Transcript Highlights:

• , I'm speaking generally, if they had failed to do either one of those two, then that could be a violation
• And if you do have somebody that has a violation, just how much authority do you have to deal with a
• contractor or somebody that you have found in violation?
• can issue a civil penalty under formal enforcement, a consent administrative order, or a notice of violation

Summary: The committee first reviewed the Arkansas Division of Environmental Quality’s asbestos abatement program. DEQ explained that it licenses asbestos-related workers and businesses under federal and state law, including contractors, workers, inspectors, planners, designers, consultants, air monitors, and training providers. Members asked about the continued presence of asbestos in modern products, the status of the program’s grant fund, and why program expenses were expected to rise; DEQ said grants have not been issued in more than six years because revenues have not left a surplus, and the higher expenses reflect a reallocation of inspector salaries to the fund that supports the program. DEQ also described complaint-driven inspections, enforcement tools such as civil penalties and notices of violation, and the health risks of exposure, including asbestosis and mesothelioma. The report was accepted without objection. The committee then heard from the Arkansas Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training. The commission outlined its standards, compliance, decertification, basic academy, advanced training, and jail standards functions, and said it operates three basic academies in Camden, Benton-Bryant, and Springdale. Members asked about recruitment and retention, academy capacity, training hours, and costs to local agencies; the commission said attendance costs counties nothing because the state funds the academies, and that basic training is being expanded to 705 hours with a greater emphasis on practical instruction. The commission also described separate training for detention officers and school resource officers, and said law enforcement divisions in other agencies, such as the Department of Agriculture, are held to the same standards. It noted that most academy attendance requires agency hiring first, though a veterans-to-law-enforcement program allows some veterans to attend on their own and later seek employment. This report also was accepted without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• two—I'm speaking generally—if they had failed to do either one of those two, then that could be a violation
• And if you do have somebody that has a violation, just how much authority do you have to deal with a
• contractor or somebody that you have found in violation?
• issue a civil penalty under a formal enforcement, a consent administrative order, or a notice of violation

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , I'm speaking generally, if they had failed to do either one of those two, then that could be a violation
• And if you do have somebody that has a violation, just how much authority do you have to deal with a
• contractor or somebody that you have found in violation?
• can issue a civil penalty under formal enforcement, a consent administrative order, or a notice of violation

Summary: The committee first reviewed the Division of Environmental Quality’s asbestos abatement program. DEQ officials explained that the program licenses asbestos-related workers and businesses, including contractors, workers, inspectors, planners/designers, consultants, air monitors, and training providers, under federal and state requirements. Members asked about asbestos use today, grant funding for removal, inspections funded by fees and fines, complaint handling, enforcement authority, and health risks. DEQ said some asbestos-containing products are still manufactured, grants have not been issued in over six years due to funding constraints, inspectors investigate complaints and can issue civil penalties or other enforcement actions, and exposure can cause asbestosis and mesothelioma. The report was accepted without objection. The committee then heard from the Arkansas Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training. Officials described the agency’s standards and training divisions, three basic academies, advanced training, and jail standards training. Members asked about recruitment, academy capacity, training costs, and curriculum changes. The commission said recruitment and retention are improving, basic academy enrollment is around 700 per year with capacity for about 725 to 750, training costs counties nothing because the state funds it, and basic training is being expanded from 528 hours to 705 hours with more practical instruction based on input from chiefs and sheriffs. Questions also covered detention officer training, school resource officer training, and whether other agencies are subject to the same standards. Officials said detention officers receive separate training, school resource officers have standalone training approved by the commission, and other law enforcement divisions such as the Department of Agriculture are held to the same standards. They also noted a Veterans to Law Enforcement program that allows eligible veterans to attend the academy without first being hired by an agency, with GI Bill support. The report was accepted without objection, and the meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• identifies uh alleges what the violation identifies uh alleges what the violation is<00:37:02.960
• <00:50:10.559> of diagnosis is a profound violation of diagnosis is a profound violation of
• We already have the tools to be able to enforce administrative actions on violators.
• There's been numerous violations of it. It's been addressed by OIP.
• <02:09:26.400> of already provides that any violation of already provides that any violation

