Transcript Highlights:

• We work with you all to give information, provide resource, testimony.
• And so I think her recommendation, and I'm guessing by your testimony, you support.
• And I get that in your testimony, I heard very clearly, is that you currently are not.
• My testimony was specific to Tuya, now, of course, our general manager and Management team oversee the
• Good seeing you again. and thanks for coming in to your testimony today.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Does anyone else wish to provide testimony in support of the legislation?
• I'll switch to provide testimony in support of the legislation.
• Thanks to everyone who's provided testimony.
• Thanks for being here, and thanks for your testimony.
• Thanks for being here, and thanks for your testimony.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on privacy, AI, consumer protection, and public safety. AB 1979 would require a licensed health care professional to retain final clinical judgment when using AI tools in health care and would limit chatbot access to medical records; supporters, including nurses and TechEquity, said it preserves human decision-making, while hospitals and industry groups opposed it unless amended, citing burdens and training concerns. The bill passed 6-1 and was placed on call. AB 2624 would expand the Safe at Home confidentiality program to immigrant service providers and workers facing harassment and doxing; supporters described threats against advocates and their families, while one senator raised concerns about a private right of action and penalties. The bill passed 4-1 and was placed on call for further committees. AB 2103 would make Engaged California a permanent statewide public engagement program; supporters said it broadens civic participation and transparency, while concerns were raised about partisan balance in topic selection. It passed 6-0 and was placed on call to Appropriations. The committee also considered AB 2, which would set statutory damages and other financial accountability measures for large social media platforms when negligence causing harm to children is proven in court. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost her daughter and child-safety advocates, argued that stronger remedies are needed because social media design features are harming children and existing enforcement has been insufficient. Opponents, including TechNet, CCIA, CalChamber, and others, argued the bill blurs content and conduct, could increase litigation, and is unnecessary given existing lawsuits and verdicts. Several senators said the bill was a consumer-protection measure and supported it; it passed 5-0 and was placed on call. AB 883, as amended, would use California’s Delete Act/DROP system to help elected officials and judges remove personal information from data brokers, while also shortening the deletion timeline for all Californians from 45 to 30 days. Supporters said the bill responds to rising threats against public servants and improves privacy tools broadly; some opponents removed or softened opposition after amendments, though CalChamber and CCIA remained opposed unless amended, largely over the private right of action. The bill passed 4-0 and was placed on call. The committee then recessed briefly before taking up AB 2023, a chatbot safety bill for children that would require age verification, safety audits, default protections, parental controls, crisis-response measures, and limits on targeted ads and data sharing. Supporters said it builds on prior AI and child-safety legislation and is needed to prevent harms like self-harm and manipulation; opponents raised concerns about vague harm standards, audit requirements, and liability. The hearing continued with testimony and committee discussion, but no final vote on AB 2023 was shown in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we had testimony about how we would do this.
• And we had testimony about how we would do this.
• And we had testimony about how we would do this.
• And we had testimony about how we would do this.
• And we had testimony about how we would do this.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The segment focused first on Senator John Marty’s bill, SF 3612, which would remove private insurers and HMOs from Minnesota’s state health care programs and replace them with a statewide administrative services model. Marty argued that managed care has created churn, coverage disruptions, and administrative waste in Medicaid and MinnesotaCare, and said the state should instead pay providers directly while investing more in care coordination, case management, and wraparound services through primary care clinics and county-based purchasers. He said the goal is better care, not just savings, though he also cited potential taxpayer savings and pointed to Connecticut as a model. He acknowledged the bill is not expected to become law this year and said a fiscal note and more details are still pending. Marty said the proposal has support from the governor and groups such as the American Cancer Society, but that his current co-authors are all DFL members. He expressed hope for bipartisan support and said the simpler system would also improve fraud detection and transparency. He addressed concerns about insurance-industry jobs by saying workers should be treated fairly and that retraining and dislocated-worker assistance would be part of the transition. He also said the broader goal is universal coverage for all medical needs, including mental health and dental care, without co-pays or deductibles. The second half highlighted Senator Jeff Howe and Minnesota’s Hometown Heroes Assistance Program for firefighters. Howe described the program as a statewide effort for roughly 20,000 career, paid-on-call, and volunteer firefighters that provides up to $20,000 in assistance for occupational illnesses such as cancer and heart disease, along with training, counseling, and family support. He said the program helps firefighters process trauma and has been recognized as the nation’s most comprehensive firefighter well-being initiative. Howe said the most recent version of the bill received unanimous bipartisan support in both chambers, and he suggested future expansions could include retired firefighters and possibly peace officers. The segment also noted a separate therapy approach using retired racehorses to help first responders work through trauma, with participants saying it has helped them stay on the job and manage anxiety and PTSD.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony. All right, Jack.
• Thank you for your testimony. All right, Jack.
• You know, your testimony brought a question to my mind.
• You know, your testimony brought a question to my mind.
• <00:14:54.839> I all for your testimony. I all for your testimony.

