Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing no members. Any objections? Hearing no members. Any objections?
• Hearing no with. Any objections? Hearing no with. Any objections?
• I I hear You have to charge a person. I I hear You have to charge a person. I I hear you. I see.
• It's hard for me to hear sometimes in It's hard for me to hear sometimes in It's hard for me to hear
• as a public hearing or a vote up heard as a public hearing or a vote up heard as a public hearing or

Bills: HB 200 , HB 541 , HB 1803 , HB 30 , HB 175 , HB 249 , HB 721 , HB 851 , HB 897 , HB 1128 , HB 1904 , HB 1916 , HB 5560 , HB 3071 , HB 5627 , HB 5435 , HB 3913 , HB 2921 , HB 2695 , HB 2688 , HB 3045 , HB 3483 , HB 3673 , HB 4213 , HB 4226 , HB 783 , HB 4373 , HB 4735 , HB 5155 , HB 5057 , HB 4984 , HB 4944 , HB 4813 , HB 5339 , HB 5196 , HB 5033 , HB 4853 , HB 3486 , HB 4211 , HB 74 , HB 4670 , HB 4730 , HB 4743 , HB 4603 , HB 4463 , HB 3892 , HB 4139 , HB 4752 , HB 4520 , HB 4517 , HB 4486 , HB 4437 , HB 4426 , HB 4396 , HB 4263 , HB 3487 , HB 3418 , HB 2284 , HB 2266 , HB 2229 , HB 4912 , HB 2189 , HB 4506 , HB 5269 , HB 5224 , HB 5195 , HB 3317 , HB 4166 , HB 3947 , HB 3358 , HB 3370 , HB 4438 , HB 3745 , HB 3602 , HB 3697 , HB 2001 , HB 1968 , HB 3371 , HB 3909 , HCR 7 , SB 1744 , SB 1364 , SB 1316 , HB 2026 , HB 3302 , HB 3368 , HB 1639 , HB 5652 , HB 4655 , HB 5654 , HB 5658 , HB 5656 , HB 4894 , HB 4996 , HB 5088 , HB 5650 , HB 4464 , HB 3751 , HB 5665 , HB 5661 , HB 1237 , HB 2802 , HB 5437 , HB 2703 , HB 5666 , HB 5667 , HCR 113 , HCR 86 , SB 2196 , SB 463 , SB 856 , SB 1245 , SB 1169 , SB 509 , SB 985 , SB 305 , SB 552 , HB 1535 , HB 123 , HB 1804 , HB 426 , HB 1773 , HB 1871 , HB 2035 , HB 2492 , HB 1411 , HB 4753 , HB 4666 , HB 4529 , HB 1499 , HB 1610 , HB 2028 , HB 1506 , HB 886 , HB 3546 , HB 796 , HB 223 , HB 3556 , HB 2448 , HB 4638 , HB 111 , HB 180 , HB 1027 , HB 1178 , HB 610 , HB 1277 , HB 1615 , HB 1620 , HB 5342 , HB 4885 , HB 4751 , HB 4530 , HB 4488 , HB 2149 , HB 2071 , HB 2282 , HB 2248 , HB 2243 , HB 2522 , HB 2310 , HB 2513 , HB 2300 , HB 1902 , HB 1813 , HB 3719 , HB 4284 , HB 3743 , HB 3778 , HB 5153 , HB 5147 , HB 4877 , HB 4850 , HB 3261 , HB 3005 , HB 3033 , HB 2849 , HB 2967 , HB 3531 , HB 1768 , HB 333 , HB 2914 , HB 2613 , HB 3717 , HB 3704 , HB 2697 , HB 3801 , HB 3099 , HB 3488 , HB 3477 , HB 3466 , HB 3396 , HB 3469 , HB 2594 , HB 2776 , HB 2564 , HB 2298 , HB 5331 , HB 5646 , HB 5247 , HB 5323 , HB 4384 , HB 3896 , HB 4014 , HB 3627 , HB 3594 , HB 2524 , HB 510 , HB 561 , HB 5111 , HB 5446 , HB 1181 , HB 3963 , HB 2785 , HB 1661 , HB 2460 , HB 200 , HB 541 , HB 1803 , HB 30 , HB 175 , HB 249 , HB 721 , HB 851 , HB 897 , HB 1128 , HB 1904 , HB 1916 , HB 5560 , HB 3071 , HB 5627 , HB 5435 , HB 3913 , HB 2921 , HB 2695 , HB 2688 , HB 3045 , HB 3483 , HB 3673 , HB 4213 , HB 4226 , HB 783 , HB 4373 , HB 4735 , HB 5155 , HB 5057 , HB 4984 , HB 4944 , HB 4813 , HB 5339 , HB 5196 , HB 5033 , HB 4853 , HB 3486 , HB 4211 , HB 74 , HB 4670 , HB 4730 , HB 4743 , HB 4603 , HB 4463 , HB 3892 , HB 4139 , HB 4752 , HB 4520 , HB 4517 , HB 4486 , HB 4437 , HB 4426 , HB 4396 , HB 4263 , HB 3487 , HB 3418 , HB 2284 , HB 2266 , HB 2229 , HB 4912 , HB 2189 , HB 4506 , HB 5269 , HB 5224 , HB 5195 , HB 3317 , HB 4166 , HB 3947 , HB 3358 , HB 3370 , HB 4438 , HB 3745 , HB 3602 , HB 3697 , HB 2001 , HB 1968 , HB 3371 , HB 3909 , HCR 98 , HCR 92 , HCR 126 , HCR 7