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 302, which would repeal the requirement that a provider-patient relationship for medical cannabis certification be established in person first. The Department of Health said it supported the House Draft 2 version as a way to expand patient access, and several testifiers from the medical cannabis community and dispensary industry supported the bill, especially for patients on outer islands or those unable to travel. One witness asked that earlier language removed in committee be restored to further improve access. Representative Shimizu asked whether follow-up in-person visits would still occur, and DOH responded that this varies by provider, with some continuing in-person care and others moving to telehealth for chronic conditions. The committee then took up House Bill 712, relating to the federal 340B drug pricing program and contract pharmacies. The Office of Consumer Protection and the Attorney General’s office both said they supported the bill’s purpose but wanted it clarified and possibly moved into a standalone chapter rather than chapter 481B. Supporters, including Hawaii Pacific Health and the Queen’s Health Systems, said the bill is needed to protect safety-net funding and access to discounted drugs, citing large financial benefits from 340B and losses caused by manufacturer restrictions on contract pharmacies. PhRMA opposed the bill, arguing the issue is not access to discounts but accountability and transparency in how contract pharmacies distribute benefits, and said it was willing to discuss amendments. Members asked follow-up questions about whether there was data showing misuse; PhRMA said it did not have numbers, while hospital witnesses said the program is federally audited and used appropriately in Hawaii. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1482, HD1, which would tighten hemp and controlled-substance definitions to exclude Schedule I cannabinoids from manufactured hemp products and clarify the treatment of artificially derived cannabis. The Department of Health supported the measure, saying it adds clarity to existing prohibitions. Kūre Hawaii and other supporters said it would close loopholes involving Delta-8 and similar products. An individual testifier urged stronger language to also cover compounds such as HHC, THCA, THCP, and THCO. In response to questions about enforcement against mislabeled hemp products, DOH explained that THC percentages are relative to product weight, that some products can remain under the hemp threshold while still containing significant THC, and that hemp flower is already prohibited from direct retail sale, though enforcement can be complicated and involves both administrative and criminal authorities.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:51:49.840> in and put into law that any violations in and put into law that any violations
• Any violations, not even a 30-day, Yeah.
• And so, if I look at violations, right?
• ,<00:59:15.920> that that this center has 10 violations, that that this center has 10 violations
• But actually, to me, when I read the violations, I said, this doesn't seem like fraud.

Bills: HF3542, HF3819

Keywords: data privacy, investigative data, welfare system, public funds, transparency, child care, licensing, inspections, compliance, program integrity, 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3542, authored by Representative Hudson, and first adopted the February 25 minutes. Hudson explained that the bill, as amended in a DE1, would require agencies to disclose to the public, legislators, or the press the existence of certain investigations only after the subject has been notified and the agency has decided to reduce, suspend, or withhold payments. He said the amendment was intended to avoid tipping off subjects before notification while still increasing transparency about investigations involving public funds. A separate A3 amendment was withdrawn after the DE1 was adopted. Several members questioned the bill’s scope and timing, asking what “existence of an investigation” meant and whether the proposal would disclose information before findings were complete. Hudson clarified that the bill was aimed at identifying who is being investigated, not revealing investigative details. The committee then heard extensive public testimony from child care providers and advocates, who opposed the bill and argued it would expose providers to harassment, threats, and stigma before any findings were made. Testifiers described recent threats, ICE-related disruptions, audits, overpayment findings, and the burden of CCAP compliance, saying the bill would punish providers for paperwork errors and worsen safety concerns, especially for Somali and other providers of color. A board member of the Minnesota Child Care Association also opposed the bill, saying providers had been chilled from speaking publicly because of death threats and harassment, and warning that disclosure of investigations could intensify that climate. In response, Hudson said the bill was not about targeting child care providers generally and was limited to confirmed ongoing investigations after notice to the subject. The committee then heard from Inspector General Keys, who explained that CCAP investigations are administrative, not criminal, and are based on evidence of repeated errors or financial misconduct rather than intentional fraud. He said the office looks for patterns beyond simple mistakes and that the bill’s notice requirement would not impede investigations. The discussion ended amid a brief procedural dispute over comments directed at Hudson, after which the chair returned to the bill and the Inspector General’s testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've hopefully never done anything to violate any of the rules or ethics.
• They never go back to say I violated any regulation.
• They are engaging in an ethical violation.
• The sitting judge claimed that that election contest violated his rights to free speech.
• The sitting judge claimed that that election contest violated his rights to free speech.

