Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. to say regarding the legislation before to say regarding the legislation before US<00:04:37.199
• </c><00:23:25.400><c> was</c> of whether this legislation was of whether this legislation was necessary
• </c><00:28:45.799><c> adds</c> sure what this legislation adds sure what this legislation adds to<00:
• </c> we've been we've supported legislation we've been we've supported legislation that<03:10:26.680>
• We oppose this legislation.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee held a hearing on HB 566, which would require permit applications for new landfills to include a detailed leachate management plan. The bill sponsor said the measure was prompted by recent reporting on leachate problems at New Hampshire landfills, including alleged violations at a Bethlehem facility and deficiencies at other sites, and argued the bill is meant to improve public health protections without dictating specific treatment methods or hindering innovation. The sponsor also said the proposal was developed with input from the Department of Environmental Services (DES) and industry representatives, and that a forthcoming amendment would revise the bill’s language to better fit the permitting process. The sponsor explained that the amendment would move several requirements out of the contract section and into the planning section, change references such as “permit for construction” to “operating approval,” include landfill expansions, and remove language that could be read as requiring long-term contracts. Questions from members focused on whether the bill would create enforceable consequences if a plan is not followed, whether it would limit operators’ flexibility, and whether existing DES rules already cover the subject. The sponsor said enforcement details should be addressed by DES and emphasized that the bill would not lock operators into any particular contract or technology. The Business and Industry Association testified in opposition to the bill as introduced, saying it appeared unnecessary because DES already regulates leachate through existing rules, including Env 806.53, and has authority to update those rules as technology changes. The witness argued that putting the requirements into statute could freeze the regulatory framework, create conflicts with future rulemaking, and make it harder for DES to respond quickly to new treatment methods or operational issues. No vote or final action was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:14:16.519><c> is</c> think that this legislation is think that this legislation is ill-advised
• </c> Improvement on the original legislation Improvement on the original legislation itself<00:14:26.480
• </c> language you know legislation language you know legislation itself<00:14:39.199><c> okay</c><00:
• could we say we support legislation, policies, and legislation that will promote these values instead
• could we say we produces legislation could we say we support<01:48:39.480><c> legislation</c><01:48:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Solid Waste Subcommittee met to discuss proposed amendments to HB 171 and HB 215. For HB 171, Representative Gerna outlined technical changes to a landfill moratorium bill: DES would be allowed to accept applications only to review them for completeness, a notwithstanding clause would override automatic approval timing rules, the word “fully” would be removed, and an unnecessary reference to perennial water bodies would be deleted. Members raised concern about whether applications deemed complete during the moratorium would still have to comply with later changes in law or rule. Director Mike Whap of DES said applicants would likely need to amend applications if policy changes occurred, and suggested the bill could explicitly state that later changes apply to pending applications. The subcommittee generally supported the revised language and agreed the amended bill could go directly to executive session, though one member said the underlying legislation was ill-advised but preferred the amended version over the original. The committee then turned to HB 215, which would create a two-stage landfill siting review centered on a “net public benefit” determination before full technical review. Representative Gerna explained that the amendment would define net public benefit, require an independent third-party assessment paid for by the applicant, and set up a process for selecting the contractor from a list submitted by the applicant, with DES and the host community involved and the commissioner choosing if no agreement is reached within 60 days. Members asked how “host community” would be defined; DES said it would generally mean the municipal governing body, though that body could appoint others. The amendment also broadened the factors considered in both harms and benefits, including human health, property values, tourism, recreation, wildlife, local economic benefits, and infrastructure improvements. The discussion also added a provision directing DES to consult with the Department of Transportation, the Department of Business and Economic Affairs, and the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources as needed when reviewing the third-party assessment. Director Whap said interdepartmental consultation is normal and that DES would likely adopt rules to guide the process. Members questioned whether the new framework would be too vague or burdensome for applicants, but Whap said it would not be designed to stack the deck against applicants and that the process should provide clearer, more balanced criteria. No votes were taken during the meeting, and the subcommittee appeared to continue refining the amendment language before further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we've, Legislative box as far as I can tell.
• Other legislation passed during the last session that were legislative priorities for our board were
• I believe it has been suggested in various legislative issues, yes ma'am.
• We recently took legislative staff to Cedars Academy. Dr.
• You, as legislators, Texas teachers and staff are leaving in droves.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• on the legislation and to insert extraneous material on H.J.
• on the legislation and to insert extraneous material on H.J.
• Today the House will consider the gentleman from Alabama's legislation, H.J.
• We've had legislation on that recently to address that.
• <02:56:05.000><c> on</c> legislate on legislate on it<02:56:07.279><c> so</c><02:56:07.479><c> let's<