Transcript Highlights:

• Hello, and thank you for having this hearing.
• </c> are trained I hear these obes I hear are trained I hear these obes I hear these<00:49:03.079><c>
• </c> have to throw out because I didn't hear have to throw out because I didn't hear it<01:20:36.679>
• </c> the horror stories that you're hearing the horror stories that you're hearing and<01:55:36.679><
• Thank you. the time to hear us um I am Jamie Lewis the time to hear us um I am Jamie Lewis I<02:50:01.720

Summary: The joint House Committee on Health and Committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce heard two midwifery bills, with testimony focused primarily on HB 1194. Committee chairs opened the hearing with rules for Zoom testimony and noted the bills relate to midwives. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs said it supported the intent of HB 1194 and offered comments. Supporters of the bill, including the Midwives Alliance of Hawaii, argued that midwifery should remain subject to mandatory licensure to protect consumer safety, citing the state’s regulatory licensing standards and a 2025 state auditor sunset analysis. They said the bill would strengthen educational standards and public protection, and some offered clarifying amendments. Opponents argued HB 1194 would restrict access to care and fail to protect traditional, cultural, and community-based birth practices. Testifiers from the Hawaii Home Birth Task Force, the Hawaii Home Birth Collective, the Libertarian Party of Hawaii, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Pacific Birth Collective, and Papa Ola Lōkahi said the bill would limit licensure pathways, reduce access in rural and underserved areas, and burden Native Hawaiian and traditional practitioners. Several speakers said the measure could worsen Hawaii’s maternal health shortages, especially on Maui, and urged lawmakers to defer HB 1194 or instead advance HB 1328, which they said better protects practitioner access and cultural practices. The Hawaii affiliate of the American College of Nurse-Midwives said it opposed HB 1194 because it did not align with national or state standards for certified midwives and could create conflicts with Medicaid reimbursement and prescriptive authority. The ACLU also opposed the measure, emphasizing reproductive rights, privacy, and the need to preserve apprenticeship pathways to licensure. No vote or final committee action was taken during the portion of the hearing reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we applied to the hearings bureau. The hearings officer heard our case.
• </c><00:18:48.080><c> officers</c> the previous hearing officers the previous hearing officers aired<
• </c> I'm going to open up the public hearing I'm going to open up the public hearing on<00:28:42.000>
• And at this time, I will close the public hearing on House Bill 1785. will close the public hearing on
• So, it should be a public hearing. 15th. So, it should be a public hearing.

Committee: House Public Works and Highways

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> chair maintains control of this hearing chair maintains control of this hearing and<00:00:37.360
• Verbal outbursts and the hearing room.
• </c> removal from the hearing. removal from the hearing.
• </c><00:03:04.239><c> about</c> gaps, which I think you'll hear about gaps, which I think you'll hear
• </c> hearing your information, your stories. hearing your information, your stories.