Bills: HB2242, HB2446, HB2799, HB4502, HB2920, HB2790, HB5620, HB5060, HB5076, HB5080, HB5081, HB5128, HB5130, HB3847, HB5116, HB2969, HB4546, HB4202, HB5624, HB3964, HB4803, HB872, HB4775, HB4777, HB4961, HB5570, HB2988, HB4260, HB1375, HB5009, HB5411, HB5134, HB4388, HB3095, HB1387

Keywords: constables, civil rights, local government, law enforcement, policy-making authority, affidavit, medical bills, civil actions, reasonable charges, healthcare services, judicial statistics, court performance, family law, civil cases, efficiency reporting, court security, emergency management, harassment penalties, judicial safety, court committee

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills affecting civil practice, judicial conduct, and attorney regulation. HB 4961 and the similar HB 3095 would bar uninsured motorists from recovering non-economic damages after a collision, with HB 3095 also addressing certain exceptions and limiting economic damages in some cases. Supporters said the measures would encourage insurance coverage and fairness for insured drivers, while opponents argued they would unfairly punish injured people who were not responsible for the lack of insurance, including pedestrians, passengers, children, and others. HB 3095 drew constitutional concerns from witnesses, and the committee later withdrew the committee substitute and left the bill pending; HB 4961 was also left pending after questions about its scope, including passengers. HB 5570 would expand a continuing legal education exemption to attorneys appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate who serve on boards or commissions. The author and witness said the bill would free up time for public service while still requiring ethics training. A committee member raised a discrepancy in the number of attorneys covered, and the bill was left pending. HB 2969 would prohibit the State Bar from adopting rules or penalties that unreasonably burden attorneys’ religious exercise or free speech, especially in relation to sincerely held religious beliefs. Supporters framed it as a protection for lawyers of faith against an ABA-style speech code, while no one testified in opposition; the bill was left pending. HB 4260 would prohibit county judges and county commissioners from practicing law in courts over which they have jurisdiction. The author described it as an ethics measure to avoid conflicts of interest, but county officials and the County Judges and Commissioners Association opposed it, saying existing ethics rules already address conflicts and that the bill would impose hardships, especially in rural counties. The bill was left pending. HB 4388 would require all judges, including those who serve only in administrative roles, to remain subject to the Code of Judicial Conduct; supporters said some judges avoid discipline by relinquishing judicial functions, while opponents said the bill was unnecessary and could burden county judges who serve as administrators. It was also left pending. The committee also heard HB 5134, which would limit Rule 202 pre-suit depositions to people who have suffered or reasonably expect to suffer actual damages and allow attorney’s fees against abusive petitioners. The author said the bill would curb harassment and fishing expeditions, but members questioned how the standard would work in practice; the bill was left pending. Finally, HB 3964 would narrow common-law public nuisance claims by barring suits over lawful conduct, conduct already addressed by other remedies, and products, while preserving other causes of action. Supporters said the bill would prevent regulation through litigation and protect legislative authority; opponents said it would eliminate important remedies and that no Texas abuse had been shown. The author indicated he would revise the bill, and it was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• <02:00:03.760> or stopped for an unrelated violation or stopped for an unrelated violation
• By the letter of the law, I have committed a violation.
• Um, however, it's committed a violation.
• Is it a criminal violation? Is it a civil... are there fines?
• Is that a violation or or a reason why.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• need to be separated from society so that we can have them not violate the rights of others.
• the rights of others need to not violate the rights of others need to be<01:16:02.480> separated<
• , but in violation of the Secretary<01:19:14.400> of<01:19:14.640> State's<01:19:16.080
• <01:25:11.040> your because they cannot not violate your because they cannot not violate your
• > design,<02:14:12.320> it When you violate God's design, it When you violate God's design