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, February 27, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the chief of the Office of Planning, Policy and Program Development, legislative coordinator, and
• /c> of planning policy and program of planning policy and program development.<00:02:27.400><c> Legislative
• Legislative coordinator and development.
• Legislative coordinator and as<00:02:29.600><c> always</c><00:02:30.160><c> a</c><00:02:30.280><c> proud

Bills: HB20, HB276, HB644, HB812, HB816, HB916, HB1131, HB1247, HB1518, HB1525, HB1537, HB1541, HB1546, HB1553, HB1562, HB1565, HB1566, HB1576, HB1577, HB1591, HB1605, HB1612, HB1613, HB1614, HB1618, HB1620, HB1650, HB1656, HB1658, HB1661, HB1664, HB1668, HB1676, HB1707, HB1711, HB1713, HB1715, HB1718, HB1727, HB1749, HB1756, HB1774, HB1776, HB1801, HB1802, HB1805, HB1813, HB1815, HB1831, HB1838, HB1853, HB1854, HB1859, HB1863, HB1871, HB1872, HB1918, HB1920, HB1952, HB1965, HB1966, HB1967, HB1969, HB1972, HB1973, HB1974, HB1975, HB1980, HB1985, HB2005, HB2023, HB2031, HB2033, HB2062, HB2113, HB2114, HB2116, HB2138, HB2139, HB2156, HB2158, HB2159, HB2171, HB2208, HB2268, HB2270, HB2272, HB2273, HB2276, HB2289, HB2310, HB2315, HB2335, HB2338, HB2339, HB2340, HB2343, HB2361, HB2384, HB2387, SB2338, SB2431, SB2438, SB2593, SB2907, SB2671, SB2321, SB3084, SB2401, SB3033, SB2972, SB3032, SB2806, SB3014, SB2108, SB2981, SB2973, SB2423, SB2078, SB2322, SB2397, SB2896, SB2088, SB2347, SB2408, SB2970, SB2851, SB2713, SB2697, SB2312, SB2192, SB2363, SB2530, SB3028, SB2024, SB3007, SB2599, SB2596, SB2662, SB2930, SB3334, SB2378, SB3019, SB3231, SB2240, SB2372, SB2175, SB2046, SB2298, SB2922, SB2835, SB3263, SB2174, SB2128, SB2006, SB2489, SB3134, SB2982, SB2425, SB2849, SB2797, SB2795, SB2575, SB2521, SB2765, SB2386, SB2852, SB2022, SB2117, SB2277, SB2387, SB2688, SB2885, SB3132, SB3219, SB2169, SB2591, SB2090, SB2983, SB888, SB3249, SB2611, SB2429, SB2463, SB3154, SB3131, SB3152, SB3315, SB2448, SB2054, SB2140, SB2520, SB2377, SB2986, SB2010, SB2189, SB2026, SB3010, SB2818, SB2002

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, condominiums, annual report, filing fee, real estate, developer, residency, property regime, PFAS, single-use plastics, environmental health, food ware, pollution reduction, local produce, agriculture, Hawaii Revised Statutes

Transcript Highlights:

• You've already met my legislative aide, Mia Ogata.
• Coming down from the office today also was Helena Beltran, legislative intern from Oahu.
• Jesse Fig, legislative committee clerk. Mia's mother, yes.

