Video & Transcript Research : 'Section 504'
Page 20 of 500
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Actions under section 39 a point zero zero two of the education code the substitute limits the scope
- I noticed in section 4 the committee sub and I'm not sure if it's still in this one the you had the word
- And last, the substitute adds a new section.
- 504.
- 504 plan that had XYZ accommodations or I had an IEP plan that had XYZ accommodations, and then you
Bills:
SB530, SB757, SB769, SB1085, SB1241, SB1242, SB1409, SB1878, SB2138, SB2314, SB2231, SB2361, SB2431, SJR59
Keywords:
accreditation, postsecondary education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, baccalaureate degrees, junior colleges, program delivery, faculty recruitment, higher education, performance standards, student loan debt, degree programs, funding, students with disabilities, accessibility, enrollment, report, SB 1085, Sul Ross State University, Rio Grande College, Del Rio
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- In section 29.358, which is the section that describes the requirements for pre-approval for different
- Article 7, Section 1 is a mandate just to create a system. That's it.
- We'd like to see that return to that section.
- I understand the anti-fraud provisions in Section 29.359B3B.
- My second recommendation is Section 29.373, Section 8, which specifies that you're not awarding attorney's
Summary:
The Senate Committee on Education K-16 convened with a quorum, adopted its committee rules, and heard opening remarks from members introducing staff and outlining priorities for the session. Members from both parties emphasized education as a major issue, while several Republicans framed the committee’s work around school choice and parent empowerment. Senator West and other Democrats stressed protecting public schools, listening to Texans, and considering the effects of vouchers or education savings accounts on school districts and communities.
Chairman Creighton laid out Senate Bill 2, the Texas Education Freedom Act, describing it as a universal education savings account program modeled on similar programs in other states. He said the bill would provide about $200 million for a universal eligibility pool and additional funding for students with disabilities and lower-income families, with priority weighting for former public school students. He also highlighted anti-fraud measures, vendor pre-approval, criminal background checks, cybersecurity protections, annual testing requirements for participating students, and the use of the Comptroller rather than TEA to administer the program. Creighton repeatedly said the bill is not a voucher and argued it would not take money from public schools, which he said would receive separate historic funding increases.
Members questioned Creighton about the 500% of federal poverty line definition, the adequacy of the $10,000 ESA amount, whether the program would favor students already in private school, how microschools and homeschool pods would fit, and whether the bill protects religious liberty and private-school autonomy. Democrats raised concerns about disability protections, 504 students, foster children, public-school funding, open records, and the historical context of vouchers. Republicans generally supported the bill as a way to expand options for parents and students, while also asking about administration, fraud prevention, and data security. After member questions, the committee began invited testimony, with EdChoice President Robert Inlow presenting in support of SB 2 and citing the growth and reported success of school choice programs nationwide.
HI
Transcript Highlights:
- On page 251, Law 504, sequence 218-001, House-Senate adjustment: eight permanent positions and $2,942,937
- On page 251, law 504,<00:40:00.079>
sequence <00:40:01.000>218-001, <00:40:02.000>House - <00:40:02.160>
Senate 504, sequence 218-001, House Senate 504, sequence 218-001, House Senate - LNR 504, sequence 2100-001, Senate, on page 291.
- LNR 101, sequence 100-001 and 101-001; LNR 401, sequence 2070-001; LNR 402, sequence 2070-001; LNR 504
AL
Transcript Highlights:
- It lists the code sections number.
- Yes, as classified by the code sections that I referenced.
- Well, we still can put it on that same section... you can have it if it's that section. section, you
- can have it if it's section 31-2-D50.
- Replace line 633 on page 23 with the following: "Section 2.
Bills:
SJR 18, SCR 5, SCR 13, SCR 25, SB 3, SB 6, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15, SB 17, SB 18, SB 35, SB 388, SB 412, SB 441, SB 495, SB 666, SB 687, SB 706, SB 740, SB 815, SB 842, SB 917, SB 925, SB 995, SB 1006, SB 1281, SB 1300, SB 1379, SB 1451, SB 1902, SJR 36, SJR 18, SJR 12, SCR 13, SCR 25, SCR 5, SCR 22, SB 565, SB 372, SB 495, SB 842, SB 765, SB 62, SB 19, SB 18, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 706, SB 847, SB 290, SB 11, SB 10, SB 13, SB 412, SB 441, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 917, SB 925, SB 388, SB 1902, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 35, SB 6, SB 815, SB 3, SB 1281, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1451, SB 1061, SB 15, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 17, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 12, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SCR 12, SCR 24, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SJR 18, SB 11, SB 441, SB 10, SB 18, SB 412, SB 495, SR 238, SR 264, SR 266, SR 267, SR 268, SR 270, SR 271, SR 272, SR 278, SB 1169, SB 1169
Keywords:
capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- So, but your bill goes on to the penal code. section of defining harmful material and rather than Hey
- Section A. A.
