Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? Move the vote.
• Is there any further discussion? Is there a motion to move the bill?
• Is there any further discussion? Is there a motion to move the bill?
• Any further discussion? Thank you, Senator. Any further discussion? Good bill. It's moving.
• Any further discussion? Thank you, Senator. Any further discussion? Good bill. It's moving.

Committee: Senate Codes

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Codes Committee held its first meeting of the year with a 10-bill agenda, opening with brief remarks from the chair and Ranking Member Palumbo emphasizing the committee’s bipartisan tone and noting that several bills related to National Human Trafficking Prevention Month. The chair also announced quorum, identified members present, and introduced the clerk and counsel. The committee discussed and reported a series of bills, many involving criminal procedure, penal law, and civil rights. Several measures focused on human trafficking and sexual exploitation, including bills addressing statutes of limitation for sex trafficking cases and a new bill to close a loophole involving 16- and 17-year-olds in commercial sex offenses. Other bills dealt with appellate review, plea-related criminal procedure issues, consent and autonomy, and executive-law changes. Some sponsors and members explained their support or concerns, particularly on appellate finality and judicial economy, but the overall tone remained respectful and collaborative. Most bills were reported out of committee, several to the Finance Committee. Recorded negatives or without-recommendation votes appeared on a few measures, including opposition from Senators Palumbo, Murray, and Gallivan on one criminal procedure bill and mixed votes on others. The final bill, Senator Mayer’s measure on commercial sex involving minors, was praised as closing a dangerous loophole and was reported unanimously, concluding the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> discussion? Representative Fellows. discussion? Representative Fellows.
• </c> &gt;&gt; Further discussion represent Damon. &gt;&gt; Further discussion represent Damon.
• </c> &gt;&gt; Further discussion represent Damon. &gt;&gt; Further discussion represent Damon.
• Will it be<01:26:58.320><c> discussed</c> be discussed be discussed &gt;&gt; bills<01:26:59.040><c> coming
• </c> Further discussion. Represent Brickie. Further discussion. Represent Brickie.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up several school building aid bills. HB 295, which would make school building aid program funds non-lapsing, drew debate over whether the program is effective and whether funds should be allowed to carry forward. Supporters argued the program is underfunded and that even small leftover amounts should remain available for building aid; opponents said non-lapsing funds limit future budget flexibility and that the program creates winners and losers. The committee voted 4-3 to recommend HB 295 inexpedient to legislate (ITL). The committee then considered HB 366, which would increase school building aid for eligible projects and include retroactive funding for projects completed in the past. The motion to ITL was supported on the grounds that retroactive payments would be unfair to districts still waiting in line and that the legislature should focus on future projects. Supporters of the bill said the increase was modest and that districts that built during a prior moratorium on aid were left with long-term fiscal burdens. The committee again voted 4-3 to recommend ITL. The discussion also broadened into special education funding and a retained bill, HB 742, concerning catastrophic special education aid and the source of funding. Members debated whether the education trust fund should cover the aid and whether the committee should act now or wait for a separate commission studying special education costs. Several members emphasized that special education costs are rising, that more data is needed on student identification and funding formulas, and that the commission’s report may provide better guidance. The chair said the subcommittee’s recommendations would go to the full committee, and the next meeting was expected to be rescheduled from November 4 to later that week because of election-related conflicts.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? I do have a substitute ending in 0.06C, and it's been distributed.
• Any discussion?
• Any discussion on the substitute? Mm-hmm. Yeah.
• Any discussion on the substitute? The substitute just adds a little bit.
• Any further discussion? Seeing none.