Keywords: The livestream event for this meeting cut off shortly after the meeting began. This is the complete copy pulled from back ups., 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That study included testimony from stakeholders.
• That study included testimony from stakeholders.
• Stakeholders from education organizations have provided testimony.
• We solicit written testimony from them, and ultimately that testimony is incorporated into the final
• We solicit written testimony from them.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the prior minutes and then shifted to an update from Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith on early childhood education, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. They said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ABC as a large state program with about 23,800 funded slots and roughly $114 million in annual appropriations. Department officials said they are reviewing slot allocations because about 1,000 seats are funded but unfilled, while more than 2,000 families are on waiting lists, and they plan to reduce or reallocate slots from providers that have not filled them over several years. They also said they are examining whether income thresholds, curriculum expectations, daily rates, and summer programming should be updated, and members raised concerns about access, local control, transportation, and whether the program should better align with K-12 choice and school readiness goals. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical data and other information for future discussion. The committee then received a legal presentation from BLR attorney Taylor Lloyd on the constitutional and statutory framework for education adequacy in Arkansas. She reviewed the Dupree and Lake View cases, explaining that the state must maintain a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools, and that adequacy and equity are distinct but related concepts. She emphasized that the General Assembly is responsible for defining adequacy, studying whether the system meets that standard, and reacting to the evidence, while the courts ultimately decide constitutional compliance. Lloyd also explained the current adequacy definition, the role of the matrix as a funding tool rather than a spending mandate, and the distinction between unrestricted foundation funding and restricted categorical funding. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum followed with a historical overview of how Arkansas responded to the court cases and developed the current adequacy process. She traced major legislative actions from the 1980s through the Lake View litigation, including the creation of funding formulas, categorical aid, isolated funding, declining enrollment funding, and the 2003-2004 adequacy study that led to the Continuing Adequacy Evaluation Act and the matrix used to set foundation funding. She also described later changes to the adequacy statute, the financial reporting requirements for districts, and the ongoing use of surveys, stakeholder testimony, and consultant studies in the biennial adequacy process. Members asked questions about whether private or homeschool programs could use public funds for expenses like utilities, whether stakeholders should include those groups, the difference between average daily membership and attendance, and whether school board members are surveyed; staff said those issues would need further research or were outside the scope of the presenters’ role.

Transcript Highlights:

• So for those bills, we will have testimony, and the testimony will be 30-minute blocks for support, opposition
• So for those bills, we will have testimony.
• So for those bills, we will have testimony, and the testimony will be 30-minute blocks for support, opposition
• Chair, we have no callers for opposition testimony. Thank you so much.
• We will move your testimony to support. Broadcast, do we have any other callers?

Bills: SB6, SB62, SB74, SB90, SB104, SB119, SB132, SB133, SB135, SB182, SB185, SB193, SB207, SB217, SB229, SB233, SB260, SB262, SB280, SB281, SB300, SB306, SB378, SB382, SB393, SB403, SB422, SB427, SB431, SB434, SB442, SB452, SB456, SB468, SB472, SB487, SB503, SB6

Keywords: cloud seeding, Nevada, water conservation, agriculture, Desert Research Institute, victim compensation, hate crimes, property remediation, criminal justice, vulnerable persons, elections, voter registration, mail ballots, candidate eligibility, cybersecurity, education funding, teacher grants, classroom supplies, instructional support, specialized personnel

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'll leave the rest of my testimony there to not repeat. Members, any questions?
• I appreciate your testimony. Yes, sure. Thank you, everyone.
• This concludes my testimony.
• I really appreciate—well, I extremely appreciate your testimony.
• I am really confused by some of the testimony from Frisco.