- so different classes. of taxes so income tax federally is a pretty broad umbrella with different sections
- President, I rise to bring a point of order in that this bill violates Article 1, Section 7 of the Texas
- I was reading the bill and I was highlighting some sections of the bill.
Bills:
SJR18, SCR5, SCR13, SCR25, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB35, SB388, SB412, SB441, SB495, SB666, SB687, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB917, SB925, SB995, SB1006, SB1281, SB1300, SB1379, SB1451, SB1902, SJR36, SJR18, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SB565, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB412, SB441, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SCR12, SCR24, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840
Keywords:
capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
Fiscal Committee (12/19/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- And there is a class line on the 504 class line that indicates that any remaining funds must be paid
- <00:15:46.320>
is grant obviously one of the sections is grant obviously one of the sections - The report is presented in two sections.
- The first section is the management letter section prepared by auditors, and it contains our report on
- The second section is the financial section, which contains our independent auditor's report followed
Summary:
The Fiscal Committee met on December 19, with Senators Long and Lang serving as replacements. The committee approved the November 21 minutes and adopted the consent calendar after removing two Department of Health and Human Services items for separate discussion. It then took up an HHS request involving nursing facility rates, where Nathan White explained that $2.2 million would be transferred from a long-term care Medicaid eligibility contract to the nursing facilities budget. He said the funds would offset an otherwise projected 3.9% average rate decrease and bring the overall average change to zero for the next six months, with rates reset again in July under state law. Members asked about the budget adjustment factor, bed counts, and whether additional funds could raise rates further; White said the factor is statutory, capped at 28.76%, and that more money would lower the factor and increase rates. The committee also corrected a date in the request from February 1, 2025 to February 1, 2026, and approved the item.
The committee next approved another HHS item related to rural health transformation grants. Members confirmed the request covered the full amount applied for this biennium, and asked about the technology component. HHS said the grant is not solely about AI, but about broader technology improvements such as electronic medical records, back-end systems, and tools to improve access and sustainability in underserved areas. The committee approved that item as well.
The Judicial Council then requested funds for contract attorneys providing indigent defense on a fixed-fee basis. The council said current funds had already been exhausted and that the new appropriation would be used immediately. Members questioned the size of the request and the number of people awaiting counsel; the council reported about 150 incarcerated people and about 300 non-incarcerated people waiting for counsel, more than in recent years. It attributed the increase to competition for attorneys, public defender offices closing intake in some locations because of caseload limits, and broader case and court-system changes. One member raised constitutional concerns about delays in counsel for incarcerated defendants. The committee ultimately amended the request downward to $1 million, approved it, and then approved a motion to place several annual financial reports on file and release them to the public when available. The committee also discussed dashboard reporting from HHS, asking for more detail on community mental health center caseloads and budget-reduction information, and HHS agreed to provide more useful monthly detail.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Higher Education Jun 21st, 2026 at 12:00 pm
Joint Committee on Higher Education
Transcript Highlights:
- was actually that there wasn't communication between the administrators and the school that handle 504
- So typically when you set up a 504 plan for your child with celiac disease, you're working with an assistant
- Like, the food service director is not part of a 504 meeting, and so that's a really big problem.
- .one of the things that at Boston Children's we would continue to ask for is, when you schedule the 504
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Higher Education held a hearing on two late-filed bills, S. 2927 and H. 5012, titled An Act Relative to Students Accessing Food and Nutritional Information, filed by Senator Joan Lovely and Representative Michelle Badger. The bills would require schools to make clear, centralized online information available about gluten-free and allergen-free meals, including menus, food safety procedures, and contact information, so students with celiac disease and other medically necessary dietary restrictions can safely participate in universal school meal programs. Committee members and the bill sponsors emphasized that the measure is intended to improve transparency, equity, and access within the Commonwealth’s universal free breakfast and lunch program.
Testimony came from students, parents, physicians, and advocates, many of whom described celiac disease as a serious autoimmune condition requiring a strict lifelong gluten-free diet. Witnesses said families often struggle to find reliable school meal information, and that lack of communication between school administrators, nurses, and food service staff can lead families to opt out of school meals even when safe options exist. Medical witnesses from Boston Children’s, Mass General, and Beth Israel said the bill addresses a real barrier identified in research and could help prevent health problems, missed school, and long-term complications from gluten exposure. Several witnesses also noted that the bill’s approach could benefit students with food allergies more broadly.
