. 1023 honoring Christian Beerbill, H.R. 1033 recognizing International Bereaved Mother’s Day, and H.R. 877 recognizing Urban League Advocates Day. The House also recommitted SB 17 and HB 4211 to committee and postponed SCR 27 and HB 2145 for later consideration. The chamber then took up a long third-reading calendar of bills covering a wide range of topics, including Sunset review measures, health care workforce and pricing, child custody and family law, Medicaid, rural ambulance grants, energy reporting, public information requests, trail development, virtual meeting disruptions, occupational licensing, protective orders, county leave pools, animal cruelty, infrastructure, and higher education. Most bills were explained briefly by their authors and passed with broad support, though several drew notable opposition, including HB 5265, HB 2402, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 1056, HB 281, HB 3308, HB 1043, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 294, HB 809, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 285, HB 1353, HB 3960, HB 4044, HB 4264, HB 2807, HB 3349, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 1201, and others. Several bills prompted extended debate or amendments. HB 3237, extending public energy-use reporting for state and higher-education buildings, passed after questions about its public-sector-only scope and energy savings. HB 3326, addressing public service loan forgiveness credit for adjunct professors, initially failed on a 69-70 vote but later passed after verification and machine corrections. HB 3211, concerning optometrists in managed care plans, adopted a Buckley amendment before passing. HB 2213 on Texas Windstorm Insurance Association board composition adopted a Metcalf amendment requiring certain board members to be Texas residents. HB 412, dealing with harmful materials and sexual performance of a child, generated extensive questioning about its scope, existing legal standards, and effects on educators and medical professionals; the excerpt ends during that debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the structure of the document, just so you all have that context.
• Or charter was already paying for more of their employees' premiums before.
• So NMCA is raising premiums next year for all employees by 10% for medical...
• of the current programmatic structure of residences.
• And do include those sort of current structures, multi-layer systems of support.

Summary: The committee first heard a detailed staff presentation on the LESC FY27 public school support recommendation. Staff reviewed the budget structure and explained that, despite a downward revision in state revenue estimates, the recommendation still relied on recurring and non-recurring revenue to support educator compensation, insurance, transportation, literacy, math, special education, and other school programs. Major recurring items included a 3% compensation increase, funding for an 80-20 health insurance cost share, insurance premium growth, and transportation adequacy funding. Staff also flagged a possible supplemental need of up to $35 million for virtual education tied to rapid enrollment growth in Chama and Santa Rosa, and members raised concerns about the quality, accountability, and funding model for virtual programs. Members asked questions about transportation for rural districts, the Martinez-Yazzie lawsuit fees, the treatment of enrollment declines in the school funding formula, and whether the word “average” in salary language should remain in the budget. Staff explained that the SEG should remain whole, that the insurance and transportation recommendations applied to all public school employees but not contractors, and that the budget included multiple math-related investments spread across several lines rather than one single appropriation. There was also discussion of out-of-school learning grants, school meals, literacy center operations, special education training, and the Public Education Reform Fund, including the use of multi-year, evaluation-based appropriations for high-impact tutoring and community schools. After discussion, the committee adopted the LESC budget recommendation. The committee then moved to endorsed legislation proposals. It endorsed a bill allowing the secretary to suspend an individual school board member, with notice and appeal procedures clarified, and a bill creating an 80-20 health insurance cost-share requirement for public school employees, along with a study of the sustainability of public school insurance programs. It also endorsed a bill on attendance provisions for students with severe medical conditions, which would keep those students from being classified as excessively absent. Finally, the committee discussed a teacher residency bill that would raise stipend levels, allow residents to complete service anywhere in New Mexico, and remove the requirement that sponsoring schools must hire them, though the bill did not include an appropriation. Members also raised questions about bilingual, Hispanic, and Black education funding, cultural and linguistic supports in teacher preparation, and where various programs should be placed in the budget or PERF framework.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill gets the structure right, especially with that amendment, by admission.
• This bill gets the structure right, especially with that amendment.
• down, I Say you're putting it back into the marketplace, which is driving premiums down.
• It’s going back to the policyholder in the way of new premiums. No, ma’am.
• There are structures in Florida that allow that already, but they're not functional in reality.

