Transcript Highlights:

• That's why I'm urging Nevada lawmakers to pass SB 156 and establish the special counsel for the prevention
• Communities have had a clear voice in the solutions being implemented, and lawmakers have been able to
• made earlier in the presentation that a lot of information about this issue is already available to lawmakers

Bills: SB156

Committee: Assembly Government Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm asking my lawmakers. His intention was to send me home to die.
• My lawmakers, his intention was to send me home to die.
• And when I come to my lawmakers, and I come to the Board of Health for answers, I get nothing because

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and considered several health-related bills. SB 398, by Senator Burgess, would create a statewide Alzheimer’s and dementia awareness campaign through the Department of Elder Affairs, focused on early detection, brain health, risk reduction, clinical trial access, and community resources. Supporters said Florida has a large and growing Alzheimer’s population and that the campaign would help families and vulnerable communities; the bill was reported favorably after a roll call vote. The committee also adopted an amendment to SB 714, by Senator Burton, which would create non-opioid advanced directives and add liability protections for providers in medical emergencies involving opioids. Supporters framed it as a patient-choice measure, while opponents argued it was vague and could interfere with appropriate pain treatment; the amended bill was then reported favorably. The committee also approved CS/SB 756, which removes the current age-eight diagnosis requirement for autism-related insurance coverage and extends coverage beyond age 18 for those diagnosed with autism. Senator Burton said the bill would help families whose children are diagnosed later or whose needs continue into adulthood. There was brief discussion about existing lifetime benefit caps, but the sponsor said the bill did not change those limits. The committee then took up SB 734, a proposal by Senator Yarbrough to repeal Florida’s wrongful death exception that bars certain parents and adult children from recovering non-economic damages in medical negligence cases. The sponsor and supporters described the current law as discriminatory and unjust, especially for families of older adults and disabled individuals, while opponents warned it would raise malpractice costs, increase premiums, and worsen provider shortages. The bill drew extensive public testimony from both grieving family members and health care/insurance representatives, and members debated whether caps or other safeguards should be added. No final action on SB 734 is reflected in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:29:59.600><c> who</c> continued interest from lawmakers who continued interest from lawmakers
• And lawmakers must resist the pressure to move forward or further deploy any edtech product use until
• ><c> pressure</c><01:39:56.080><c> to</c> lawmakers must resist the pressure to lawmakers must resist
• Children thrive when parents, educators, and lawmakers fight for them together.
• </c> when parents, educators, and lawmakers when parents, educators, and lawmakers fight<01:43:20.320

Committee: Joint Education

Transcript Highlights:

• So, first some good news for Kentucky and for the lawmakers there.
• So, first some good news for Kentucky and for the lawmakers there.
• The federal government lawmakers there.
• It meets the standards that you as the lawmakers put in place.
• Um and that's lawmakers put in place.

Committee: Joint Agriculture

Transcript Highlights:

• the amount found naturally in the plant, prompting concern from health officials, regulators, and lawmakers
• Kratom has several side effects, including liver damage... ...health officials, regulators, and lawmakers

Summary: The working group met for a legislative-only discussion on kratom ahead of a special session, with members agreeing to keep remarks brief and noting a public open house and expert testimony would follow the next week. Staff provided an overview of kratom regulation, describing the substance, its psychoactive effects, reported health risks, federal DEA action on 7-OH, state approaches, and North Dakota’s recent executive action and special session call. Legislators then debated whether the state should prohibit kratom, regulate it, or distinguish between natural kratom and synthetic or concentrated 7-OH products. Several members cited extensive testimony from the 2025 session, including House Bill 1101, which would have scheduled kratom as a Schedule I substance and failed in the House, and House Bill 1566, which evolved into a study. Supporters of regulation emphasized testimony from people who said natural kratom helped with chronic pain or function, while others stressed concerns about addiction, adulterated products, youth access, infant withdrawal, and deaths linked to kratom or 7-OH. Members also discussed enforcement and public health issues, including whether the Good Samaritan law should be updated, how law enforcement would respond under the executive order, and whether withdrawal could drive people toward harder drugs. One member urged a temporary approach until the 2027 session, while others argued the short special session could still address a narrow ban on 7-OH and tighter controls on natural kratom. No votes were taken, and the meeting ended with plans for additional testimony and further legislative hearings during the special session.