Committee: House Health and Mental Health

Summary: The Committee on Health and Mental Health met with a quorum and took up several measures in executive session. The committee first considered Senate Bill 878, a pharmacy-related bill. Members adopted a committee substitute and amendment that added language previously seen in other bills, including pseudoephedrine and 340B provisions, and language matching Senate floor changes on ivermectin. One member raised concerns about making hydroxychloroquine available over the counter and about pharmacists prescribing class II devices such as CPAP machines, but the substitute ultimately passed by a vote of 13-2. The committee then considered House Bill 3457, Representative Burns’s medically complex patients bill. A substitute was adopted that narrowed the definition of “medically complex patient,” changed one provision from “shall” to “may,” and required primary care physician approval of a care plan before it could be entered into the alert system. The substitute passed unanimously, 15-0. Finally, the committee approved two resolutions sponsored by Representative Harbison. House Resolution 538, on ALS awareness, was amended to add more emphasis on assistive technology and augmentative/alternative communication, then passed 15-0. House Resolution 4661, on chronic kidney disease, also passed unanimously, 15-0. The meeting concluded with brief closing remarks and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean where's the discussions?
• :33.520><c> Michigan,</c><00:20:34.400><c> uh</c> discuss these states Texas, Michigan, uh discuss these
• I think we do person to discuss this.
• discussions. Uh obviously we we want to discussions.
• </c> There was there was internal discussions There was there was internal discussions uh<00:57:36.319

Keywords: The original version of this live stream dropped before the meeting was technically finished. This is the complete copy pulled from back up sources., 958, all

Summary: The committee met to hear updates from the Department of Juvenile Justice and the Department of Corrections on two related issues: a proposed high-acuity juvenile mental health treatment facility and medical services contracts, including the impact of Wellpath’s bankruptcy proceedings. At the start, the chair agreed to hear the Department of Corrections first so members could get context on the medical contract before turning to DJJ’s proposal. DOC officials said Wellpath, the department’s comprehensive medical and mental health provider since 2013, was awarded its current contract through a 2021 procurement process. They reported that Wellpath’s Chapter 11 reorganization plan had been confirmed and that the company had transitioned ownership to lenders, but had not yet fully completed the bankruptcy process. DOC said there had been no service lapses, no reduction in care, and no known impact on Kentucky vendors or hospitals, and that DOC staff meet with Wellpath almost weekly. Members asked whether the committee had been kept informed and whether the bankruptcy could affect future services or subcontractors. DJJ then presented its concept for a high-acuity facility, explaining that the project is still in the preliminary programming and conceptual stage and has not yet entered the formal design phase with DECA. Officials said the proposal in the capital plan would create a 24-bed facility, with 16 clinical beds and 8 assessment/stabilization beds, to serve justice-involved youth with serious mental health needs. They said the facility would need to separate males and females and high- and low-risk youth, and that current placements often require sending youth out of state to places such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Arkansas, and Texas. Staff said the goal is to centralize treatment, improve safety, and reduce the need for fragmented or out-of-state placements. Committee members questioned the cost estimates, staffing needs, and whether the facility was justified given the small number of youth currently placed out of state. DJJ said the operational estimate includes an unknown medical-contract component and that the number of youth needing the facility can fluctuate because of surges in the juvenile population. Officials also said they had consulted with South Carolina, which is developing a similar facility, and noted that renovating existing facilities was considered but could be more expensive or impractical than building a separate site. No votes or formal actions were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> or any further discussion about scope. or any further discussion about scope.
• &gt;&gt; discussed<00:21:24.640><c> again.</c> &gt;&gt; discussed again. &gt;&gt; discussed again.
• </c> by item for any that need discussion. by item for any that need discussion.
• </c><01:39:55.840><c> Peter</c> discussion on that. Peter discussion on that.
• </c> contribution to that um discussion? contribution to that um discussion?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Further discussion, the representative. Mr. Speaker.
• Discussion on the gentleman's motion. I've withdrawn my motion.
• Further discussion, gentleman from Pulaski County. Thank you, Mr.
• Further discussion. Mr. Speaker. Further discussion.
• Speaker, I close for the discussion.