Bills: HB74, HB175, HB460, HB576, HB2271, HB2294, HB2874, HB3016, HB3133, HB3191, HB3458, HB3929, HB4063, HB4115, HB4394, HB74, HB175

Keywords: Puerto Verde, Port Authority, eminent domain, bonds, tax assessments, economic development, infrastructure, transportation, public welfare, child care, certifications, Texas Rising Star Program, grant program, disability inclusion, family income, affordability, economic impact, state study, cost analysis, government support

Transcript Highlights:

• I did pass out a written letter of testimony.
• We did email this letter of testimony late last night, but in the outside chance that you haven't had
• Thank you very much for the testimony. Does anybody else want to talk about this?
• does anybody else much for Testimony does anybody else want<00:13:47.360> to<00:13:47.480>
• wanted to be able to provide testimony in<00:32:46.679> a<00:32:46.960> process<00:32:

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Vice Chair Griffitts: Seeing no more questions, we have public testimony.
• That will conclude public testimony. We are in debate. Rep. Gantt, you are recognized. Rep.
• Is there public testimony? Barney Bishop, American History Incorporated, in support.
• That's closing public testimony, we are in debate. Rep. Gantt. Rep. Gantt: Thank you Mister Chair.
• Vice Chair Griffitts: No public testimony. Members, we are on debate. Debate on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.
• ADDITIONAL PUBLIC TESTIMONY DEREK TALBOT FROM AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY WAIVING IN SUPPORT.
• PUBLIC TESTIMONY. NONE ARE SUBMITTED. DEBATE?
• IS THERE PUBLIC TESTIMONY? I SEE NONE. IS THERE DEBATE?
• SEEING NONE PUBLIC TESTIMONY? SEEING NONE DEBATE? THERE WE GO.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we listen to the testimony of the agencies who are assembled here today.
• Please share your testimony. Thank you.
• Thank you very much for your testimony here today.
• We really appreciate your testimony.
• We really appreciate your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from Senate Chair Robyn Kennedy and House Chair Chynah Tyler, who emphasized that the fiscal year 2026 hearing was focused on the Health and Human Services budget, asked members to keep questions budget-related, and noted that no public testimony would be taken. They also highlighted the choice of Doherty Memorial High School as the venue to showcase Worcester’s investment in career and technical education. Committee members then introduced themselves before the first panel, the Executive Office of Veterans Services and the state veterans homes, began testimony. Secretary John Santiago said the governor’s FY26 proposal would support implementation of the HERO Act, which he said is now about 95% implemented, including higher disabled veteran annuities, expanded behavioral health benefits, and other service expansions. He described efforts to reduce veteran homelessness, including nearly $20 million in ARPA-funded housing and outreach initiatives, and said the agency has delivered more than 100,000 supportive services to nearly 8,500 veterans. Leaders from the Chelsea and Holyoke veterans homes reported on staffing, quality measures, electronic medical records, and major construction projects at both facilities, including a new Chelsea campus and the new Holyoke home. Members asked about funding transfers, geographic equity in access to the homes, outreach to women veterans and veterans of color, suicide prevention, Gold Star family support, and the impact of federal uncertainty; Santiago said the homes are now licensed and certified, that the current budget is sufficient, and that the agency is expanding engagement and data collection. The second panel, the Office of the Veteran Advocate, testified that its FY26 request is about $3.3 million, up from the current $2 million, to cover staffing, a larger office, and higher technology costs. Veteran Advocate Bob Notch said the office is a new independent oversight agency created in 2022 to examine systems, coordinate with local veteran service officers, and investigate fatalities or serious harm involving veterans in state care. He said the office’s work depends on research, data, and collaboration with other agencies, and that current funding is only enough for minimum operations. In response to questions, Notch and Deputy Commissioner David O’Callaghan discussed the difficulty of tracking veteran suicides, the need for better data across agencies, and the office’s role as an oversight body rather than a direct service provider. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Discussion and testimony complaints.
• testimony on this bill. testimony on this bill.
• Today in this testimony, I'm hearing a lot of rebuttal.
• instead of listening to the testimony instead of listening to the testimony and<00:58:23.680>
• <01:00:01.640> today, we heard in the earlier testimony today, we heard in the earlier testimony