Committee members praised the testimony, especially from young student witnesses, and discussed practical issues such as cross-contamination, 504 plans, and whether schools already have the underlying information needed to comply. One member suggested the Department of Public Health might be able to address some of the issue through regulations, similar to a prior restaurant allergy-protocol change. No vote was taken during the hearing, and the committee closed after hearing from all panels and the bill sponsors, who asked for favorable consideration.
NM
Transcript Highlights:
- So the retirement in Section B, the retirement is referencing this ceremony.
- In the section, it's those sections that talk about it in different terms that elevate it to racketeering
- I think it's cleaner and easier just to strike section C.
- So, section 3 of the bill, starting on page 5, any changes to it, right?
- Please note all those present voting in favor; you have a do pass on SB 504.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Now, looking at SB 2 in some detail, it says in Section 29.36(a), B, I read this to you real quickly,
- It says in Section 29.36(a), (b), I read this to you real quickly: state agency or state official may
- Section 29.36 of SB 2, Section 29.368, part B, says a state agency or state official may not adopt a
- Accommodations under IEPs and 504s.
- They don't have it during a sectional period. I think so.
Keywords:
election laws, attorney general, prosecution, criminal offenses, voting integrity, education, property values, school districts, comptroller, funding formula
Summary:
The Senate Committee on Education K-16 met to hear testimony on a full agenda of education-related bills. Several measures were laid out and left pending, including HB 322 to allow JET Grant funds to be used for subscription-based and ongoing technology costs for career and technical education; HB 3062 to require fentanyl and drug-poisoning prevention instruction for entering college students; HB 121 to update school safety laws, including TEA peace officer commissions, annual renewal of certain safety exceptions, new reporting requirements, and special education behavior threat assessment changes; HB 3627 to let the State Board of Education chair employ staff; HB 5515 to curb inflated shipping and handling charges on instructional materials; HB 2674 to prohibit new state regulation of homeschool programs; HB 2310 to require a statewide strategic plan for early learning and inclusion for young children with disabilities; HB 367 to standardize documentation for excused absences due to serious illness; HB 1178 to speed certification for out-of-state educators and military spouses; and HB 1481 to expand cell phone restrictions to the full school day.
Testimony was generally supportive on most bills, with some concerns raised on HB 121 about school district police departments investigating misconduct and on HB 2674 about how it would interact with the new ESA program in SB 2. HB 5515 drew support from instructional materials coordinators who described extreme shipping invoices and argued the bill would restore transparency and fiscal responsibility. HB 2310 was supported by disability advocates and early learning groups, who said a coordinated state plan would improve access and inclusion for children with disabilities. HB 367 was presented as a simple clarification to reduce confusion for medically vulnerable students and families, and HB 1178 was described by TEA as a modest pathway that would help bring experienced out-of-state teachers into Texas schools more quickly.
HB 126, updating Texas’ NIL law to align with the pending House settlement and allow direct payments and pre-enrollment NIL agreements, received extensive testimony from university counsel and committee questioning about the settlement, recruiting, and future college athletics rules. HB 1481, expanding school cell phone restrictions from instructional time to the entire school day, drew strong support from parents, students, educators, and advocates who linked phones to distraction, cyberbullying, and mental health harms; one teacher asked for flexibility so phones could still be used for limited academic tasks. No bills were voted out; each measure heard was left pending subject to the call of the chair, and the committee then recessed to attend the floor session.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Pre-K, kindergarten screen time prohibition 3/4/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- >> Yes, so the two amendments clarify some of the language around IEP and 504 plans, and when students
- use for students with an individualized family service plan, an individualized education plan, or a 504
- For example, there may be a student who has a 504 plan because there's a... ...diabetes monitor on the
FL
Florida 2026 Regular Session
Appropriations Committee on Pre-K - 12 Education Jan 15th, 2025
Appropriations Committee on Pre-K - 12 Education
Transcript Highlights:
- As I previously mentioned, there are five sections within the bureau.
- One of our sections within the bureau is around dispute resolution and monitoring.
- Through the Fiddler system, are we also dealing with the 504 plans for behavioral issues as well?
- The services and structure of CARD is in section 1004.55, regional autism centers.
- The services and structure of CARD is in section 1004.55, regional autism centers.
Summary:
The committee held its first meeting and received an overview of the Pre-K-12 education appropriations jurisdiction and base budget. Staff explained that education funding is driven largely by enrollment and per-student formulas, with most money coming from state and local sources. The presentation highlighted the major budget areas: early learning, the Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP), non-FEFP K-12 programs, federal programs, and the State Board of Education. Members asked about instructional materials funding and how scholarship students who return to public schools are counted and funded; staff explained that instructional materials remain in the base and that funding depends on survey timing, with districts ultimately funded through the enrollment count process.