Bills: HF4588 , HF3685 , HF4577 , HF4932

Committee: House Veterans and Military Affairs Division

Keywords: veterans, veterans affairs, mental health, behavioral health, rural health, rural areas, access to care, task force, Minnesota Department of Veterans Affairs, general fund appropriation, veteran suicide prevention, PTSD, service members, military families, telehealth, rural psychiatry, high school diploma, armed forces, education policy, military service

Transcript Highlights:

• That hearing occurred with 132 mode.
• You will hear from all of them that yet.
• I'm not hearing a ton of new information.
• </c> &gt;&gt; Ed, can you hear us? &gt;&gt; Ed, can you hear us?
• Uh, can you hear me? &gt;&gt; Yeah. Uh, can you hear me?

Bills: HF4253 , HF4257 , HF3236 , HF4264 , HF4149 , HF4019

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Keywords: boat storage structures, public waters, natural resources, rule amendments, watercraft canopy, PFAS, environmental regulation, manufacturers, public health, product safety, groundwater, water appropriation, water-use permit, water permit, aquifer test, aquifer, well construction, groundwater permit, Department of Natural Resources, DNR

Transcript Highlights:

• Failure to leave the hearing room.
• </c> result in removal from the hearing room. result in removal from the hearing room.
• Hearing<00:02:25.599><c> none.
• </c> Hearing none. All those in favor say I. Hearing none. All those in favor say I.
• I hear about across the street.

Bills: HF3435 , HF3409

Committee: House Education Policy

Keywords: school access, school site, school district, charter school, federal agents, DHS, Department of Homeland Security, ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, CBP, Customs and Border Protection, USCIS, immigration enforcement, judicial warrant, student privacy, school safety, sanctuary schools, warrant requirement, federal warrant, school grounds

Transcript Highlights:

• Do I hear a motion for 229.
• Do I hear a second? I will 229, please. Do I hear a second?
• Do I hear a facilities. Do I hear a motion?
• </c> Do I hear Oh, I'll second that. Do I hear Oh, I'll second that.
• Do I hear? And I will I will adjourned. Do I hear?

Summary: The committee first took up a Senate message on HB 179, relative to hazardous waste accident fees. Members reviewed the Senate amendment, which would cap the daily non-payment penalty at no more than $1,000 per day and limit the cumulative penalty to 25% of the cost, with no additional daily penalty if the responsible party is following an agreed payment plan. Members discussed the change from the committee’s earlier version, which had allowed penalties up to 100% of the damages, and agreed the revised language was reasonable. The committee voted to concur with the Senate amendment and indicated the bill could be placed on consent. The committee then recessed SB 302, requiring background checks for solid waste facility owners, because a late request for an additional change had not yet been fully reviewed. It next voted on SB 229, relative to the sale of uninspected bison, red deer, and elk meat. Supporters said the bill would expand retail access to these meats, support New Hampshire farms, and improve food security. Members also noted the Department of Agriculture did not object, that the bill would remove a sunset and keep more workable inspection rules in place, and that the animals involved are largely from closed herds. The committee voted unanimously to pass SB 229 and agreed to place it on consent. Finally, the committee considered SB 50, establishing a committee to study the regulation of private animal boarding facilities. Members described disturbing testimony about missing, injured, or dead dogs and the lack of clear oversight, licensing, or even a reliable list of kennels in the state. They discussed possible study topics including licensing, inspection authority, standards, penalties, and protections for both pet owners and boarding operators, including disclosure of medical conditions. The committee voted unanimously to pass SB 50 and also agreed to place it on consent. After the executive sessions, the committee heard a presentation from the New Hampshire Food Alliance on the state’s first food and agriculture strategic plan, introduced by director Nicole Cardwell, with participation from advisory committee members including Rep. Bixby and Commissioner Sean Jasper.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're holding our committee hearing in 1021 O Street, Room 1,200 in the swing space.
• Thank you for holding this hearing on these important topics.
• Thank you for hosting this important hearing.
• Thank you for a very informative hearing today. Good afternoon.
• Thank you for a very informative hearing today.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee held an oversight hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s safety net, focusing on Medi-Cal and CalFresh. The chair and vice chair framed the issue as a major federal disruption that would reduce benefits and shift costs to the state, counties, hospitals, and other local systems. The first panel included the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Department of Finance, the UC Berkeley Labor Center, and the Food Research and Action Center, each describing projected enrollment losses, higher state and county costs, and implementation challenges. The LAO outlined H.R. 1’s main changes: new and expanded work requirements, more frequent eligibility redeterminations, restrictions on certain non-citizen eligibility, and financing changes affecting provider taxes and federal matching rates. The LAO estimated that 1 to 2 million people could be disenrolled from Medi-Cal and more than 600,000 could lose CalFresh, with additional costs from reduced federal support and possible state and county administrative burdens. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s budget includes about $1.4 billion General Fund in 2026-27 to respond to H.R. 1, with larger out-year reductions in federal funds and projected Medi-Cal caseload losses of up to 2 million by 2029-30. The UC Berkeley Labor Center projected up to 3 million Californians could lose full-scope Medi-Cal by 2028 when H.R. 1 is combined with state budget changes, while noting the state could choose policies that would reduce some of those losses. The Food Research and Action Center warned that CalFresh cuts and time limits would increase hunger, worsen health outcomes, and strain local economies and emergency systems. Members questioned the witnesses about procedural disenrollments, regional variation, the overall growth in Medi-Cal spending, the future of the MCO tax, the CalFresh error rate, and the downstream effects on hospitals and county indigent care. Several senators argued that the federal law was driven by tax cuts for high-income earners and would disproportionately harm low-income Californians, immigrants, and communities of color. Administration witnesses said some impacts are still being analyzed, that counties and departments are working on implementation, and that the Legislature may need to use statute, reporting, and oversight tools as federal guidance develops. No votes or formal actions were taken during this portion of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for holding this hearing on these important topics.
• Thank you for holding this hearing on these important topics.
• Thank you for hosting this important hearing.
• I just want to say I appreciate the hearing today.
• Thank you for a very informative hearing today.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, that's just how it is because we always hear—excuse me, I'm sorry—we always... ...hear from the
• Honestly, I'm open again to hearing what Ms.
• I was in another committee hearing.
• I was in another committee hearing.
• If you wanted to speak, we’ll hear.