Bills: HB20, HB276, HB644, HB812, HB816, HB916, HB1131, HB1247, HB1518, HB1525, HB1537, HB1541, HB1546, HB1553, HB1562, HB1565, HB1566, HB1576, HB1577, HB1591, HB1605, HB1612, HB1613, HB1614, HB1618, HB1620, HB1650, HB1656, HB1658, HB1661, HB1664, HB1668, HB1676, HB1707, HB1711, HB1713, HB1715, HB1718, HB1727, HB1749, HB1756, HB1774, HB1776, HB1801, HB1802, HB1805, HB1813, HB1815, HB1831, HB1838, HB1853, HB1854, HB1859, HB1863, HB1871, HB1872, HB1918, HB1920, HB1952, HB1965, HB1966, HB1967, HB1969, HB1972, HB1973, HB1974, HB1975, HB1980, HB1985, HB2005, HB2023, HB2031, HB2033, HB2062, HB2113, HB2114, HB2116, HB2138, HB2139, HB2156, HB2158, HB2159, HB2171, HB2208, HB2268, HB2270, HB2272, HB2273, HB2276, HB2289, HB2310, HB2315, HB2335, HB2338, HB2339, HB2340, HB2343, HB2361, HB2384, HB2387, SB2338, SB2431, SB2438, SB2593, SB2907, SB2671, SB2321, SB3084, SB2401, SB3033, SB2972, SB3032, SB2806, SB3014, SB2108, SB2981, SB2973, SB2423, SB2078, SB2322, SB2397, SB2896, SB2088, SB2347, SB2408, SB2970, SB2851, SB2713, SB2697, SB2312, SB2192, SB2363, SB2530, SB3028, SB2024, SB3007, SB2599, SB2596, SB2662, SB2930, SB3334, SB2378, SB3019, SB3231, SB2240, SB2372, SB2175, SB2046, SB2298, SB2922, SB2835, SB3263, SB2174, SB2128, SB2006, SB2489, SB3134, SB2982, SB2425, SB2849, SB2797, SB2795, SB2575, SB2521, SB2765, SB2386, SB2852, SB2022, SB2117, SB2277, SB2387, SB2688, SB2885, SB3132, SB3219, SB2169, SB2591, SB2090, SB2983, SB888, SB3249, SB2611, SB2429, SB2463, SB3154, SB3131, SB3152, SB3315, SB2448, SB2054, SB2140, SB2520, SB2377, SB2986, SB2010, SB2189, SB2026, SB3010, SB2818, SB2002

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, condominiums, annual report, filing fee, real estate, developer, residency, property regime, PFAS, single-use plastics, environmental health, food ware, pollution reduction, local produce, agriculture, Hawaii Revised Statutes

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:23:25.400><c> was</c> of whether this legislation was of whether this legislation was necessary
• </c><00:28:45.799><c> adds</c> sure what this legislation adds sure what this legislation adds to<00:
• Why do we need this legislation?
• </c> we've been we've supported legislation we've been we've supported legislation that<03:10:26.680>
• We oppose this legislation.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee held a hearing on HB 566, which would require permit applications for new landfills to include a detailed leachate management plan. Representative German introduced the bill and explained that it was prompted by recent reporting on leachate management problems at New Hampshire landfills, including alleged violations and deficiency letters from DES. He said the bill was intended to address public health concerns, PFAS contamination, and increased leachate volumes tied to more severe rainstorms, while still allowing innovation in treatment and transportation methods. He also described a set of proposed amendments developed after discussions with DES and a landfill operator, including changing “permit for construction” to “operating approval,” applying the bill to landfill expansions, moving contract-related language into the planning section, and removing a proposed new subparagraph. Committee members asked whether the bill would limit operator flexibility or duplicate existing DES rules. Representative German said the bill would not dictate specific treatment methods or lock operators into long-term contracts, but would require a plan showing how leachate will be managed, transported, and disposed of, with later contract changes reported to DES. Several members and the BIA representative questioned whether the bill was necessary given existing Env 806 rules and DES enforcement authority. The Business and Industry Association opposed the bill as introduced, arguing that DES already has rules and technical expertise, that the issue is better handled through rulemaking, and that moving requirements into statute could freeze the framework and make future adjustments harder. Supporters countered that a statute would provide a stronger, more durable policy commitment in response to ongoing problems. No vote or final committee action was taken during the hearing. The discussion ended with the bill still under consideration and with the sponsor indicating that a revised amendment would likely be brought forward for later work session or executive session review.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't think you can get creative with the legislation. You might have to study that.
• I don't think you can get creative with the legislation. You might have to study that.
• I don't think you can get creative with the legislation. You might have to study that.
• I don't think you can get creative with the legislation. You might have to study that.
• the bill and that um the uh the legisl the bill also<01:09:21.799><c> has</c><01:09:22.040><c> the</