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, approved the journal, and then moved out of order to consider Senate Joint Resolution 10, a resolution celebrating Lunar New Year 2026. The resolution highlighted Colorado’s observed Lunar New Year holiday, the cultural significance of the holiday to Asian-American communities, and the contributions of Asian-Americans in Colorado. Several members spoke in support, including remarks about the Far East Center, Asian-American heritage, and the importance of recognizing the holiday statewide. The chamber also welcomed a number of guests and groups for the Lunar New Year observance, including state and international dignitaries, community leaders, and lion dancers. Representative Soer and others introduced guests and offered brief remarks; the House then recessed briefly for the celebration. After returning, the House adopted Senate Joint Resolution 10 by a vote of 60 ayes, with five excused and no no votes. Following the resolution, members made announcements about committee meetings and visiting student groups, including District 6 Day, Disability Rights Advocacy Day, and several school groups at the Capitol. The House then took up third reading of supplemental appropriations bills. House Bill 1150, a supplemental appropriation to the Department of Agriculture, passed on third reading. House Bill 1151, a supplemental appropriation to the Department of Corrections, prompted extended debate over prison funding, inmate care, staffing, and parole-related concerns; members argued both for humane treatment and for fiscal restraint, and discussion was still ongoing in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• the law even though the fire chief had violated the law.
• <01:20:54.560> of um would be in technical violation of um would be in technical violation
• :21:11.840> violated<01:21:12.239> the<01:21:12.480> law.
• And I don't chief had violated the law.
• <01:21:22.480> a the public um they would be violating a the public um they would be violating

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A court may not sever any portion of a bill or measure that violates subsection A of this section.
• It's wrong and it violates long-standing reforms.
• children piece—the entire initiative would be void, which violates so many parts of the Constitution
• And it likely violates the single subject rule. That's been discussed, that's been talked about.
• It's about being a—we are attempting to violate the separation of powers and strip the Arizona voters

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A court may not sever any portion of a bill or measure that violates subsection of this section.'
• A court may not sever any portion of a bill or measure that violates subsection of this section.
• It's wrong, and it violates long-standing... ...reforms.
• That violates so many parts of the Constitution that I'm glad leaders on duration listed something.
• And it likely violates the single-subject rule.

Summary: The Senate met, opened with prayer and the pledge, and then handled a series of messages and floor actions. The chamber transmitted a large group of Senate bills to the governor and Senate Concurrent Memorial 1004 to the Secretary of State. It also received House requests to return Senate Bills 1175 and 1198 for reconsideration, which were granted without objection. The Senate then moved into Committee of the Whole to consider several House concurrent resolutions. On H.C.R. 2001, a constitutional referral on election requirements, senators debated a Judiciary Committee amendment and a Hoffman floor amendment that would require voter ID, allow election-day tabulation of early ballots at polling places, and require legislative funding for implementation. Supporters said the measure would improve election security, voter confidence, and speed up results; opponents argued it was vague, could undermine mail voting, and lacked clear implementation details. The amendment was adopted, and after further debate the Committee of the Whole gave H.C.R. 2001 a do-pass recommendation by a 15-12 vote. Later, on third reading, the full Senate passed H.C.R. 2001 by a 16-12 vote and transmitted it to the House. The chamber also considered H.C.R. 2003, a referral on student athletics and biological sex. Senator Ortiz offered a floor amendment to replace the blanket ban approach with rules based on athletic ability and inclusion; supporters said it would preserve fairness while avoiding discrimination, while opponents said it would gut the measure and weaken protections for girls’ sports. The Ortiz amendment failed 11-16, and H.C.R. 2003 then received a do-pass recommendation in Committee of the Whole and later passed third reading. H.C.R. 2044, a referral on prohibiting preferential treatment and discrimination, also received a do-pass recommendation without recorded controversy. The Senate then adjourned after completing the remaining procedural motions and votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• and for other licensing violations.
• study violations and for other<00:31:25.680> licensing<00:31:26.360> violations.
• the severity of licensing violations. the severity of licensing violations.
• <01:03:15.640> I underwriters as a serious violation.
• I underwriters as a serious violation.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:00:08.400> this facility who materially violates this facility who materially violates
• constitute that material violation? constitute that material violation?
• During that year, there were 3,269 violations that were discovered.
• <01:10:58.400> Um<01:10:59.280> and violations that were discovered.
• Um and violations that were discovered.