The committee then reviewed federal IDEA funding for students with disabilities. Department of Education officials explained how IDEA Part B funds are split between state set-asides and local educational agencies, and noted that Florida ranked fourth nationally in total IDEA Part B funding and received a 95% state determination for meeting IDEA requirements. They also described the bureau’s responsibilities, including monitoring, dispute resolution, instructional support, and the Hope Florida unit for ages 3 to 5. Members asked for more information on student performance outcomes and how the state measures success beyond compliance, and the department agreed to provide follow-up data.
The final major topic was the Florida Diagnostic and Learning Resources System (FDLRS), including associate centers, multidisciplinary centers, and specialized centers for deaf/hard of hearing and visually impaired students. Presenters described services such as child find, family support, assessments, professional learning, accessible instructional materials, and technical assistance. Committee members focused on whether families and schools have equal access to services across the state, how IEP disputes and reevaluations are handled, and whether more support is needed for parents, teachers, and rural districts. FDLRS representatives said they do not write IEPs but help connect families to districts, provide training and assessments, and support compliance and data collection; they also emphasized staffing and resource needs, especially for low-incidence disabilities and multilingual family outreach.
TX
Texas 89th Regular
Senate Committee on Education K-16 Jan 28th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- In section 29.358, which is the section that describes the requirements for pre-approval for different
- However, this section in the bill doesn't require This section in the bill doesn't require that the results
- My second recommendation is Section 29.373, Section 8, which specifies that you're not awarding attorney's
- My second recommendation is Section 29.373, Section 8, which specifies that you're not awarding attorney's
- tutoring, ...Section 29.358.
Summary:
The Senate Committee on Education K-16 convened with a quorum, adopted its committee rules, and heard opening remarks from members introducing staff and outlining priorities for the session. Several senators emphasized support for public education, teacher pay and safety, parental choice, and the combined K-16 jurisdiction of the committee. The chair also reviewed hearing procedures, including public testimony registration and time limits.
The main item was Senate Bill 2, the Texas Education Freedom Act, laid out by Chairman Creighton. He described the bill as an education savings account program intended to expand school choice, with a $200 million universal eligibility pool and an additional $800 million targeted to students with disabilities and lower-income families. He said the bill includes anti-fraud safeguards, criminal background checks for vendors, reporting requirements, data protections, and annual testing for participating students, while not imposing STAAR on private schools or homeschoolers. He also said the bill removes a prior hold-harmless provision for public schools and is separate from public school funding and teacher pay legislation.
Members questioned the bill’s income threshold, lottery and priority structure, treatment of homeschoolers, microschools, charter schools, religious freedom protections, citizenship/lawful presence language, cybersecurity, open records, and disability-related issues, including whether 504 students and foster children should be included. Creighton said the bill is designed to prioritize former public school students with disabilities or lower incomes, while also allowing universal eligibility within the program’s first funding tier, and that the Comptroller would oversee vendor screening and cybersecurity rules. He said the bill does not direct curriculum or interfere with religious beliefs and that amendments may be offered later on citizenship and other issues. After member questions, the committee began invited testimony, starting with EdChoice representative Robert Inlow, who testified in support of SB 2 and cited national growth in school choice programs and studies he said show positive effects for students and public schools.
HI
Hawaii 2025 Regular Session
WAM, WAM, WAM DEFER Public Hearings 04-03-2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Removing the repeal of HRS 237-24.9 on page 60, section 17; HRS 237-24.31 on page 20, section 6; and
- Removing the repeal of HRS 237-24.9 on page 60, section 17; HRS 237-24.31 on page 20, section 6; and
- Removing the repeal of HRS 237-24.9 on page 60, section 17; HRS 237-24.31 on page 20, section 6; and
- removing<00:23:49.120>
sections <00:23:49.600>three section two and removing sections - on lands acquired through this section. on lands acquired through this section.
Summary:
The committee heard testimony and then took up House Bill 1369, which would repeal several tax credits and exemptions, including the renewable fuels production tax credit. Testimony was overwhelmingly opposed: Hawaii Gas, the Hawaii Renewable Fuels Coalition, and the Tax Foundation all raised concerns, with opponents arguing the renewable fuels credit has supported major local investment, cleaner fuel production, and energy resilience, while Hawaii Gas warned repeal would raise costs for customers. The Department of Taxation said it did not take a position but provided revenue estimates, saying the bill would increase revenues by about $33.8 million in FY 2026 and $121.7 million in FY 2027; DBEDT said it would follow up on broader economic impacts. The chair proposed a series of amendments that removed some repeals, added five-year sunsets to certain exemptions, narrowed or conditioned others, and tied the renewable fuels exemption to a dollar-for-dollar match for renewable fuel production certified by the state energy officer. The committee recommended passage with amendments, and the motion was adopted with multiple members voting with reservations.