Summary: The Insurance and Banking Subcommittee met to hear and vote on several bills, with all measures reported favorably. The first major item was PCS for HB 175 on payment stablecoins, which would create a Florida regulatory framework aligned with the federal GENIUS Act so issuers can choose state regulation instead of federal licensing. Members asked extensive questions about how stablecoins differ from other digital assets, whether Florida would need federal approval, and what impact the bill would have on the Office of Financial Regulation; the sponsor and OFR said the state framework would mirror federal standards and that any workload increase was currently indeterminate. The PCS passed unanimously after testimony from OFR and the Florida Blockchain Business Association in support. The committee then approved CS for HB 961, which streamlines electronic signature requirements for salvage titles and certificates of destruction, and HB 1415, a DFS stablecoin pilot program allowing certain stablecoins to be used for licensing and regulatory fees. HB 1415 was amended to remove authority for a Florida coin, limit the pilot to established stablecoins with at least $1 billion market cap, and require secure custody through a public depository or custodial bank. Members discussed how any interest or revenue would be used, with sponsors saying the pilot was still exploratory and intended mainly to cover program costs. Both bills passed favorably. HB 1039, establishing a state cryptocurrency reserve, also passed after a strike-all amendment moved administration of the reserve from the CFO’s office to the State Board of Administration and tightened eligibility to cryptocurrencies with a $100 billion market cap over the prior 12 months. Supporters argued the bill would create a framework for future diversification and investment in established digital assets, while several members raised concerns about volatility, reporting frequency, and the meaning of new terms such as qualified liquidity provider and secure custody solution. The committee also passed CS for HB 951 on penny rounding for cash transactions, with an amendment clarifying cash transaction definitions and treating money orders and gift cards like credit-card transactions for rounding purposes.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the only one we estimated the cost on actual current premiums that the...
• Over the last five years, years, our premiums have increased by more than 100%.
• Learning premiums for partial coverage or reduce critical instructional services.
• These policies come with a premium, literally.
• And then you mentioned your current premiums.

Bills: SB2920, SB2929, SB2398, SB865, SB401, SB2619, SB2927, SB1395, SB1972, SB2540, SB1635, SB1581, SB2008

Keywords: steroids, student athletes, athletic competition, University Interscholastic League, medical purpose, gender transition, school athletics, spectator conduct, referees, ejection policy, extracurricular activities, concussion, brain injury, school policy, academic accommodations, student welfare, cardiac arrest, emergency response, CPR training, automated external defibrillators

Transcript Highlights:

• variety of reasons pressure on premiums variety of reasons pressure on premiums that<00:11:29.600
• insurance premiums or get non-renewed. insurance premiums or get non-renewed.
• insurance premiums. insurance premiums.
• for their group premiums. for their group premiums.
• from premium pressure. from premium pressure.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 562, which would create a home damage mitigation and resilience grant program aimed at helping homeowners make property improvements that could reduce insurance costs and non-renewals. Commissioner DJ Bettencourt of the New Hampshire Insurance Department explained that the program is modeled in part on Alabama’s safer homes program, but tailored for New Hampshire hazards such as floods, microbursts, heavy snow, ice, and falling trees. He said the grants would be limited to primary residences, subject to a means test, capped at $10,000, and intended to help homeowners make targeted improvements such as roof fortification or tree removal that could improve underwriting outcomes and lead to premium discounts. Bettencourt said the program would not use state taxpayer funds and would instead rely on philanthropic donations, possible federal or regional housing-bank funding, and other outside sources. He said the department would not need new staff, and that a current position could be reconfigured to help administer the program part-time. Committee members asked about the funding language, the meaning of “loans” in the bill, whether there were any other states using a similar no-state-funds model, and how many homeowners could be helped. Bettencourt said Rhode Island and Connecticut were moving forward in a similar way, and that the number of beneficiaries would depend on how much money is raised. Members also questioned how the grant program would actually lower premiums, whether savings would apply only to participants or more broadly, and how the IBHS evaluation process would work. Bettencourt and department staff said the direct benefit would be to the homeowner whose property is improved, though neighbors could also benefit in some cases. They explained that IBHS is a building-safety organization that certifies contractors and inspectors and that its standards can qualify homes for insurer discounts. Questions were also raised about confidentiality provisions, first-come-first-served grant awards, rollover of unused applications, and possible tax treatment of donations. The sponsor said those details would be addressed through rulemaking or existing tax rules, and no vote was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• premium tax credits go away.
• premium tax credits go away.
• premium tax credits go away.
• premium tax credits go away.
• premium tax credits go away.

Keywords: 1183, house