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee met to review a large package of bills, with the first four—HB 717, 742, 773, and 603—focused on special education aid, formerly called catastrophic aid. Chair Ladin explained that the committee needed to move a special education bill forward by March 4 and was trying to determine which bill would serve as the vehicle. He described the current formula and the difficulty of estimating the fiscal impact of lowering the threshold from 3.5 times the statewide average cost per pupil to a lower level, noting that DOE did not have reliable data on how many students would fall into the lower-cost bands. The committee also noted that several other bills in the package addressed SWEP and adequacy issues, and that HB 510 dealt with due process rather than funding. Mark Mello of the Bureau of School Finance testified that the department only has reliable data for special education expenditures above $70,000 per student, since claims are submitted for reimbursement at that point. He said the bureau was trying to estimate how many students might fall between 2.5x and 3.5x or 3x and 3.5x the average cost, but that the basic answer was they did not know and that any estimate would be difficult. He explained that moving the threshold from 3.5x to 2.5x would create a minimum additional cost of about $13.6 million based on existing claims, not counting new students who would enter the range. Members discussed whether districts already had the underlying data, whether a survey should be required, and how districts know when to begin tracking costs for reimbursement. The committee also discussed proration and the state’s share of special education aid. Mello explained that the current 80% state share is modeled in the formula, but the actual payment has been prorated because appropriations have not matched the statutory liability; he said the state liability was about $50 million, while the budget had provided $34 million, resulting in a 68% payment rate. HB 742 was described as a bill that would eliminate proration by paying the liability directly from the education trust fund with an overflow mechanism. Members also discussed possible alternatives such as changing the state share, using a lower threshold in a transition period, or requiring districts to submit data. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided; the committee was still in discussion and considering which bills to advance.

Transcript Highlights:

• Privilege report of the Legislative Bureau.
• It is ordered to the Legislative Bureau.
• It is ordered to the Legislative Bureau.
• It is ordered to the Legislative Bureau.
• It is ordered to the Legislative Bureau.

Bills: SR107, SCR53, SCR54, SCR55, SCR12, HB167, HB181, HB243, HB316, HB321, HB335, HB492, HB578, HB624, HB708, HB864, HB906, HB968, HB969, HB978, HB985, HB1005, HB1032, HB1077, HB1095, HB1104, HB1118, HB1157, HB1187, HB1189, HB1195, HB1198, HB1220, HB221, HCR58, SB283, SB338, SB488, SB520, HB90, HB127, HB138, HB150, HB201, HB268, HB273, HB285, HB315, HB354, HB355, HB360, HB376, HB445, HB506, HB606, HB649, HB665, HB681, HB721, HB746, HB757, HB781, HB835, HB844, HB857, HB872, HB886, HB889, HB892, HB972, HB982, HB987, HB1037, HB1068, HB1072, HB1078, HB1085, HB1132, HB1137, HB1167, HB1174, HB1232, HB1238, SB68, SB76, SB149, SB191, SB196, SB318, SB162, SB382, SCR33, SCR30, SB112, SB194, SB307, SB341, SB346, SB363, SB495, SB503, SB507, SB509, SB513, SB408, SB131, SB145, SB333, SB464, SB466, SB500, SB35, SB65, SB215, SB228, SB246, SB249, SB268, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB312, SB319, SB323, SB369, SB431, SB474, SB484, SB490, SB492, SB501, HCR14, HB537, HB652, HB653, HB661, HB726, HB756, HB851, HB964, HB966, HB34, HB35, HB48, HB474, HB553, HB758, HB852, HB10, HB16, HB36, HB44, HB46, HB52, HB61, HB78, HB98, HB102, HB124, HB126, HB131, HB135, HB141, HB142, HB164, HB170, HB171, HB179, HB194, HB231, HB245, HB280, HB292, HB294, HB297, HB305, HB336, HB337, HB351, HB436, HB594, HB789, HB956, HB957, HB995, HB1040, HB50, HB117, HB120, HB122, HB139, HB148, HB149, HB185, HB199, HB247, HB271, HB286, HB301, HB358, HB359, HB384, HB413, HB428, HB450, HB462, HB547, HB613, HB631, HB657, HB669, HB675, HB680, HB691, HB712, HB716, HB720, HB723, HB727, HB728, HB735, HB747, HB759, HB825, HB842, HB845, HB846, HB903, HB904, HB907, HB923, HB929, HB941, HB962, HB965, HB1036, HB287, HB370, HB515, HB521, HB570, HB1200, HB119, HB129, HB677, HB850