Committee: House House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2348, which would appropriate state funds for Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs training-center needs, including Wi-Fi for reserve units at joint facilities, a reimbursement program for service members using personal computers, lodging and kind for drill weekends, and HVAC upgrades and maintenance. Two amendments were considered: the Marquez Amendment, which filled in dollar amounts for each purpose, failed; and the Gillette Amendment, which added national-security restrictions on networking equipment, removed the reimbursement and lodging provisions from the underlying bill, and adjusted the funding language, passed. The sponsor and several military witnesses testified that reserve and Guard members at places like Buckeye lack Wi-Fi, adequate HVAC, and lodging, forcing soldiers to use public libraries, personal devices, or sleep in cars or on armory floors. After debate over whether the state should fund needs tied to federal reserve units and how the money would be sourced, the committee recommended HB 2348 as amended by a 4-3 vote. The committee then took up House Concurrent Resolution 2016, a ballot referral that would cap precinct size at 2,500 registered voters and eliminate county authority to use vote centers, emergency voting centers, and certain on-site early voting options. The sponsor said the measure was intended to restore precinct-based voting and reflect voter preference, noting the change from an earlier 1,000-voter cap to 2,500 after feedback from county officials. County and advocacy witnesses opposed the resolution, arguing that vote centers provide flexibility, are often more cost-effective, and are necessary in rural counties and large counties like Maricopa; they also said precinct voting would require many more locations, staff, and equipment, and could force some counties into central-count tabulation. Supporters argued precinct voting improves voter confidence and access. The committee approved HCR 2016 for the ballot by a 4-3 vote. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2165, which exempts veterans from Arizona State Parks admission fees, and adopted the Marquez Amendment to extend the exemption to active military, National Guard, and reserve members and to broaden acceptable identification. Arizona State Parks testified in a neutral position, saying the agency is self-funded through user fees and already offers discounts to active duty, veterans, and disabled veterans, but warned that expanding free admission could affect park revenue and rural economies. The bill discussion ended with the amendment adopted and the measure moving forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as I noted, we are having a three-committee hearing today.
• And I’m looking forward to hearing from you all today in this hearing.
• So we are going to go ahead and hear from our first panelists.
• Can you hear me? Yes. My name is Jeremy Martin.
• We will go ahead and hear from our next panelist. Let's see... Let's hear from our next panelist.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Committees on Utilities and Energy, Transportation, and Natural Resources focused on California’s transportation fuels sector, especially the state’s response to refinery closures and the broader transition away from fossil fuels. Opening remarks emphasized the tension between climate and air-quality goals, fuel affordability, refinery jobs and local tax bases, and the need to avoid crisis-driven responses as Phillips 66 and Valero consider shutting refineries in Wilmington and Benicia. Professor Emily Grubert framed the issue as a long-term managed transition in which the public already bears much of the risk and should also capture benefits from a well-planned shift. CARB Chair Leanne Randolph reviewed the state’s emissions and fuel policies, including AB 32, the low-carbon fuel standard, clean vehicle programs, and the at-berth regulation for ocean-going vessels. She said California’s transportation sector remains the largest source of greenhouse gases and a major source of smog-forming pollution, but that the state has made substantial progress and still needs to reduce demand for fossil fuels while maintaining compliance with federal air-quality standards. Randolph also said CARB’s recent LCFS amendments had not caused the predicted spike in gas prices and explained that compliance pathways for the at-berth rule include emissions-reduction technologies or payments into a remediation fund. CEC Vice Chair Gunda described declining gasoline demand, shrinking in-state refining capacity, and growing dependence on imports, arguing that the state is in a “mid-transition” period that requires both support for legacy infrastructure and continued investment in cleaner alternatives. He outlined the administration’s petroleum market stabilization