Transcript Highlights:

• Interest rates, along with other asset classes, dropped significantly.
• New Mexico PERA has many different contribution rates for smaller classes of workers. contribution rates
• for smaller classes of workers, but for the most part, they are contributing.
• That's a property that's constitutionally protected.
• What is not protected is any future increase, and that's where you have heard from our You know, our

Transcript Highlights:

• they don’t take longer than the entire classroom period so that we’re not having large disruptions to class
• can be grouped together in small groups so that students are taking a test that only takes a single class
• grouped together, uh, in small groups so that students are 263 taking a test that only takes a single class
• I believe once the complaint is filed, it is in fact an audit working paper protected under state law
• I believe once the complaint is 502 filed, it is in fact an audit working paper protected, um, uh, under

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Summary: The House Committee on Public Education met to hear House Bill 8, which would replace STAAR with a new assessment and accountability system beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The chair described the bill as reducing testing time, limiting benchmark tests, adding beginning-, middle-, and end-of-year assessments, requiring faster score turnaround, involving Texas teachers in test development, and tightening accountability timelines and transparency rules. Members also discussed provisions on A-F ratings, cut scores, CCMR, local accountability plans, and TEA reporting requirements. Committee members and invited witnesses split sharply on the bill’s approach. Supporters, including the chair, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath, and Ed Trust’s Nicholas Munyon Penny, argued the bill would reduce high-stakes pressure, provide quicker and more actionable data, limit over-testing, and better align assessments to Texas standards while preserving criterion-referenced accountability. They said the new system would help teachers and parents intervene sooner and would improve transparency, including parent access to student responses and automatic rescoring in some writing cases. Opponents, including Rep. Hinojosa and student witness Ella Moran, argued the bill still increases testing and replaces one high-stakes test with multiple TEA-created tests. Moran testified that STAAR creates anxiety, disrupts instruction, and does not reflect real learning, while Hinojosa said the House had previously passed a better bill based on a nationally norm-referenced model and criticized the new proposal as a concession to the Senate. Questions also focused on AI scoring of writing, rescoring rates, and whether the bill’s new accountability rules would be reliable and fair. The committee did not take a final vote during the portion provided, but the chair said a vote on HB 8 would be called after public testimony later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• And working-class Wisconsinites that we already... In favor of this one.
• And working-class Wisconsinites that we all represent, all of us represent, are the people who have to
• It's a middle-class tax cut. It's for people.
• And as far as no tax on overtime, you know, we're talking about nurses, 911 operators, working-class
• They say that they support the working class, but they're going to vote against overtime tax cuts.

Keywords: 970, all

Transcript Highlights:

• many of you know, the college experience and educational opportunities are much bigger than going to class
• It's if the average grade or the meeting grade of the class was maybe a 70 and someone Someone who's
• Next to it in parenthesis. say the average class grade was a B, well that tells you something very good
• In the classes, just because you can learn, I mean you can never not learn more about politics and the
• I'm also the son of two Texas Tech graduates, class of 1972.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, waiting until high school to address some of these advanced math classes, specifically algebra 1,
• they're at and that bored in the classes they're at and that is<00:25:30.240> probably<00:25:
• classes such as algebra?
• My goal is to protect and teacher.
• <01:56:42.080> of myself, I feel very protective of myself, I feel very protective of teachers

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so there are 19 first-class cities. It would... There are 19 first-class cities.
• That can be a centralized class...
• Centralized class that we can get in front of people, so. >> Great. >> Mr.
• Chair, um, I think you would see opposition from the first-class cities.
• The two investigators teach that class at the academy as well.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and middle-class Arizonans.
• That would have... ...middle-class Arizonans.
• And that's fine because those tax cuts were intended to support working-class and middle-class Arizonans
• When I come down here, my responsibility is to my constituents and to working class Arizonans, and this
• Arizonans and the middle class.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• we can protect this nation by halves. we can protect this nation by halves.
• <00:09:18.320> The and Americans are protected. The and Americans are protected.
• It protects our and resources we need.
• <00:22:00.240> American government is to protect American government is to protect American
• <00:22:48.240> our agencies tasked with protecting our agencies tasked with protecting our

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Friday, March 27, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:37:06.320> their must have the ability to protect their must have the ability to protect
• So, and again, they're the Class II wells. They're not the Class VI. >> Mr.
• So, and again, they're the Class II wells. They're not the Class VI. >> And follow up to that, Mr.
• So, and again, they're the Class II wells. They're not the Class VI. >> And follow up to that, Mr.
• The Class VI. And follow up to that, Mr.