The committee then moved through a series of other measures. HB 159, HB 244, HB 280, HB 316, HB 716, HB 1298, and HB 1295 were recommended for passage, with HB 1295 amended to change a date to 2050. HB 455 was amended to remove the Hawaii Startup Business Loan Program language and instead fund DBEDT contracting for startup financing and support, excluding businesses already eligible for the community-based economic development loan program. HB 504 was amended to add non-recurring appropriations for the Hawaii Tourism Authority, conditioned on formal commitments to purchase local products under the HRS 27-8 timeline; members discussed the cruise passenger tax and where the revenue would go, and the bill was passed with amendments.
HB 606 was amended to recognize DHHL authority over mercantile projects licenses, remove some reporting requirements, and replace the appropriation with $25 million for mercantile projects and $25 million for repair and maintenance. HB 1378 was amended to allow the foundation to enter public-private partnerships, adjust appropriation language, and cap a proposed limit at $15 million, with the committee noting the changes addressed concerns raised in testimony from BNF and the attorney general. HB 974 was deferred indefinitely because the House had already passed SB 1501. Finally, HB 1007 was amended to rename the transit-oriented development infrastructure district program as the transit-oriented community improvement program, consolidate the boards into one, expand board membership, add conflict-of-interest provisions, and allow legislative designation of areas; after discussion about HCDA’s role and the stadium district, the measure was adopted with one reservation.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Could you go through this section by section and explain what the difference is between your amendment
- Um, three sections: one, it moved 2025 to 2026.
- Pursuant to Rule 8, Section 1. Mr.
- 3, looking at the newly created Section 320267.
- I raise a point of order under Rule 32, Section...
Bills:
SB15, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SB6, SB2878, SB13, SB30, SJR87, SB7, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB57, SB512, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB1346, SB2753, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB552, SB646, SJR1, SB15, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SB2501, SB66, SB268, SB331, SB618, SB414, SB1394, SB2425, SB898, SB993, SB442, SB735, SB784, SB2538, SB1919, SB1013, SB2215, SB2322, SB626, SB570, SB747, SB2183, SB673, SB1015, SB1447, SB1370, SB1784, SB1897, SB2873, SB2891, SB2933, SB2540, SB2681, SB2695, SB1965, SB2203, SB872, SB875, SB1030, SB1277, SB1730, SB1681, SB1152, SB2969, SB2747, SB2705, SB2541, SB1708, SB2080, SB2721, SB1986, SB2392, SB2539, SB2857, SB2799, SB2785, SB2782, SB1531, SB1927, SB1263, SB1098, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SCR9, SB21, SB1198, SB1405, SB2601, SB2778, HB5560, HB762, HB1584, HB 107, HB 114, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323, HB4341, HB6, HB171, HB143, HB449, HB3486, HB4263, HB5246, HB2, HB2011, SB17
Keywords:
SB 15, Texas Local Government Code, zoning preemption, housing affordability, small lots, lot size, lot density, single-family zoning, residential subdivision, municipal land use, local control, state preemption, parking requirements, setbacks, infill development, missing middle housing, lot width, lot depth, homebuilders, housing supply
NH
Transcript Highlights:
- However, students on 504 plans are considered to be regular education students, and all costs and their
- However, um students on 504 plans would However, um students on 504 plans would are<01:48:09.160>
- The resident district is required to provide transportation for special education or 504 plan students
- Disputes over placement decisions and services of special education and 504 students could end up in
- services of special education and 504 services of special education and 504 students<02:14:02.760
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Finance Division III (02/03/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- <00:05:41.880>
or them at the end of each section or them at the end of each section or throughout - So the slide nine really breaks down into three sections.
- Sometimes it’s a 504. I’m not sure. It’s one of the 504 plans.
- section in terms of there are some risks section in terms of there are some risks as<01:39:35.760>
- little education when it says section little education when it says section 1955<01:51:29.560>
Summary:
The House Finance Division III held an informational hearing on Medicaid, Medicare, Choices for Independence, and related financing, while postponing nursing facility financing and the county cap discussion to a later date. DHHS officials Ann Landry, Jonathan Ballard, and Medicaid Director Henry Litman provided an overview of Medicaid’s role, noting it is a federal-state partnership with state-specific eligibility and benefits, and emphasizing that Medicaid is a major funding and programmatic support for other DHHS initiatives. They also distinguished Medicaid from Medicare and explained that Medicaid funding is not the same as grant funding, though some providers may also receive federal grants through other channels.