Summary: The House opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and approval of the previous day’s journal by a 119-0 vote. Members then used personal privilege remarks to recognize a 40th wedding anniversary, honor Sherry Anderson for her service to the House, and observe Black History Month with a tribute to former Senator Yvonne Starks-Wilson. The chamber also welcomed several guest groups, including representatives from the Alzheimer’s Association, the Festus girls cross-country team, the Blue Springs Chamber of Commerce Leadership Conference, and advocates connected to the blind pension fund. The main floor debate centered on House Committee Substitute for House Bills 2033, 1608, 1672, and 1854, which would remove the sunset from the SAFE Act and continue restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors. Supporters argued the bill protects children, citing concerns about puberty blockers, hormones, surgery, and evolving medical guidance; opponents said it targets transgender youth, interferes with family and medical decisions, and misstates the science. After extended debate, the previous question was adopted 102-45, and the combined bill package passed 102-40. House Bill 1847, creating the Dental Licensure Compact, also passed 138-10 after questions about reciprocity, data sharing, and state sovereignty. The House then passed House Committee Substitute for House Bill 1866, which bars peace officer licensure for applicants whose certification was revoked or suspended and for non-citizens, by a 101-36 vote after debate over citizenship, military service, and law enforcement standards. House Committee Substitute for House Bills 1908 and 2337 passed 147-0; the sponsor described it as protecting women and children in abusive situations and addressing legal responsibility in marriage. House Bill 1961, allowing temporary dietitian licenses and a compact for interstate practice, passed 137-8. House Bill 2180, changing Department of Revenue and blind pension notice delivery methods and allowing electronic notices, passed 146-0 and was described as both a service improvement and a cost saver. House Bill 2591, updating speech-language pathologist licensure to allow out-of-state training and practice in Missouri, passed 144-0. The House then announced upcoming committee meetings, a Scouting America Eagle Scout recognition, an America 250 celebration event, and a Labor Caucus meeting before adjourning until Monday, February 16, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> great discussion on this. great discussion on this.
• Further discussion?
• Further<01:25:30.920><c> discussion?</c> Further discussion? Further discussion?
• Further discussion.
• Further<01:34:49.120><c> discussion.</c> Further discussion. Further discussion.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion?
• Any discussion?
• Any discussion?
• Any discussion?
• Any discussion?

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is 20 minutes enough to discuss all seven? All right. Is 20 minutes enough to discuss all seven?
• Any other discussions?
• Any further discussions? Thank you, Madam Chair. The AI and... Any further discussions?
• Any further discussions? All those in favor? Thank you. Thank you. Any further discussions?
• Any discussions? Yes.