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We have heard testimony before in the Children and Family Law Committee, which is where this bill came
• I have written testimony. Where would you like me to leave it?
• I have written testimony. Where would you like me to leave it?
• <00:28:44.320> from there was conflicting testimony from there was conflicting testimony from
• actually concerned about the testimony actually concerned about the testimony that<01:04:57.680>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a public hearing on House Bill 493, a proposal to require physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants to complete child abuse and neglect training as part of licensure and continuing education. The bill’s sponsor and supporters said the measure addresses a gap in provider training, especially because abuse can be difficult to recognize and voluntary training has had low participation. They described a free Dartmouth online course and argued that mandatory, repeated education would help providers identify signs of abuse, know when to involve specialists or DCYF, and improve child safety. Supporters also noted the bill was amended to clarify coverage for nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and nursing hours, and to address language concerns raised by the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification. Committee members and OPLC counsel raised implementation questions, including whether the bill would apply to all physicians regardless of specialty, whether it created a new licensure condition rather than only a continuing education requirement, how often the training would need to be repeated, and whether the accreditation language fit nursing rules. OPLC also noted that psychiatrists would be covered as physicians, while psychologists would not. A child abuse pediatrician testified that in his experience, children were sometimes seen by providers who missed early signs of abuse, leading to worse outcomes, and that mandatory education was needed because voluntary programs had poor uptake. The New Hampshire Hospital Association opposed the bill, saying health care professionals already have reporting duties and that the legislature should not single out one training mandate when similar requirements are generally left to licensing boards. The Office of the Child Advocate supported the bill, citing cases from 2023 involving non-ambulatory infants with fractures, conflicting medical testimony in court, and a low completion rate for the existing free online course. The Child Advocate said the bill should be mandatory and recurring so providers stay current on evolving science and law. No vote was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Williams give us a little bit of background and overview, and then we're going to take testimony kind
• Please introduce yourself and go ahead with your testimony.
• Please just introduce yourself for the record as you get started with your testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony, Commissioner Jepson.
• Thank you so much for your testimony, Commissioner Jepson.

Bills: HF2254, HF2302, HF2502, HF2315, HF2475, HF2086

Keywords: HF2254, Minnesota child credit, baby bonus, child tax credit, income tax, individual income tax, tax relief, newborn, birth credit, family tax credit, tax refund, advance payment, Department of Revenue, taxable year, parenting, families with children, child credit, state regulations, families, taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:32:52.360> on<01:32:52.639> his uh read read this testimony on his uh read read
• this testimony on his behalf<01:32:54.159> um<01:32:54.360> HB<01:32:54.800> 370
• <01:36:53.040> and questions after his testimony and questions after his testimony and commerce
• And I think that's why Representative Bernardi used the word 'warehousing' in his testimony.
• We will need a pink card from you after your testimony or before, either one.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Then we will take public testimony after the presentation.
• Information about how to register for in-person and remote public testimony was on the legislature's
• Then we will take public testimony after the presentation.
• signed up for public testimony.
• And we have two people signed up for public testimony. Can you bring them up?

Summary: The committee meeting began with a brief explanation of the renamed Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee subcommittee, now called the Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits, and a presentation from the State Auditor’s Office on its current biennium performance audit work plan. The auditor described how topics are selected from a large pool of potential audits and highlighted several ongoing or planned audits, including the Liquor and Cannabis Board, oversight of authorized entities serving students with disabilities, the Quality Home Care Initiative, Medicaid managed care versus fee-for-service costs, the Housing Commission tenant ownership follow-up, DSHS vendor payment patterns, implementation of the Since Time Memorial curriculum, and the Washington State ferry system. Members asked about coordination with JLARC to avoid duplication, and the auditor said the offices exchange work plans, monthly updates, and quarterly coordination meetings. The committee then heard the State Auditor’s performance audit on how charter schools identify and support at-risk students. Auditors reviewed four charter schools—Catalyst Public Schools, Innovation High School, Pinnacles Prep, and Rainier Prep—and focused on English language learners, homeless students, and special education students. The audit found the schools met nearly all legal requirements reviewed, with only one area where two schools partially met a language-access requirement. The schools also used several promising practices, including small-group instruction, culturally responsive environments, and multi-tiered systems of support, though the auditors recommended better documentation of procedures to improve consistency. Families interviewed generally reported positive experiences, while noting resource constraints. Committee members asked about how the four schools were selected, whether the audit compared charter populations to home districts, and how MTSS requirements applied to the schools reviewed. The State Auditor’s Office said the sample was chosen for geographic diversity, student population characteristics, and representation from both authorizers, and that K-2 MTSS requirements were not evaluated because they applied to only one school. Representatives from the Charter School Commission and charter school advocates responded positively, emphasizing technical assistance, collaboration, and sharing best practices across schools. Two public testifiers also supported the report and said it highlighted effective practices that could be expanded across charter and traditional public schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have written testimony, please hand it in and assume we can read it.
• Thank you for your testimony. Members, are there questions of this witness? Adam Bazzaldua.
• Thank you for your testimony, members. Mr. Anchía? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• Thank you for your testimony. Members, are there questions of the witness? I see none.
• Thank you for your testimony. Members, are there questions for this witness? I see none.