The presentation focused on New Hampshire’s relatively small Medicaid program and why it differs from national averages. Officials said about 184,000 residents are covered, roughly one in seven Granite Staters compared with one in five nationally, and attributed the difference largely to the state’s higher per-capita income and older population. They highlighted that about 65% of Medicaid-enrolled adults in New Hampshire are working, that only 22% of births are covered by Medicaid versus 42% nationally, and that the state’s uninsured rate is lower than the national rate. Members asked about covered services, income limits, federal matching rates, and the names of optional eligibility groups; staff explained that New Hampshire offers the optional groups discussed, with matching rates varying by category, including 90% for Granite Advantage and certain other groups, and 65% for children above the required level.
A substantial portion of the hearing covered eligibility rules and recent policy changes. Officials reviewed the history of Medicaid, including HCBS waivers, the CFI program, Katie Beckett, the Olmstead decision, the ACA, and the end of continuous enrollment after the public health emergency. They also discussed the 2023 legislative expansion of postpartum coverage from 60 days to 12 months and child eligibility changes. In response to questions, DHHS said it is tracking utilization and costs for the postpartum expansion and reported that many maternal deaths occur after the prior 60-day coverage period, often involving substance use disorder or suicide; they said the longer coverage is intended to improve access to treatment and prevention. The committee also walked through household-income examples, clarified that Medicaid eligibility is based on household income and categorical rules, and confirmed that Granite Advantage ends at 138% of the federal poverty level unless another categorical basis applies. No votes were taken, and the hearing remained informational.
LA
Louisiana 2026 Regular Session
House of Representatives Apr 22nd, 2026
Louisiana House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- What the amendment does is delete Section 2 of this legislation, which is a commission that no longer
- So we're just deleting that whole section. Are there any questions on the amendment?
- So right now, currently in the statute, Section 1243, there's various penalties for various parishes
- So right now, currently in the statute, Section 1243, there's various penalties for various parishes
- Senate Bill 504 by Senator Car...
Bills:
HR188, HR189, HR190, HR191, HR179, HR180, HR181, HR182, HR183, HR185, HR186, HR187, HCR75, HCR76, HCR77, HCR78, HCR79, SCR24, SCR36, SCR39, SB64, SB107, SB152, SB185, SB217, SB232, SB278, SB290, SB294, SB320, SB321, SB419, SB424, SB436, SB440, SB468, SB470, SB476, SB482, SB489, HCR32, SCR11, HB12, HB42, HB205, HB222, HB267, HB324, HB325, HB350, HB478, HB610, HB617, HB679, HB745, HB749, HB797, HB807, HB821, HB896, HB979, HB992, HB1000, HB1024, HB1050, HB1166, HB1172, HB1173, HB1193, HB1207, HB1218, HB1223, SB256, SB180, HR1, HR17, HCR5, HCR4, HCR47, HB59, HB74, HB159, HB330, HB364, HB414, HB458, HB525, HB568, HB786, HB1008, HB1033, HB1034, HB1041, HB1062, HB1070, HB1079, HB1112, HB1118, HB1139, HB1151, HB1176, HB1182, HB1196, HB1214, HB1241, HB87, HB115, HB162, HB368, HB433, HB441, HB447, HB466, HB481, HB741, HB1242, HB362, HB893, HB990, HB1007, HB1153, HB1243, SB162, SB349, SB350, SB382, SB383, SB127, SB244, HB615, HB864, HB1103, HB1175, HB31, HB225, HB608, HB664, HB897, HB977, HB1003, HB1160, HB1180, HB911, HB306, HB366, HB1161, HB1230, HB181, HB901, HR20, HR74, HB284, HB393, HB459, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB772, HB773, HB996, HB1035, HB1058, HB1082, HB1113, HB1189, HB1234, HB1240
Keywords:
hunting dogs, field trials, working dogs, dog training, greyhound protection, Farm Bill, federal overreach, sportsmen, sportswomen, wildlife management, conservation, rural communities, Louisiana hunting, hunting tradition, animal welfare, dog breeders, dog owners, outdoor recreation, Kathy Taylor, musical achievements
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
House Floor Session Apr 8th, 2025 at 01:00 pm
North Dakota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- new sections to chapter 26.1-39, a new section of chapter 26.1-44, and a new subsection to section 26.1
- Section 4 exempts large commercial risks from notice requirements...
- Section 7 and 8 offer new language that clarifies... ...managed repair program.
- Sections 11 through 14 provide clarity for risk retention groups...
- Senate Bill 2216 is a bill for an act to create a new section in chapter 20.1-02 and a new section to
Summary:
The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present. The chamber received notice that the governor had signed several bills, and the Speaker appointed conference committees after the Senate failed to concur with House amendments on Senate Bills 2180 and 2330. The House also approved several sixth-order amendments without objection before moving into reconsideration and final action on House Bill 1300, which concerns legislative term limits. After procedural motions to reconsider and undo concurrence, the House voted to do not concur on HB 1300, sending it back to the chair’s lap for further negotiation.