Keywords: condolence resolution, memorial resolution, tribute, sympathy, Joel Parker Sr., Louisiana Senate, rodeo, cowboy, horse trainer, stock and rodeo producer, black cowboy, African American history, community recognition, funeral resolution, celebration of life, Lottie Stampede Arena, Easter Sunday Rodeo, ranching, plantation work, faith community

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, heard a guest minister’s prayer and pledge, and then proceeded through the journal, legislative bureau report, and a large number of bills and resolutions. Several Senate resolutions and concurrent resolutions were introduced or laid over, including measures recognizing individuals and events, commemorating the YMCA’s 175th anniversary, and creating or referring study and memorial resolutions. The House also sent over multiple bills, which were introduced and referred to the appropriate committees, covering topics such as court filings, travel reimbursement, public assistance integrity, pregnancy and baby care data protections, alcohol permits, capital-case intellectual disability procedures, and pharmacy benefit manager transparency. The chamber then considered House-returned Senate bills. SB 68, a constitutional amendment concerning Louisiana Supreme Court jurisdiction over attorney disciplinary matters, failed to receive the required votes on concurrence after a 24-10 vote, though the author gave notice. SB 76, dealing with child custody modification standards, was concurred in unanimously. SB 149, on general obligation bond bid requirements, had House amendments rejected and was sent to conference. SB 191, concerning ad valorem tax notice procedures, and SB 196, extending the appeal period for tax assessments, were both concurred in. SB 318, on publication of the tax exemption budget and local reporting, was also concurred in unanimously. The Senate also suspended the rules to recall HB 1017 from the Retirement Committee and recommit it to Judiciary A. During personal privilege remarks, members highlighted Disability Awareness Day, recognized a local award recipient, and provided an update and prayer request for Senator Selders following surgery. The meeting concluded with committee announcements and adjournment to reconvene the following day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Privilege report of the Legislative Bureau.
• It is ordered to the Legislative Bureau.
• It is ordered to the Legislative Bureau.
• It is ordered to the Legislative Bureau.
• It is ordered to the Legislative Bureau.

Bills: SR107, SCR53, SCR54, SCR55, SCR12, HB167, HB181, HB243, HB316, HB321, HB335, HB492, HB578, HB624, HB708, HB864, HB906, HB968, HB969, HB978, HB985, HB1005, HB1032, HB1077, HB1095, HB1104, HB1118, HB1157, HB1187, HB1189, HB1195, HB1198, HB1220, HB221, HCR58, SB283, SB338, SB488, SB520, HB90, HB127, HB138, HB150, HB201, HB268, HB273, HB285, HB315, HB354, HB355, HB360, HB376, HB445, HB506, HB606, HB649, HB665, HB681, HB721, HB746, HB757, HB781, HB835, HB844, HB857, HB872, HB886, HB889, HB892, HB972, HB982, HB987, HB1037, HB1068, HB1072, HB1078, HB1085, HB1132, HB1137, HB1167, HB1174, HB1232, HB1238, SB68, SB76, SB149, SB191, SB196, SB318, SB162, SB382, SCR33, SCR30, SB112, SB194, SB307, SB341, SB346, SB363, SB495, SB503, SB507, SB509, SB513, SB408, SB131, SB145, SB333, SB464, SB466, SB500, SB35, SB65, SB215, SB228, SB246, SB249, SB268, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB312, SB319, SB323, SB369, SB431, SB474, SB484, SB490, SB492, SB501, HCR14, HB537, HB652, HB653, HB661, HB726, HB756, HB851, HB964, HB966, HB34, HB35, HB48, HB474, HB553, HB758, HB852, HB10, HB16, HB36, HB44, HB46, HB52, HB61, HB78, HB98, HB102, HB124, HB126, HB131, HB135, HB141, HB142, HB164, HB170, HB171, HB179, HB194, HB231, HB245, HB280, HB292, HB294, HB297, HB305, HB336, HB337, HB351, HB436, HB594, HB789, HB956, HB957, HB995, HB1040, HB50, HB117, HB120, HB122, HB139, HB148, HB149, HB185, HB199, HB247, HB271, HB286, HB301, HB358, HB359, HB384, HB413, HB428, HB450, HB462, HB547, HB613, HB631, HB657, HB669, HB675, HB680, HB691, HB712, HB716, HB720, HB723, HB727, HB728, HB735, HB747, HB759, HB825, HB842, HB845, HB846, HB903, HB904, HB907, HB923, HB929, HB941, HB962, HB965, HB1036, HB287, HB370, HB515, HB521, HB570, HB1200, HB119, HB129, HB677, HB850