Summary: The committee first took executive action on House Bill 1170, which would require disclosures when content is developed or modified by artificial intelligence and address provenance tools and enforcement. Staff described a proposed substitute and several amendments. The committee rejected amendments that would have applied the bill to public entities and tribal nations, added technical-and-commercial-feasibility language, and created a geo-blocking provision or a right to cure. It adopted amendments allowing comparable existing detection tools to satisfy the bill, protecting covered providers from liability when disclosures are unintentionally altered despite reasonable preservation measures, and setting a January 1, 2028 effective date. Members then debated whether the bill was ready for enactment, with supporters emphasizing transparency and consumer trust and opponents warning it was premature and could hinder innovation. The committee voted 7-4, with two excused, to report the bill out of committee with a do-pass recommendation. The committee then heard House Bill 2186, which would expand state support for applicants seeking federal economic development funds, create a matching-funds account, and require a study of available federal grants. The prime sponsor said the bill would help Washington capture more federal dollars, especially for projects that require matching funds, and would expand the Fund Hub WA website beyond environmental grants. Testimony in support came from the Port of Seattle, the Washington Economic Development Association, the City of Pasco, a downtown Kennewick nonprofit, and the Department of Commerce, all saying the bill would improve competitiveness, help underserved communities, and leverage state dollars for larger federal returns. Commerce said it was still developing the fiscal note and technical edits. The hearing on HB 2186 was then closed. Finally, the committee opened a hearing on House Bill 2351, which would protect emergency responders and emergency response operations. Staff explained that the bill would bar local governments and incident command systems from assisting enforcement actions targeting emergency responders based on protected status, create emergency operation zones with restrictions on law enforcement activity, and change the obstruction statute to cover obstruction of emergency responders. The prime sponsor and many local officials, firefighters, and advocates testified in support, citing incidents where federal enforcement actions disrupted wildfire response and other emergencies. Some witnesses raised concerns about administrative burden, ambiguity, and possible unintended consequences, including a proposed mental-health defense and clarification of responder identification. The Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs and the Association of Washington Cities said they supported the goal but wanted changes to avoid conflicts and reduce burdens. The hearing concluded without a vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion on the bill?
• Any further discussion?
• Further discussion on the amendment?
• Further discussion on the amendment.
• We discussed this in tax committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have any discussion on the amendment? No second. Awesome, thank you. Yes, we have discussion.
• We have discussion. Discussion, thank you. Representative Brown. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair, Mr.
• Is there any further discussion?
• As I think about our discussion in Silver City, and, you know, we had a discussion about EVs and how
• Is there any further discussion? Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Do I have a motion?

Keywords: 996, all

Summary: The committee met with quorum and took up only HB 3, the Department of Transportation Appropriation Act of 2026 for FY27. The bill was presented as an amended budget that would increase NMDOT’s operating budget by about $132.6 million, or 10.2%, using available cash balances, additional projected revenue, and contingent revenue tied to Senate Bill 2, the highway bond bill. Staff walked through the amendment section by section, explaining changes to project design and construction, highway operations, program support, modal programs, federal and interagency transfer lines, corrected performance-measure language, and added budget adjustment authority for the current and next fiscal years. Several members raised concerns about the late circulation of a revised amendment and the appearance of multiple bill versions, arguing the committee had not had enough time to review the changes and that the process may have violated the 24-hour rule. Others asked for clarification on how the budget distinguished between rehabilitation and maintenance, and DOT staff explained that major rehabilitation is generally tied to STIP projects while maintenance is handled through district-level plans and contracts. Members also discussed the use of cash balances for non-recurring spending, the impact of electric vehicles on road revenue, and the need for more maintenance, litter cleanup, fencing, and beautification funding. DOT and executive representatives noted the amendment includes a significant maintenance increase and said additional non-recurring funding could also come through House Bill 2 and the capital bill. The committee first rejected a substitute motion to delay action, then adopted the amendment and later voted due pass on HB 3 as amended. Public comment was opened, but no one spoke in support or opposition. After passage, members explained their votes, with some supporting the bill as a needed transportation investment and others objecting to the process and the compressed review timeline.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chin, further discussion.
• Any further discussion?
• Is there any further discussion? discussion? discussion? Senator<00:35:12.560><c> Rosen.
• Further discussion?
• Any discussion on the districts. Any discussion on the amendment?

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Discussion on House Bill 2016. Lady from St. Louis County. Discussion on House Bill 2016.
• Discussion on House Bill 1869. Gentleman from Iron.
• Discussion on the bill. Lady from St. Louis County: “Mr.
• “Further discussion, gentleman from California.” “Further discussion, gentleman from Calloway.
• Further discussion on the bill.