A major portion of the meeting focused on Senate Bill 2232, which changes mandatory reporting rules for prenatal exposure to controlled substances and alcohol. Supporters said the bill is intended to keep pregnant women in prenatal care by removing an automatic CPS report if a woman tests positive but enters and stays on a treatment plan; opponents argued it weakens protections for unborn children and creates vague standards for mandated reporters. The House passed the bill 57-36. The chamber also passed Senate Bill 2280 unanimously, establishing timelines and standards for prior authorization in health insurance, and passed Senate Bill 2186, which creates a civil remedy for interference with court-ordered parenting time, a child custody review task force, and related reporting requirements.
The House then took up Senate Bill 2239, an apprenticeship grant program with a $1.1 million appropriation, but rejected it 14-79 after the committee said the program lacked a clear administrative home. Senate Bill 2241, creating a framework for public charter schools, generated extensive debate over school choice, local control, funding, staffing, and rural impacts; supporters emphasized flexibility and community-driven options, while opponents warned about diversion of funds and weak guardrails. The bill passed 64-29. The House also passed Senate Bill 2024, the Department of Environmental Quality budget, after discussion about federal funding uncertainty; Senate Bill 2374, updating property insurance laws and market rules; Senate Bill 2216, creating a waterfowl habitat restoration stamp; Senate Bill 2245, allowing certain duck and goose hunting from anchored floating craft; and Senate Bill 233, establishing a distressed ambulance services process, which drew questions about how affected districts and neighboring services would be involved.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- in Texas by a strong network of allied organizations, including the Northern and Southern Texas Sections
- Members, that concludes the morning call. 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504
- is required to negotiate and finalize the sale. lease in accordance with the existing laws under section
Bills:
SB66, SB317, SB393, SB397, SB456, SB614, SB628, SB629, SB636, SB715, SB731, SB801, SB872, SB905, SB986, SB1012, SB1013, SB1015, SB1032, SB1113, SB1181, SB1212, SB1241, SB1250, SB1278, SB1285, SB1376, SB1444, SB1449, SB1524, SB1525, SB1528, SB1556, SB1588, SB1660, SB1704, SB1708, SB1802, SB1833, SB1844, SB1854, SB1863, SB1957, SB1959, SB1965, SB1999, SB2035, SB2056, SB2082, SB2119, SB2138, SB2165, SB2199, SB2201, SB2203, SB2245, SB2284, SB2419, SB2422, SB2452, SB2487, SB2523, SB2529, SB2533, SB2541, SB2586, SB2595, SB2605, SB2615, SB2675, SB2690, SB2717, SB2753, SB2778, SB2835, SB2841, SB2891, SB2929, SB2933, SB3016, SB3039, SB3044, HB912, HB2525, SJR3, SB5, SB29, SB326, SB494, SB530, SB769, SB783, SB963, SB1238, SB1271, SB1786, SB1967, SB2312, SB72, SB616, SB1143, SB1172, SB1267, SB1273, SB1506, SB1759, SB2361, SB1, SB260, SB1637, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR48, SCR19, SB2023, SB1524, SB2422, SB2119, SB2753, SB1863, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1376, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1845, SB2681, SB2199, SB2458, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB1013, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB2284, SB2929, SB2595, SB715, SB1640, SB1241, SB2538, SB1449, SB2529, SB986, SB1181, SB1359, SB2245, SB410, SB1234, SB456, SB1012, SB2926, SB2138, SB2615, SB2972, SB2841, SB3016, SB1856, SB2035, SB1528, SB1373, SB672, SB2891, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB1285, SB1959, SB1454, SB2520, SB2541, SB1708, SB1237, SB1844, SB1586, SB3039, SB2819, SB66, SB629, SB1015, SB2342, SB2903, SB2933, SB1965, SB2477, SB3029, SB2605, SB2419, SB1957, SB375, SB250, SB777, SB628, SB2523, SB2367, SB2703, SB2608, SB2778, SB3044, SB2965, SB2521, SB865, SB1032, SB2165, SB2501, SB2675, SB2452, SB2835, SB872, SB1212, SB1278, SB1588, SB1602, SB1704, SB1723, SB1833, SB1858, SB1946, SB2009, SB2177, SB2460, SB2785, SB2373, SB1660, SB614, SB867, SB1608, SB1525, SB905, SB640, SB2487, SB1698, SB383, SB705, SB748, SB1113, SB1117, SB1802, SB2340, SB2586, SB2680, SB2690, SB2994, SB2747, SB1950, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB3059, SB2782, SB2781, SB2637, SB2633, SB2337, SB2334, SB1861, SB2043, SB1367, SB946, SB945, SB2857, SB128, SB571, SB1263, SB3058, SB612, SB2221, SB2587, SB2044, SB2363, SB2713, HB1109, HB1392, HB22, HB2525, HB3093, HB517, HB912, HB1130, HB142, HB1689, HB2018, SB2311, SB1986, SB2565, SB2943, SB1888, SB2417, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SB3036, SB3057, SB3056, SB3043, SB3037, SB3050, SB3063, SB3047, SB3035, HJR98, HJR99, HB136, HB2884, HB1393, HB2730, HB1399, HB1244, HB467, HB331, HB2559
Keywords:
disability, supported decision-making, legal assistance, confidentiality, access to justice, autonomy, civil rights, advocacy, monuments, memorials, public property, historical significance, civil penalties, local governance, SB 393, Sparks, Middleton, local government, political subdivision, public securities
TX
Bills:
SB66, SB317, SB393, SB397, SB456, SB614, SB628, SB629, SB636, SB715, SB731, SB801, SB872, SB905, SB986, SB1012, SB1013, SB1015, SB1032, SB1113, SB1181, SB1212, SB1241, SB1250, SB1278, SB1285, SB1376, SB1444, SB1449, SB1524, SB1525, SB1528, SB1556, SB1588, SB1660, SB1704, SB1708, SB1802, SB1833, SB1844, SB1854, SB1863, SB1957, SB1959, SB1965, SB1999, SB2035, SB2056, SB2082, SB2119, SB2138, SB2165, SB2199, SB2201, SB2203, SB2245, SB2284, SB2419, SB2422, SB2452, SB2487, SB2523, SB2529, SB2533, SB2541, SB2586, SB2595, SB2605, SB2615, SB2675, SB2690, SB2717, SB2753, SB2778, SB2835, SB2841, SB2891, SB2929, SB2933, SB3016, SB3039, SB3044, HB912, HB2525, SJR3, SB5, SB29, SB326, SB494, SB530, SB769, SB783, SB963, SB1238, SB1271, SB1786, SB1967, SB2312, SB72, SB616, SB1143, SB1172, SB1267, SB1273, SB1506, SB1759, SB2361, SB1, SB260, SB1637, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR48, SCR19, SB2023, SB1524, SB2422, SB2119, SB2753, SB1863, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1376, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB517, SB1200, SB1845, SB2681, SB2199, SB2458, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB1013, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB2284, SB2929, SB2595, SB715, SB1640, SB1241, SB2538, SB1449, SB2529, SB986, SB1181, SB1359, SB2245, SB410, SB1234, SB456, SB1012, SB2926, SB2138, SB2615, SB2972, SB2841, SB3016, SB1856, SB2035, SB1528, SB1373, SB672, SB2891, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB1285, SB1959, SB1454, SB2520, SB2541, SB1708, SB1237, SB1844, SB1586, SB3039, SB2819, SB66, SB629, SB1015, SB2342, SB2903, SB2933, SB1965, SB2477, SB3029, SB2605, SB2419, SB1957, SB375, SB250, SB777, SB628, SB2523, SB2367, SB2703, SB2608, SB2778, SB3044, SB2965, SB2521, SB865, SB1032, SB2165, SB2501, SB2675, SB2452, SB2835, SB872, SB1212, SB1278, SB1588, SB1602, SB1704, SB1723, SB1833, SB1858, SB1946, SB2009, SB2177, SB2460, SB2785, SB2373, SB1660, SB614, SB867, SB1608, SB1525, SB905, SB640, SB2487, SB1698, SB383, SB705, SB748, SB1113, SB1117, SB1802, SB2340, SB2586, SB2680, SB2690, SB2994, SB2747, SB1950, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB3059, SB2782, SB2781, SB2637, SB2633, SB2337, SB2334, SB1861, SB2043, SB1367, SB946, SB945, SB2857, SB128, SB571, SB1263, SB3058, SB612, SB2221, SB2587, SB2044, SB2363, SB2713, HB1109, HB1392, HB22, HB2525, HB3093, HB517, HB912, HB1130, HB142, HB1689, HB2018, SB2311, SB1986, SB2565, SB2943, SB1888, SB2417, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SB3036, SB3057, SB3056, SB3043, SB3037, SB3050, SB3063, SB3047, SB3035, HJR98, HJR99, HB136, HB2884, HB1393, HB2730, HB1399, HB1244, HB467, HB331, HB2559
Keywords:
disability, supported decision-making, legal assistance, confidentiality, access to justice, autonomy, civil rights, advocacy, monuments, memorials, public property, historical significance, civil penalties, local governance, SB 393, Sparks, Middleton, local government, political subdivision, public securities