Keywords: condolence resolution, memorial resolution, tribute, sympathy, Joel Parker Sr., Louisiana Senate, rodeo, cowboy, horse trainer, stock and rodeo producer, black cowboy, African American history, community recognition, funeral resolution, celebration of life, Lottie Stampede Arena, Easter Sunday Rodeo, ranching, plantation work, faith community

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think from a legislative perspective, there could be more robust legislation to support districts
• I have complete faith in the legislative system.
• And there is a reason the governor added water to be a strategic legislative priority this legislative
• This legislation, toward starting to solve the problem, this legislative... ...toward starting to solve
• the problem this legislative session.

Summary: The committee held a hearing on high-capacity groundwater wells proposed in Anderson, Henderson, and Houston counties, with members framing the issue as one of local water supply, fairness, and the need to modernize groundwater law while protecting private property rights. Opening remarks focused on the scale of the proposed Redtown Ranch and Pine Bliss projects, the potential export of tens of thousands of acre-feet of groundwater annually, and concerns that the applications lacked sufficient technical detail and could harm nearby landowners, cities, agriculture, and manufacturing. Members also noted the broader context of the recent flooding tragedy in central Texas and the Legislature’s intent to address water-related loss of life in the upcoming special session. Witnesses from the Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts and the Texas Water Development Board explained the current groundwater management framework. They described groundwater conservation districts as the state’s preferred management method, the role of groundwater management areas and desired future conditions, and how the Water Development Board uses those conditions to calculate modeled available groundwater. They emphasized that districts rely on local data, monitoring wells, and planning processes, but that information is often more limited in areas without a district, where the rule of capture applies. Members pressed witnesses on recharge rates, export permits, subsidence, the effect of pumping on nearby wells, the age and real-time availability of model data, and whether the proposed project would exceed modeled available groundwater in some counties. TCEQ explained its limited oversight role over groundwater conservation districts, including inquiries, compliance actions, and, in extreme cases, dissolution authority. Water Development Board staff also outlined funding programs, saying the New Water Supply for Texas Fund is limited to projects such as brackish desalination, reuse, ASR, and other new-supply projects, and does not fund fresh groundwater exports alone. They said the project at issue had not applied for board funding. A water lawyer then testified on the rule of capture, ownership in place, and district regulation, arguing that districts must use permitting and other tools to manage production within modeled available groundwater and that the Legislature could consider additional authority over groundwater exports under current law.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> legislation in the conference committee. legislation in the conference committee.
• Uh, he has complied with all ethical rules and so forth.
• legislation? legislation?
• And when council reviewed the And when council reviewed the legislation, legislation, legislation, I
• ,</c><01:54:35.040><c> the</c> reminder for the lawyer legislator, the reminder for the lawyer legislator

Keywords: MS Senate Floor - 5 March, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> state fire marshall has the legislative state fire marshall has the legislative tools<00:23:50.480
• It has become much more complicated through legislative changes. ...through legislative changes like
• </c> not anything that could be legislated. not anything that could be legislated. Correct.
• </c> sponsors and other legislators? sponsors and other legislators?
• I'm the legislative liaison for behavioral health at DHS.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. testimony and why I think this piece of legislation is important to Texans.
• Bernie, in financial literacy, underscores the critical need for this type of legislation.
• There's legislative district profile. files that are being distributed right now.
• And my understanding of the intent of this legislation is not to be punitive.
• I respectfully urge you to support support this legislation.