proposal, which aims to return California crude production to 125 million barrels a year through four components: codifying the ban on fracking, validating the Kern County oil-and-gas permitting ordinance, creating a temporary CEQA exemption paired with a two-for-one plug-and-drill framework, and strengthening pipeline and spill-safety requirements. Department of Conservation Director Jennifer Lucasey said the proposal is intended to stabilize crude supply and pipeline throughput while preserving health and environmental protections, and noted that CalGEM would still review permits and enforce other requirements. Mayor Steve Young of Benicia testified that a Valero closure would significantly reduce city revenue and leave the community facing years of cleanup and redevelopment challenges. He said the city supports environmental protection but is worried about the economic hit, the possibility that Benicia becomes a fuel-import terminal, and the lack of local influence over refinery decisions. Members pressed the panel on the CEQA exemption, tribal and habitat review, disclosure of closure liabilities, fuel-demand projections, and whether the proposal should include more demand-side measures. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and officials said some proposals, including a margin-cap pause and further transition planning, would be taken up later in the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's why I'm glad that this hearing today is about three things.
• Assembly Member Rindler, can you hear me? Dr. Goldsmith, I do, and would love to hear from you.
• And you'll hear from some of them shortly.
• And finally, we'll hear from Irene. All right.
• It's an honor to be here and hear about everyone's work as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a number of people on the hearing schedule for today.
• Seeing and hearing none. Thank you, Senator. Thank you. Great day.
• Can you hear me? Yes. I'm sorry? I'm sorry? Wonderful.
• Can you hear me? Yes. Go ahead. Great.
• Yes, can you hear me? Yes. All right, thank you.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Summary: The committee held a lengthy hearing on a large docket of pharmacy and drug-pricing bills, with most testimony focused on PBM reform, 340B drug discount program protections, specialty medication access, and medication adherence. Chair James Murphy and Senator Paul Feeney opened the hearing and took testimony from legislators, patient advocates, pharmacists, health center leaders, industry representatives, and policy groups. Several speakers described delays, denials, high out-of-pocket costs, and pharmacy closures tied to PBM practices, while others emphasized the importance of community health centers and independent pharmacies in serving patients. On the 340B program, supporters including Senator Eldridge, Senator Payano, Community Care Cooperative, Fenway Health, the Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers, and several community health center leaders argued that bills such as H. 1107 and S. 819 would stop discriminatory PBM and manufacturer practices, preserve contract pharmacy access, and protect safety-net providers that say they reinvest savings into care, pharmacy expansion, interpreter services, behavioral health, and other services. Opponents including PhRMA, the Community Liver Alliance, and a public policy analyst argued the program lacks transparency and accountability, has grown beyond its original purpose, and may benefit large hospitals and for-profit entities more than low-income patients. They urged more reporting and oversight rather than expanding protections. On PBM reform, testimony supported bills including H. 1157, H. 1234, S. 724, S. 831, and related measures that would require rebate pass-through, ban spread pricing, limit steering to PBM-owned pharmacies, and improve reimbursement for community pharmacies. Independent pharmacists and patients said current PBM practices raise costs, create administrative burdens, and threaten access to local pharmacies. PCMA, representing PBMs, opposed the reforms, arguing PBMs lower costs, that plan sponsors choose to contract with them, and that the Health Policy Commission and CHIA should complete their ongoing study before new mandates are adopted. The committee also heard support for H. 1322 and S. 734 on specialty medications, and for H. 781 and H. 1305 on medication synchronization to improve adherence. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the biggest thing that I'm hearing and the biggest issue, The biggest thing that I'm hearing, and
• I didn't hear that.
• But I hear today, okay, you know, if we're going to say we're going to bait, and I hear some suggestion
• I didn't hear that. But I hear today, positives? I didn't hear that.
• But I hear today, okay, you know, if we're going to say we're going to bait, and I hear some suggestion