Transcript Highlights:

• our communities about what they want to see and what they want to come out in the state rules and lawmaking
• amount that we are having to chip away now at our budget again this year because we have failed as lawmakers

Transcript Highlights:

• Lawmakers and guests, let's come together to honor the thousands of participants, directors, athletes
• Lawmakers and guests, let's come together to honor the thousands of participants, directors, athletes

Transcript Highlights:

• Declaration refers to God four times: as the creator, as the source of all rights, as the Supreme Lawmaker
• As creator, as a source of all rights, as the Supreme Lawmaker and Supreme Judge and Protector.

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and an electronic roll call showing 24 members present and six excused. After approving the journal, the body recessed for a performance marking America’s 250th birthday, then returned for introductions and recognitions, including Hispanic Leadership Institute Day at the Capitol, Children’s Health Day advocates, guests of members, and the doctor of the day. The Senate also handled routine calendar items, including gubernatorial nominations and bill referrals, and appointed Senator Shope to temporarily serve as vice chair of the Finance Committee for the day. The main floor action was on SCR 1032, a measure relating to school district budgets and classroom spending. The bill, as amended, would require larger school districts to spend at least 60% of operational spending on direct instructional expenses, with a step-in penalty reducing classroom site fund allocations for continued noncompliance. Senator Hoffman explained the amendment as a moderated version that exempted certain rural/smaller districts and phased in penalties over several years; supporters argued it would ensure more money reaches classrooms and teachers. Opponents, including Senators Epstein, Miranda, Kuby, and others, argued it would micromanage local school districts, ignore important non-classroom costs such as nurses, transportation, counselors, and librarians, and unfairly target district schools while excluding charter schools. The Senate adopted the committee and floor amendments and then passed SCR 1032 on third reading by a vote of 16-12, with 2 not voting, sending it to the House. The Senate also considered SB 1071 concerning the Arizona Rangers. Supporters said the bill was not a full repeal but would create external oversight, improve background checks, and increase accountability and training transparency. Some members said they expected the House to further amend the measure. SB 1071 passed on third reading by a vote of 17-11, with 2 not voting, and was transmitted to the House. The session concluded with caucus and committee announcements, a recognition of World Down Syndrome Day advocates, an invitation to SRP Day at the Capitol, and adjournment until the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Declaration refers to God four times, as the Creator, as the source of all rights, as the Supreme Lawmaker
• and Supreme Judge in Britain. ...as Creator, as the source of all rights, as the Supreme Lawmaker and

Transcript Highlights:

• touched on this, but the breadth of this language, you know, when we talk about the restrictions with lawmakers
• touched on this, but the breadth of this language, you know, when we talk about the restrictions with lawmakers

Committee: House Emerging Issues and Professional Registration

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 3423 from Rep. Darren Chappell, which would require judges in Missouri courts of record to file annual financial disclosure statements, bar judges from hearing cases involving people who have given them money, and extend similar disclosure rules to members of judicial nominating commissions. Chappell framed the bill as a transparency and ethics measure. Business groups supported the proposal, but judges, bar groups, and trial and defense lawyers opposed it, arguing existing judicial ethics rules already address gifts and recusals, that the bill is overly broad in covering “anything of value,” and that it could create unintended consequences, including strategic donations to force recusal and reduced public access to judicial financial disclosures. The Supreme Court’s representative said the bill should be read alongside the full Code of Judicial Conduct and offered to provide the committee with that material. No vote was taken. The committee then heard House Bill 2922 from Rep. Jeff Myers, which would align Missouri’s right-to-try law with federal law by extending access from terminal illness to debilitating conditions and by addressing the use of Schedule I drugs in that framework. Myers said the bill is intended to help ensure access to emerging treatments and has passed in various forms in prior sessions. There was no opposition testimony, and the hearing concluded without action. Next, the committee heard House Bill 2643, also from Rep. Senate, the “Hope for Missouri Patients Act,” which would expand right-to-try access for individualized treatments such as gene therapies, enzyme replacement therapies, and substrate reduction therapies for patients with rare or debilitating diseases. Supporters, including the Goldwater Institute, a parent of a child with a rare disease, and Americans for Prosperity, said the bill could help patients access customized treatments sooner and reduce red tape. The sponsor and witnesses emphasized that the bill would not require insurance coverage and is meant to help patients who cannot wait for lengthy clinical trial or FDA pathways. No opposition testimony was offered. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 3204 from Rep. Senate, which would create a tax credit to encourage private donations to prevention resource centers that work on substance misuse prevention. Supporters from prevention organizations and advocacy groups said the credit would strengthen local prevention coalitions, reduce future treatment and criminal justice costs, and stabilize funding for services such as school education, early intervention, and suicide prevention. One opponent warned that Planned Parenthood could qualify as a prevention resource center and receive tax credits, but supporters said they had no concern about that. The hearing ended with no vote or other committee action, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• They have the information and they will share it with you, not just as a lawmaker, but you could do PRAs
• matter of forcing them to give us the information that should be made public to everyone, especially lawmakers

Bills: HB2464 , SGA9305

Committee: Senate Human Services

Keywords: detention facilities, law enforcement, reporting requirements, incidents, private detention

Transcript Highlights:

• You're the lawmakers. ...closely with what's going on. And I don't have an opinion.
• You're the lawmakers, folks. So we're just lobbyists representing interested groups.