Bills: HB6, HB27, HB 123, HB210, HB213, HB222, HB610, HB 1085, HB1481, HB6, HB27, HB123, HB210, HB213, HB222

Keywords: mental health, telehealth, public schools, discipline management, behavioral interventions, financial literacy, high school education, curriculum requirements, economics, personal finance, HB 123, kindergarten readiness, early literacy, early numeracy, reading screening, math screening, foundational literacy, foundational numeracy, dyslexia screening, reading intervention

Transcript Highlights:

• read the language on it, but that would be really weird that the actual words used in the actual legislation
• and as a sponsor of HB 2123, it would provide a vehicle to do that, and a supporter of previous legislation
• He added that there are moral and ethical differences about gambling or the lottery, but that the voters
• I mean, I'm talking about policy legislation, of course.
• Representative Fogle: I'm talking about policy legislation, of course.

Summary: The House Budget Committee met with a quorum and began by taking up a series of budget bills and committee substitutes, including House Bills 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013, which were laid over. The chair then walked members through a committee amendment package, explaining a mix of technical corrections, fund swaps, and adjustments involving highway patrol fringe costs, summary budget timing, rural health care, the CCBHO FMAP correction, and marijuana-fund reallocations. Members adopted the chair’s decrease amendments and later adopted the corresponding increase amendments, including partial restoration for Care to Learn, a Title I grant language change, an Overpass and Seymour road project, technical corrections for DPS and health-related items, and restorations for Jordan Valley and FQHC substance abuse funding. After a brief recess for session and lunch, the committee returned to House Bill 2 and began considering member amendments. On House Bill 2, the committee adopted Representative Lewis’s amendment making the curriculum transparency and parent portal item a pilot program, and Representative Davidson’s amendment adding $2 million in federal Child Care and Development Block Grant funds for One-Time Wonder School. Representative Steinhoff’s attempt to shift funding from Missouri Star Solutions and WorkKeys to the Success Ready Student Assessment failed, as did Representative Taylor’s proposal to move $1.2 million from career ladder to community college nursing programs. The committee then rejected Representative Steinhoff’s attempt to redirect Title I Innovation and Improvement Grant funds back to the governor’s recommendation, and later adopted Representative Steinhoff’s vocational rehabilitation amendment, which restored the department’s request and drew down additional federal matching funds. The committee also adopted Representative Hyne’s language amendment to allow flexibility between the MOQPK pre-K grant program and the Child Care Works tri-share program, though members discussed concerns about cross-bill flexibility and whether funds would actually be available. Representative Fogle’s amendment to require budget communications sent to committee chairs to also go to the full Budget Committee was defeated after members expressed concern about information overload and the difference between required distribution and requested information. The committee then took up a lengthy debate over Representative Fogle’s amendment to remove language barring Parents as Teachers participation for children already enrolled in public pre-K. Supporters argued the programs serve different purposes and that families should not be forced to choose between them, while opponents said the language was intended to prevent duplication of services and preserve resources for children without other options. After extensive discussion, the amendment failed. The committee continued with additional House Bill 2 amendments, but the transcript ends before final action on the remaining items.

Transcript Highlights:

• Use it as model legislation.
• But ultimately, it as model legislation.
• </c><03:21:49.279><c> that's</c> And so this won't be legislation that's And so this won't be legislation
• </c> had OS or not OS, I have had legislative had OS or not OS, I have had legislative research<04:24
• </c><04:24:53.040><c> research</c> and as I said, legislative research and as I said, legislative research

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator, I cannot recall that piece of legislation.
• That's the purpose of this piece of legislation.
• Consistent with the legislative intent of the bill. With that, Mr.
• It's the enabling legislation for that probably within a couple of weeks.
• There may be other legislation other than this bill that addresses him. Not this bill.