Bills: SB231, SB667, SB689, SB825, SB965, SB992, SB1059, SB1220, SB2368, SB2601

Keywords: temporary emergency electric energy facility, temporary generation, emergency power, backup generation, mobile generator, portable generator, grid resilience, power outage restoration, transmission and distribution utility, TDU, Public Utility Commission of Texas, PUCT, Utilities Code Section 39.918, competitive bidding, lease authorization, emergency procurement, bulk power system, locational marginal pricing, reliability model, black start

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we'll receive testimony from two distinguished Americans who have been nominated by President Trump
• In connection with their testimony, so if you would both please stand and raise your right hands, I'll
• Justice, Baby Dog's testimony will be admitted into the record without objection.
• And that's what I was alluding in my testimony of it is time to build a quantum center. supercomputer
• For their testimony today, we sometimes have a chance for a second round. We don't have that today.

Keywords: nominations, Undersecretary of Energy, Undersecretary of Science, Preston Griffith, Dario Gil, energy policy, scientific innovation

Summary: The meeting was convened to discuss several significant nominations, particularly focusing on Preston Wills Griffith III for Undersecretary of Energy and Dr. Dario Gil for Undersecretary of Science. The committee underscored the importance of these roles in shaping American energy policy and scientific innovation. The discussion highlighted the nominees' backgrounds, with Griffith having extensive experience at the Department of Energy and the White House, and Gil bringing expertise in quantum technology and energy research. Members expressed a strong desire to understand the nominees' perspectives on current challenges facing the energy sector, including regulatory mandates and national security concerns. The meeting concluded with a commitment to ensuring thorough evaluations of the candidates and their proposed approaches to pressing issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• Before we begin, I just wanted to make a statement on providing testimony at this hearing.
• All witnesses will be testifying in person, and all testimony comments are limited to the bill at hand
• Is there any public testimony or members of the public who would like to state their position?
• This is really important testimony, especially for the author.
• So I appreciate the testimony of how to improve it and to work with the author.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Military and Veterans Affairs met as a subcommittee because a quorum was initially lacking, and heard six bills. AB 81 by Assemblymember Ta would require CalVet to study the mental health needs of women veterans; supporters from county veterans service officers, veterans organizations, and behavioral health groups said women veterans face higher rates of military sexual trauma, PTSD, depression, and suicide, while no opposition appeared. The bill was later passed 7-0 and re-referred to Appropriations. AB 826 by Assemblymember Gonzalez would prohibit unaccredited individuals or businesses from charging veterans fees to file or assist with VA benefits claims, impose a civil penalty, and direct penalty revenue to veterans services and district attorneys. Supporters argued the bill would curb predatory “claim sharks” and protect veterans from exploitation, while opponents from private claims consulting firms and several veterans said the measure could restrict access to legitimate help and should be narrowed to target bad actors instead of banning paid assistance broadly. After extensive testimony and discussion about federal law, accreditation, and possible amendments, the committee passed the bill 8-0 and re-referred it to Judiciary. AB 556 by Assemblymember Patterson would clarify that campus-level mandatory fees are covered under the CalVet fee waiver for dependents of certain veterans and Medal of Honor recipients. Supporters said the bill would fulfill the state’s promise to veterans’ families, while concerns were raised about fiscal impacts on CSU campuses and the need for more precise cost estimates. The bill was passed 6-0 and sent to Appropriations. The committee also adopted its rules 7-0 and approved the consent calendar, which included AB 264, AB 1508, and AB 1509, all re-referred to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, we're going to resume testimony on House Bill 1482. The chair calls our next witness, Mr.
• Again, my testimony today is not in opposition to this.
• Uh, so thank you so much, uh, for your, for your testimony, uh, as it, uh, actually relates to a couple
• If not, we appreciate your testimony. Thank you for being here at this time.
• I know you just heard his testimony, but maybe you've already been talking about it before, or I hope