Bills: SJ0001, SF0017

Keywords: mineral leasing, federal lands, Wyoming, energy policy, local control, federalism, forestry management, good neighbor authority, state lands, employee funding, donations, revolving account, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• distributions of the fuel sales tax proceeds and caps the distribution of funds into the Inland Protection
• The bill establishes contribution rates by employers for each class of employee who participates in the
• It also allows retirees in the special risk class to receive an alternative cost-of-living adjustment
• To be eligible, the retiree must have completed six years of service in the special risk class if enrolled

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I didn't realize I I was part of the elite class today that is not technically challenged, Mr.
• Have the courage to change this, and there are a lot of subjects and classes that really didn't matter
• But because the institutions want to protect them, you're asking us to do something that makes sense,
• Here we've got a former colleague, former class of six classmate, and friend Carri Bush joining us on

Bills: HB4104, HB3722, HB3787, HB3700, HB3701, HB3310, HB3404, HB2964, HB2398, HB3024, HB3499, HB3278, HB3279, HB3645, HB3649, HB2293, HB3260, HB3176, HB3177, HB3114, HB3172, HB3322, HB3323, HB4248, HB3720, HB2210, HB1322, HB1937, HB3301, HB4107

Keywords: Oklahoma criminal law, felony classification, Class B5, Class D1, sentencing enhancement, repeat offender, domestic violence, stalking, voyeurism, peeping tom, clandestine recording, hidden camera, privacy offense, sex offender registry, Sex Offenders Registration Act, protective order violation, animal cruelty, cockfighting, dogfighting, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• successful in their language arts class successful in their language arts class and<00:05:09.919
• That was a stressor that was put on to parents in wanting to protect their children.
• ,<00:18:38.840> but of monitoring and and protection, but of monitoring and and protection
• <01:13:15.680> the immediate funding cliffs and protect the immediate funding cliffs and protect
• > provide Extending this protection will provide Extending this protection will provide the<01

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Every $1 spent on family planning services, medically accurate information in small group classes, or
• You support giving money to people who wish to have access to everything that our state laws protect.
• This is language that parallels language in our other child protection statutes.
• protect children—that is the question before us today.
• You know, I personally believe that we should protect life in every stage.

Transcript Highlights:

• President Trump is closing our borders, protecting our sovereignty, and, most importantly, he has the
• back of law enforcement leaders who are on the front lines protecting our communities from criminal
• This bill supports training needs for federal, state, and local agencies to protect communities from
• Seven years of struggling, of taking one class at a time, or feeling like I would never make it.
• You're just protecting companies' interests.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee took up SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. Gruters described the measure as a broad crackdown on illegal immigration that would replace a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, create a $250 million grant program for local law enforcement, fund additional Department of Agriculture interdiction staff and facilities, expand pretrial detention for certain unauthorized immigrants, increase criminal penalties, require more cooperation with ICE, and eliminate in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students. He and supporters framed the bill as a way to support law enforcement, deter illegal immigration, and align Florida with federal enforcement efforts. Committee questioning focused heavily on the bill’s education, detention, and enforcement provisions. Senators pressed Gruters and Fine on why the bill did not address employer sanctions or E-Verify, whether the tuition changes would affect students who had grown up in Florida, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, and whether the bill would create practical burdens for prosecutors, jails, and local officials. Gruters said he was open to working on E-Verify in regular session but not to amending this bill, and Fine argued the tuition repeal would apply to undocumented students who had qualified under existing law. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified in support, saying ICE bed capacity was still insufficient and that county jails needed more resources to honor detainers. Mark Schlachman of FSU Law offered historical context, noting prior state-federal cooperation efforts and warning of unintended consequences, while several public witnesses opposed the bill as unconstitutional, costly, and harmful to immigrant families and the economy. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, Florida Policy Institute, AFL-CIO, and immigrant advocacy groups argued the bill would invite litigation, encourage racial profiling, harm the workforce and higher education, and punish law-abiding immigrants and their families. They emphasized that immigration is a federal matter, that K-12 education must be provided regardless of status, and that removing in-state tuition would reduce access to college and hurt Florida’s economy. Some speakers urged the committee to grandfather current students if the tuition waiver is repealed. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote reflected in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there anything in here that would protect a company?
• Is there anything in here that would protect a company?
• Is there anything in here that would protect a company?
• are cover a lot of consumer protection are cover a lot of consumer protection statutes<01:42:13.000
• not technically in the nature of a class not technically in the nature of a class action<01:42:21.400