Summary: The committee continued discussing recommendations for chronic wasting disease (CWD) surveillance and response in Louisiana’s wild and captive deer herds. Members and staff reviewed current surveillance results, noting that LDWF had met goals in 32 of 64 parishes and that voluntary hunter-harvest sampling was falling short in other areas. Several ideas were raised to improve sample collection without making it broadly mandatory, including incentives for hunters, taxidermists, and possibly processors; use of DMAP properties and mobile sampling units; and targeted sampling of older bucks and other higher-risk animals. Members also discussed whether to use parish-level or other geographic control areas, and whether to mirror aspects of Arkansas’s approach, including testing to reduce or remove restrictions when prevalence remains low. The committee also heard from LDWF and LDAF about captive herd surveillance and reporting. LDAF described its licensed deer facilities, a 2024 positive in Jeff Davis Parish that led to depopulation and quarantines, and follow-up testing that has remained negative at quarantined farms. Witnesses said the agencies currently share information informally and through USDA/NVSL channels, but there is no specific law or regulation requiring 24-hour notification between agencies. The Wildlife Federation and several members recommended mandatory enrollment in the USDA herd certification program, mandatory reporting of positives, and clearer coordination between LDWF and LDAF. Members also discussed the cost of testing, with LDWF saying USDA grants covered diagnostic testing for the last two deer seasons, while department self-generated funds covered earlier costs. A major portion of the meeting focused on how to respond when a positive wild deer is found. Some members favored immediate restrictions, while others argued for keeping existing season rules in place through the season and using the positive as a trigger for intensified sampling, with the goal of avoiding unnecessary penalties and encouraging hunters to submit samples. There was also discussion of whether baiting should be prohibited, allowed during hunting season, or phased based on testing results, with Arkansas’s statewide baiting allowance and county-based disease management zones used as a comparison. The chair emphasized that no final recommendation would be adopted at this meeting; instead, staff was directed to compile the discussion and written recommendations for consideration at the April meeting, when the committee expects to vote and the commission may need to act quickly through its notice-of-intent or emergency rule process before the next hunting season.