Bills: SJR 12, SCR 39, SB 7, SB 8, SB 27, SB 29, SB 125, SB 241, SB 371, SB 396, SB 406, SB 464, SB 568, SB 578, SB 608, SB 617, SB 660, SB 689, SB 693, SB 707, SB 731, SB 732, SB 763, SB 779, SB 836, SB 854, SB 857, SB 875, SB 878, SB 879, SB 906, SB 920, SB 921, SB 922, SB 942, SB 965, SB 985, SB 996, SB 1029, SB 1035, SB 1036, SB 1059, SB 1084, SB 1098, SB 1101, SB 1185, SB 1188, SB 1321, SB 1332, SB 1366, SB 1388, SB 1396, SB 1453, SB 1484, SB 1494, SB 1536, SB 1563, SB 1596, SB 1610, SB 1619, SB 1737, SB 1738, SB 1741, SB 1816, SB 1822, SB 1841, SB 1939, SB 2155, SB 2188, SB 2230

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, border security, southern border, federal immigration policy, illegal immigration, cartels, transnational cartels, fentanyl, drug trafficking, human trafficking, Operation Lone Star, Texas border, National Guard, state guard, border wall, border barriers

Summary: In this meeting, significant discussions revolved around the passage and modification of various Senate Bills, including SB1388, which pertains to family support services under the Health and Human Services Commission. Senator Kolkhorst advocated for the bill, emphasizing its focus on pro-life, family-centered care. The committee passed the bill after thorough examination, showcasing a collaborative effort among the members to ensure its alignment with successful past initiatives. In another session, Senator Hughes presented SB942, aimed at retroactive child support linked to prenatal care, which sparked a constructive dialogue reflecting bipartisan support for maternal and child welfare.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the conflict for legislators, legislators— Have ways of financial means.
• You know, the legislative process is one of inquiries.
• I don't think our job as legislators I don't think our job as legislators is to dictate how we choose
• It could be the best piece of legislation all year.
• It could be the best piece of legislation all year.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:19:12.840><c> to</c> with your P pending legislation to with your P pending legislation to provide
• I want to leave you with this: our commitment to legislation.
• </c> document that's our legislative document that's our legislative authority<01:34:08.360><c> to</c
• With me is Steve Lante, who is our legislative liaison.
• With me is Steve Lante, who is our legislative liaison.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Transportation Committee met for an opening/orientation session in which members introduced themselves and explained their interest in the committee. Several members noted backgrounds in trucking, piloting, boating, motorcycles, road safety, or constituent concerns about transportation issues. The chair also noted several absent members and said the committee would first hear agency presentations before covering committee procedures. The Department of Safety gave the main presentation, outlining its seven divisions and how they relate to transportation policy and the Highway Fund. The assistant commissioner emphasized that Highway Fund revenue supports both the Department of Transportation and the Department of Safety, with collections coming largely from the road toll/gas tax, DMV fees, and the new electric vehicle surcharge. He also noted that 12% of Highway Fund revenues go to local road repair through the DOT Betterment Fund, and warned that the fund has had a structural deficit for several biennia, requiring General Fund transfers that may be uncertain this session. He said the department aims to provide data and fiscal context on legislation and fiscal notes. State Police then provided a detailed overview of its structure and operations, including the Operations Bureau, Investigative Services Bureau, and Justice Information Bureau. Testimony highlighted Troop G’s role in vehicle inspections, commercial motor vehicle enforcement, fraud investigations, and consumer complaint handling, as well as statewide staffing shortages. The division reported rising calls for service, motor vehicle stops, DWI arrests, and other arrests despite a vacancy rate of about 17%. It also described aviation, K-9, bomb squad, special events response, SWAT, narcotics, major crime, forensic laboratory, and other specialized units, with statistics on drug seizures, investigations, and lab workload. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• read the language on it, but that would be really weird that the actual words used in the actual legislation
• and as a sponsor of HB 2123, it would provide a vehicle to do that, and a supporter of previous legislation
• I understand we have differences in is gambling or lottery morally, ethically correct?
• But I thought we had some question mark on creating funds in the budget because it required legislation
• I mean, I'm talking about policy legislation, of course.

Keywords: 959, house, all