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• McDonald's middle school class actually watching.
• initially came to me from a middle initially came to me from a middle school<01:19:28.120> class
• but I believe there's also school class but I believe there's also uh<01:19:30.560> representative
• <01:19:34.400> is<01:19:34.639> actually his middle school classes is actually his
• middle school classes is actually watching<01:19:35.920> okay<01:19:36.320> very<01:19:

Bills: HF1234, HF1956, HF1025, HF1172, HF791

Keywords: payment transparency, public contracts, contractor rights, government accountability, construction payments, municipal finance, liquor store, audit requirements, state auditor, local government, historic flag, state flag, display standards, ceremonial, Minnesota Statutes, Ursa Minor, state symbol, Minnesota state laws, constellation, official state designation

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:25:56.919> my every fan in the building I protect my every fan in the building I protect
• So we do think that there's protection in there.
• classes of data to be shared between agencies and departments.
• c><01:54:05.360> be<01:54:05.480> shared protected classes of data to be shared protected
• <02:09:04.760> chair's relating to Consumer Protection chair's relating to Consumer Protection

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures, beginning with SB 48 SD2 HD1 relating to combat sports. The Attorney General offered a technical comment on the bill’s effective date, and several testifiers from the combat sports community strongly supported the measure with amendments. They argued that boxing and MMA should be treated separately, that the current regulatory structure has made events too costly and reduced opportunities, and that more local oversight would help revive the sport and give youth a constructive outlet. Committee members questioned whether the bill’s medical staffing requirements would apply to boxing, MMA, or both, and whether the added requirements would increase costs and reduce access. The witness from the combat sports community said amateur boxing is already regulated through USA Boxing, that the DCCA should focus on professional boxing, and that for safety he would support two physicians and one ambulance for boxing and MMA events. The committee then took up SB 117 SD2 HD1 relating to transportation. The Department of Transportation and the Ulon Initiative testified in support, and the bicycling community was listed as supporting as well. Members focused on the bill’s rebate program for electric transportation devices, asking how successful it had been and whether removing the rebate would affect use. DOT said the program began in February 2023 and had issued about 500 rebates totaling roughly $166,000, aimed at helping people without vehicles access transportation options. The department explained that the bill would broaden access and increase the rebate amount, including additional assistance for low-income applicants. Finally, the committee heard SB 897 SD3 HD1 relating to energy and wildfire liability. The Division of Consumer Advocacy, the Public Utilities Commission, the Attorney General, Clearway Energy Group, Ulon Initiative, Kawai K, IBEW Local 1260, and Hawaiian Electric all testified in support, while the Hawaii Association for Justice was listed as opposed but not present. Supporters said the bill would help finance wildfire mitigation and infrastructure improvements through securitization, reduce wildfire risk, and address utility cost and credit concerns. Hawaiian Electric emphasized that the bill is forward-looking, would help protect customers from future wildfire-related cost increases, and requested amendments including a study on a future wildfire recovery fund. In questioning, members pressed Hawaiian Electric on the liability cap, asking whether it would have applied to the Maui wildfires and whether it would cover personal injury or wrongful death; the witness and company counsel clarified that the aggregate cap applies only to qualifying property damage, not personal injury or wrongful death, and said they would follow up on how the cap would calculate in a Maui-type event. Hawaiian Electric also said it would seek financing under the bill if enacted and updated members on settlement funding efforts, including raising the first $550 million in equity and divesting assets to help meet its obligations.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we should protect them.
• our children and protecting our community.
• If you don't, then we will be forced to protect our kids.
• This ultimately is about protecting our kids.
• Tom, you came in with me in the class of 2014, so we represent the class of 2014. I wanted to rise.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , or a municipality to request a critical shortage designation for either a specific position or a class
• They should have the same protections as all other agencies within the Commonwealth for just cause protection
• They should have the same protections as all other agencies within the Commonwealth for just cause protection
• Under the current law, any collective bargaining agreement may protect employees against dismissal on
• We don't have protections as employees that we would be able to try to bargain for if we even have the