Transcript Highlights:

• Committee, we are going to open it up for the hearing.
• Commissioner Huff, can you hear us? Yes, I can. Commissioner Huff, can you hear us? Yes, I can.
• Arnold, can you hear us? Yes, Madam Chair. Awesome. I'm so sorry.
• So, committee, we do have one more hearing. However, we're going.
• So committee, we do have one more hearing.

Committee: House Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• That is good to hear, Madam Chair and Madam Presenter. Presenter.
• Great to hear. Last one, Madam Chair and Dr.
• However, one of the things that you'll hear from Dr.
• We'll also hear today from Dr.
• I hear you regarding ensuring that we're achieving that.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• The Chair hears none. Any motions to instruct?
• and in committee hearings.
• How many hours of testimony did y'all hear?
• I think it was before the committee hearing.
• This is it, there's no more committee hearings.

Bills: SB 2 , SB 5 , SB 9 , SB 7 , SB 17 , SB 4 , HB4 , HB1 , HB3 , HB20 , HB22 , SB9 , SB7 , SB17 , SB4 , HB4 , SB2 , SB5

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you so much for hearing it, and please pass this.
• </c><00:01:36.520><c> it</c> animals thank you so much for hearing it animals thank you so much for hearing
• Thank you so much for hearing it and bringing it forward.
• In the unlikely event that something happens, we will have to stop the hearing.
• </c> 90-minute time limit for hearings 90-minute time limit for hearings there'll<00:10:35.720><c> be

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 345, which would establish ʻōpae ʻula as the state shrimp. The Department of Land and Natural Resources and Kua Ulu Aumo testified in strong support, saying the designation could help protect endemic shrimp in anchialine pools and increase public education and awareness. In response to questions, DLNR said it would use existing education programs, press releases, and partnerships for statewide outreach and was not seeking a separate appropriation for that purpose. Members then took up SCR 132 and SR 111, which encourage adoption of recommendations from the UN Global Plastics Treaty and the Rapa Nui Summit Declaration on climate justice and sustainable development. Greenpeace Hawaii supported the measures, arguing that plastic production is tied to fossil fuel interests and that microplastics pose serious health and environmental risks. The committee later adopted the measures with amendments, including a change from “waste hierarchy” to “zero waste hierarchy” and technical edits. The final measures, SCR 157 and SR 127, urged the state to adopt and implement the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea agreement on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction. DLNR testified that it had only just reviewed the resolution but stood on its written testimony. The committee passed SCR 157 and SR 127 as is. The meeting also included a separate hearing on SCR 89 and SR 72, which would create a University of Hawaiʻi Community College pathway for meat processing. The Department of Agriculture, Hawaii Farm Bureau, and Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council supported the idea, citing workforce needs and local protein supply, while several members raised concerns about whether a formal educational pathway or degree requirement might unnecessarily limit entry into the field; discussion focused on whether the proposal should be more vocational and whether there is enough data on workforce demand. No final vote on those measures was shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Calling this informational hearing of the Assembly Education Committee to order.
• At the end of the hearing we will be taking public comment in person.
• I'm hearing there's still some snags on the rollout.
• Would love to hear just a little more about that if you could.
• This hearing is adjourned. Thank you. Bye bye.

Committee: House Education

Transcript Highlights:

• That is a rumor that we have been hearing, as you've seen put out.
• That is a rumor that we have been hearing, as you've seen put out.
• So we will be having hearings. We will have subpoena power. We look forward to this.
• We will have hearings through the committees and start moving these along.
• We're going to hear from the party chair.

Summary: House Republican leaders, led by Speaker-designate Lisa Demuth and Majority Leader Harry Niska, outlined their priorities for the upcoming Minnesota House session and said they intend to use an organizational majority to advance their agenda. They said their focus will be on stopping fraud, making government more accountable, reducing taxes and fees, and addressing affordability, energy costs, public safety, education, and permitting reform. Specific proposals mentioned included repealing the tax on Social Security benefits, rolling back automatic gas tax increases, repealing the nuclear moratorium, and changing state programs they said should be limited to people in the country legally. A central theme was the creation of a new House committee on fraud and agency oversight, which Republicans said will have subpoena power and be chaired by Rep. Kristin Robbins. They said the committee will investigate known fraud, review agency internal controls, and press agencies for information on staffing, office space, and cost savings. Rep. Jim Nash also described a proposed “fraud note” scoring system to rate agencies on whether they have implemented Office of the Auditor’s recommendations, with the goal of informing appropriations decisions. On education and public safety, Niska said Republicans want fewer mandates and higher standards in schools, citing low reading and math proficiency, and leaders said they want stronger accountability for repeat and juvenile offenders. They also said they expect committee chairs to be Republican, may reduce Democratic committee seats if Democrats do not show up, and are not planning a power-sharing agreement unless the chamber returns to a true tie. They discussed the pending court case involving Rep. Brad Tabke, a possible recall process for absent legislators, remote voting rules, and a special election timeline, while insisting they expect Democrats to appear on the first day of session and that they will proceed with organizing the House and electing a speaker on January 14.