Bills: HB0117, HB0126

Keywords: informed consent, abortion, civil liability, coercion, healthcare rights, fetal heartbeat, termination of pregnancy, medical emergency, Wyoming legislation, rights of minors, healthcare regulations, parental consent, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. for violating laws relating to wages, for violating laws relating to wages, benefits,<00:16
• Say, "Hey, we noticed that the guy you're using has wage violations.
• Say, "Hey, we noticed that the guy you're using has wage violations.
• Say, "Hey, we noticed that the guy you're using has wage violations.
• And he also um adopted fourth violation.

Bills: HB2614, HB1660, HB1704, HB1563, HB1573, HB1777, HB1749

Keywords: cosmetics, returns, refunds, consumer protection, high-pressure sales, transparency, accountability, HB1660, Hawaii, county labor standards, counties, contractors, building permits, permit denial, permit suspension, permit revocation, wage theft, wages, benefits, hours

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 2614, which would require merchants selling cosmetics to accept returns of newer unopened goods within specified time frames and expand signage requirements for return and refund policies. DCCA’s Office of Consumer Protection strongly supported the bill, citing updated figures of 180 cosmetic complaints from 2020 to 2025, 54 still under investigation, 148 referred to class action litigation, and more than $1.3 million in consumer losses. Members questioned whether the bill was needed given the pending lawsuit and whether bad actors would comply, while the office responded that clearer signage would improve consumer awareness and could reduce complaints without limiting other remedies. No vote was taken. The committee then heard HB 1660 HD1, which would allow counties to require contractors to disclose wage, benefit, hour, and employment-status information and to deny, revoke, or suspend permits for certain labor-law violations. DLIR, the Hawaii Regional Council of Carpenters, Operating Engineers Local 3, and Pacific Resource Partnership testified in support, arguing the measure would help deter cheating contractors, protect law-abiding employers, and keep bad actors from undercutting wages and taxes. One member raised concerns about possible delays to affordable housing projects and whether owners should be held responsible for contractors’ misconduct; supporters replied that compliance is a minimum standard, that county action would be discretionary rather than automatic, and that the bill would not bar counties from working with affordable housing developers. No action was reported. Finally, the committee took up HB 1704, adopting the Psychology Interjurisdictional Compact to allow telepsychology and temporary in-person practice across state lines. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the State Health Planning and Development Agency, the Hawaii State Association of Counties, and the Hawaii Association of Health Plans supported the measure, saying it would help fill major staffing gaps, especially for forensic evaluations and services in rural and neighbor-island communities. The Board of Psychology raised concerns about the compact’s scope, the need for a study focused specifically on psychologists, background-check requirements, possible loss of regulatory authority and revenue, and the need to update older statutory provisions. Hawaii Association for Justice opposed the immunity language in the compact, and Shawn Scanlon opposed the bill, arguing it could weaken cultural responsiveness and local control and suggesting the state instead improve temporary licensing and other in-state pathways. The committee also questioned the Department of Corrections about its vacancies and whether telehealth could be filled by local providers; no vote was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• is, whether or not a violation has been made, and what the particular repercussions of that violation
• is, whether or not a violation has been made, and what the particular repercussions of that violation
• is, whether or not a violation has been made, and what the particular repercussions of that violation
• is, whether or not a violation has been made, and what the particular repercussions of that violation
• So, we are not constrained and will not be violating what we’ve been asked to do if we actually do a

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of that right to legally violations of that right to legally recognize<00:11:26.160> subjects
• <02:32:46.720> and recourse if their trust is violated and recourse if their trust is violated
• Why did this privacy violation<02:34:42.319> even<02:34:43.240> happen?
• And what can we violation even happen?
• I think that there should be penalties for privacy that's violated.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or removed if they act outside their defined authority, with criminal penalties established for violations
• or removed if they act outside their defined authority, with criminal penalties established for violations
• None of the commissioners in all of these 42 conventions has ever violated their commission.
• <00:25:41.440> their uh conventions has ever violated their uh conventions has ever violated
• violate their commission >> and<00:46:18.480> who<00:46:18.720> determines<00:46