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Service heard testimony on a wide range of retirement, municipal workforce, and public employee labor bills. Early testimony focused on H. 2749, a Plymouth home rule petition to classify Plymouth harbormaster employees as Group 4 for retirement purposes. Supporters, including local officials and retirement board representatives, argued the employees perform law-enforcement and rescue duties comparable to police and fire personnel, that the change would be fair, and that it would have little or no fiscal impact on the town. A separate harbormaster-related bill, H. 2743, was also introduced later in the hearing. The committee also heard testimony on provisions of the Municipal Empowerment Act (H. 56), including a temporary critical-shortage exemption allowing retired state or municipal employees to return to work in hard-to-fill positions, and a renewed OPEB commission to study retiree health care costs. Administration and municipal officials said the measures were needed to address staffing shortages and rising benefit liabilities, while emphasizing the shortage exemption would be time-limited and require proof of recruitment efforts. Related retirement bills drew support and caution: advocates for higher COLA bases and enhanced COLA benefits urged relief for retirees, but some asked the committee to wait for recommendations from the special COLA commission before acting. A major portion of the hearing concerned labor rights at the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority and the Committee for Public Counsel Services. Union representatives and employees backed bills to extend just-cause protections, promotional rights, and collective bargaining rights to MWRA and CPCS workers, arguing they currently lack protections available to most other public employees. Testimony described unfair discipline, delayed promotions, and high turnover, and committee members indicated prior favorable action on similar MWRA bills and expressed support for addressing CPCS labor rights. The committee also heard from representatives of the Massachusetts Municipal Association and public higher education employees in support of H. 2820, which would require timely funding of ratified state employee contracts, with witnesses describing long delays in receiving negotiated raises and back pay. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair repeatedly invited written testimony and closed each panel after questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• , that your ability to be a part of a club or a group that has membership is being protected, and the
• The First Amendment protects not just religion and not just speech, but also association.
• This legislation draws reasonable boundaries, protects constitutional rights, and provides clarity for
• This legislation draws reasonable boundaries, protects constitutional rights, and provides clarity for
• It doesn't include protections for historic districts.

Bills: S0218, S0380, S0936, S0948, S0962, S0984, S1020, S1180, S1434, S1444, S1612

Keywords: land use, disaster recovery, local government, federal assistance, Hurricane relief, legal notices, public accessibility, government transparency, digital publication, government agencies, temporary door locking device, emergency safety, building code, training programs, fire exit security, affordable housing, land development, starter homes, local government regulations, housing shortage

Summary: The committee took up a series of land use, housing, local government, and public notice bills, along with a firefighter cancer bill and a bill on temporary door locking devices. SB 984 on firefighter cancer benefits and prevention was explained as clarifying access to death benefits and a one-time cancer payment for firefighters; it was reported favorably. SB 1612 required local governments to accept electronic payments online; it also passed favorably. SB 1180 created a recall framework for elected community development district board members and, through a strike-all amendment, also addressed synthetic turf enforcement and expanded compact urban mixed-use district definitions; the amendment was adopted and the bill was reported favorably. SB 936 allowed temporary door locking devices above the finished floor and directed the Building Commission to add standards to the Florida Building Code; it passed favorably. The committee also considered SB 380 on legal notices, which would let certain local government entities publish notices on their own websites or other designated sites instead of relying on newspapers in more cases. The Florida Press Association, Common Cause, and newspaper representatives opposed the bill, arguing it would fragment public notice access and make notices harder to find and verify, while supporters said it would modernize and reduce costs. The bill’s amendment clarified which agencies were covered, and the committee reported the bill favorably. SB 962 on affordable housing narrowed prior zoning preemption language so working farms and farm operations would not be unintentionally captured by Live Local-style rules; it passed favorably. SB 1444 on state preemption and religious expression, private clubs, and minor home construction drew support from religious freedom advocates and opposition from cities and counties, which warned of vague terms and overbroad preemption; it was reported favorably. The committee then approved SB 218, which would limit the reach of last session’s hurricane recovery land-use preemption to counties actually damaged by hurricanes and restore normal local land-use authority in unaffected counties. SB 1434 on infill redevelopment would streamline zoning and subdivision approvals for environmentally impacted parcels in certain urban counties to encourage housing on contaminated or underused land; counties and local-government groups opposed it as an overbroad preemption and raised concerns about the environmental threshold and density provisions, but the bill was reported favorably. SB 1020 on chickees prohibited local ordinances from blocking chickee construction if setback requirements are met and made unauthorized attempts to circumvent the building code a misdemeanor; it passed favorably. Finally, SB 948 on local government land development regulations and orders, as amended, proposed a statewide starter-home framework with lot-split and zoning changes to increase housing supply; local-government and planning groups warned it would function as a rigid statewide zoning code and could drive overdevelopment, while housing advocates supported it as necessary state action. The committee reported the bill favorably after extensive debate.