Committee: House Agriculture, Food Production and Outdoor Resources

Summary: The Agriculture Committee first established a quorum and then went into executive session, where it voted House Bill 24-22 do pass by a vote of 18 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 present. The committee then moved into public hearing on House Bills 2713 and 2716, both sponsored by Representative Deal. HB 2713 was described as the larger agriculture tax credit package, including removal of sunsets from several existing ag-related credits and technical changes to programs such as biodiesel, meat processing, specialty crops, wood energy, and rolling stock. HB 2716 focused on the short-line rail tax credit and related rail infrastructure incentives, including track rehabilitation and industrial development credits. Representative Deal said the bills were intended to provide long-term certainty for agriculture and rail investment and noted the programs’ positive return on investment. Committee members raised concerns about eliminating sunsets, how future legislatures would review the credits, and whether some credits could be used if Missouri moved toward eliminating income tax. Questions also focused on whether abandoned or minimally used rail lines would qualify, and on the transferability of rolling stock credits to entities with different tax liabilities. Deal and witnesses said the rail provisions were aimed at active short lines and that data on the credits’ performance could be provided. Testimony in support came from the Missouri Corn Growers Association, Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Soybeans, the Biodiesel Coalition of Missouri, Missouri Dairy, Missouri Agribusiness Association, Missouri Bankers Association, Missouri Eastern Railroad, Missouri Economic Development Council, Osage Valley Electric Cooperative, and the Missouri Railroad Association. Supporters said the credits have stimulated ethanol, biodiesel, dairy, specialty crop, meat processing, and rural economic development projects, and that rail credits help preserve and expand short-line service, reduce truck traffic, and attract industrial investment. No opposition testimony was offered on either bill, and the hearings on HB 2713 and HB 2716 were adjourned without any recorded committee vote on those bills in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, Lord, touch the hearts of these lawmakers You have chosen to ensure they also help those who are
• Oh, Lord, touch the hearts of these lawmakers You have chosen to ensure they also help those who are

Transcript Highlights:

• And in our conversations, many lawmakers were not even aware of these attacks.
• Because I have faced this personally. gone to police, I've talked to lawmakers, I've talked to media,

Committee: House Emergency Management

Transcript Highlights:

• California lawmakers have rejected ...plans.
• California lawmakers have rejected this for similar reasons.

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• It is no small thing to stand in this spot to pray to the way maker for these lawmakers.
• We pray that you would keep before our lawmakers.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a physician, veteran, patient, and father, I urge Texas lawmakers to take a stand and support SB 911
• As a physician, veteran, patient, and father, I urge Texas lawmakers to... ...and support SB 911.

Bills: SB2 , SJR36 , SB2 , SB2 , SR29 , SB2

Transcript Highlights:

• tags in the future, and I think that we should, but I also just think that it's important for us as lawmakers
• It is our natural habitat as lawmakers to live in the blind spot way behind new technology.
• </c><00:56:14.400><c> to</c> it's important for us as lawmakers to it's important for us as lawmakers
• :56:20.640><c> natural</c><00:56:21.280><c> habitat</c><00:56:22.080><c> as</c><00:56:22.320><c> lawmakers
• </c> It is our natural habitat as lawmakers It is our natural habitat as lawmakers to<00:56:23.920><c

Bills: HF3794 , HF3408

Committee: House Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• We encourage lawmakers to address resourcing the required components of the act, including active efforts
• We encourage lawmakers to address resourcing the required components of the act, including active efforts
• </c><02:00:48.880><c> We</c><02:00:49.199><c> encourage</c><02:00:49.599><c> lawmakers</c><02:00:50.159
• We encourage lawmakers to of the act.
• We encourage lawmakers to address<02:00:50.719><c> resourcing</c><02:00:51.199><c> the</c><02:00:51.440

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• The potential for an audit to undermine the General Court's basic lawmaking functions...
• The potential for an audit to undermine the General Court's basic lawmaking functions exists even if
• The potential for an audit to undermine the general court's basic lawmaking functions exists even if
• Lawmakers self-censor, especially on controversial issues.

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.