Bills: HB433, HB443

Keywords: tax distribution, Talladega County, economic development, public safety, rural infrastructure, HB443, Underground Damage Prevention Program, One-Call Notification System, 811, utility locate, dig law, excavation safety, damage prevention, underground utilities, pipeline safety, public utilities, buried facilities, excavation notice, demolition notice, Alabama Public Service Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• Number one, it increases the ...range for intentional violations from $100 to $400.
• Number three, it targets vehicle operators who are the primary violators.
• By enhancing penalties for intentional violations, we can improve compliance with flagger instructions
• House Bill 1772 aims to double the traffic fines for violations regarding warnings given by a flagger
• Violators or repeat offenders? I do.

Bills: HB341, HB791, HB1564, HB1695, HB1722, HB1729, HB1772, HB2003, HB2954, HB2989, HB3084, HB3134, HB3135, HB3309, HB3611, HB3679, HB3727, HB3832

Keywords: affordable housing, zoning, development, community support, local regulations, bicycle lanes, traffic collisions, Texas Department of Transportation, study, public safety, bicycles, electric bicycles, scooters, road safety, transportation study, HB 791, Central Catholic High School, San Antonio, specialty license plate, specialty plates

Transcript Highlights:

• , while the OAG is responsible for criminal and civil violations.
• upon us to present the evidence to support. support the fact, all of the elements of whatever the violation
• Again, the stakes are too high, the fines are high, $5,000 to $10,000 per violation. and being banned
• for documentation errors and regular violations, while weakening due process and other requirements
• It's five. $10,000 per violation, so each and every individual one it lists, plus it listed out two times

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He's violating—he's looking out the Secretary of State office.
• We still have a violation of the law. We're unable to come to terms.
• A dishonorable discharge comes with the adjudication of a violation of UCMJ.
• So if there was no UCMJ violation and it was just a sexual orientation violation in Army regulations,
• So if there was no UCMJ violation and it was just a sexual orientation violation in Army regulations,

Bills: SB1003, SB1060, SB1134, SB1275, SB1327, SB1429, SB1618, SB1634, SB1654, SB1803, SCR1002, SCR1005, SCR1023, SCR1027

Keywords: election, canvass, certification, ballot tabulation, write-in candidates, registration, voting procedures, voter registration, temporary absence, absentee voting, residency, military voters, overseas voters, election law, Arizona Revised Statutes, political signs, campaign materials, public safety, municipal regulation, veterans

Summary: The committee first heard a lengthy presentation and discussion focused on Arizona State University’s foreign research ties, especially collaborations and funding connected to China and Chinese military-affiliated institutions. The presenter argued that ASU and the Arizona Board of Regents had not been transparent about foreign gifts, contracts, and research partnerships, citing federal reporting forms, the Wolf Amendment, export-control concerns, and alleged links to dual-use technologies such as quantum systems, AI, robotics, microelectronics, and biosecurity. A witness from American Global Strategies testified in support, saying the bill would help protect U.S. research security and national security by imposing state-level guardrails on sensitive collaborations. After questions, the committee considered a strike-everything amendment to SB 1060 that would bar public universities from entering into or continuing certain loans, gifts, contracts, research partnerships, or sponsored projects involving the PRC, the CCP, and listed Chinese military-linked universities, require ABOR review and approval, and impose reporting and budget penalties. The amendment was withdrawn, and the committee instead took up SB 1327, which directs ABOR to require university research security policies and to report annually on those policies and on foreign contributions over $250,000; SB 1327 received a 4-2 do-pass recommendation, with Del Santos, Hernandez, and Márquez voting no and Kolodin, Powell, Keshel, and Gillette voting yes. The committee then heard SB 1803, a veterans bill regulating unrecognized persons who assist with VA disability claims. The sponsor and industry witnesses said the bill would protect veterans from bad actors by requiring disclosures, capping fees, banning certain practices, and filing service agreements with the Attorney General, while opponents argued it could restrict consumer choice, resemble a price ceiling, and still allow non-attorneys to engage in the unauthorized practice of law. After extensive debate over contingent fees, legal ethics, and whether the bill was too favorable to one company, the committee continued the hearing with additional testimony and questions.