Summary: The House opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, approval of the previous House Journal by a 101-0 vote, and numerous special guest introductions, including student groups, robotics teams, artists, and a choir. Committee reports from Fiscal Review recommended passage of several bills, including HB 1869, HB 2387/HB 2480, HB 2061, HB 2481, and HB 2885. The chamber then took up Senate changes to HB 2016, a bill addressing anti-Semitism in educational institutions. Supporters said the Senate amendments clarified that schools should consider context, protected criticism of Israel, added charter schools, and required reporting of all Title VI complaints; opponents argued the bill was redundant, could chill speech, and did not match the state’s broader anti-discrimination rhetoric. After a successful previous-question motion, the House adopted the Senate substitute 101-19 and then gave final passage to the bill 100-17. Several third-reading bills followed. HB 2481, dealing with SNAP and Medicaid-related verification and program restrictions, drew sharp debate over fraud prevention versus added bureaucracy and harm to low-income Missourians; it passed 95-44. HB 1869, creating a process to repair veteran gravestones damaged by natural causes, passed 137-2. HB 2927, requiring written settlement demands in bad-faith liability claims to remain open for 90 days and reference the statute, passed 90-50. HB 2387/HB 2480, reinstating the presidential primary and moving it to the first Tuesday in March, passed 116-23. HB 2885, redirecting the final $1 million from boat registration fees to fund the water patrol, passed 112-27. HB 2517, a real estate wholesaler disclosure bill, passed 130-6. HB 3107 was moved to the informal calendar. Debate also began on HB 1730, which would legalize firearm suppressors in Missouri; supporters framed it as a freedom, hearing-protection, and economic bill, while opponents warned it would make gun violence harder to detect and could aid criminals, but no final vote on that bill appears in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a discussion?
• Is there a discussion?
• Is there discussion?
• Further discussion.
• Is there discussion? Senator from Lewis: No discussion.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think I'm going to let all the discussion on that.
• Then we had a robust discussion about the 25%.
• Is there any discussion on this before we proceed?
• Any other discussion? All right.
• Is there any discussion?

Committee: House Special Committee on Property Tax Reform

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any further discussion? Seeing Okay. Any further discussion?
• Further discussion on L2.
• Further discussion on L2.
• Further discussion on L2.
• Further discussion on L2.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion on the sub?
• Any discussion?
• And I think the discussion was pretty good. Representative Farnan, any discussion on that?
• So, yeah, I'm glad there was a discussion.
• Further discussion. Representative Boyd. Thank you. Thank you. Further discussion. Representative.

Committee: House Professional Registration and Licensing

Summary: The committee met with a quorum present and went into executive session. It first took up House Bill 2957, combining several respiratory care-related measures into a House Committee substitute. Members briefly discussed the consolidation as a way to condense related bills and save floor time. The committee adopted the substitute and then voted the bill due pass by a roll call vote of 19 yes and 2 no. The committee then considered House Bill 2897, the optometry bill. Members noted there had been recent discussion about collaborative practice, the Board of Healing Arts, and continuing education, and several said they wanted the conversation to continue. One member opposed the bill as too broad and a public safety concern, while another said he still had reservations but would vote yes to move the issue forward. The committee voted the bill due pass by a roll call vote of 19 yes and 2 no. After the two votes, there was no further business and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? Okay, we had a second from Representative Murphy. Any discussion?
• Further discussion?
• Further discussion?
• Any further discussion? Any further discussion?
• Any discussion? No discussion. We'll have a vote. No discussion.

Bills: HB1623

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Keywords: HB 1623, North Dakota, rural health, rural health transformation program, medical facility infrastructure loan fund, medical facility infrastructure loan program, rural health loan program, Bank of North Dakota, Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, federal grant, health care infrastructure, rural hospitals, critical access hospitals, nonprofit health care providers, gap financing, loan fund, public health funding, healthcare financing, Medicaid

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 1624, the “Universal Lunch Bill,” from Rep. Mike Nathie. He argued the proposal should be placed in Century Code rather than the Constitution so future legislatures can adjust it if state finances tighten, and said the bill would start the program a year earlier with a $65 million appropriation for one school year. DPI testified that the estimate did not include nonpublic schools that do not participate, and members questioned the impact on Title I, free-and-reduced applications, private-school accountability, breakfast mandates for schools that do not currently serve breakfast, and whether the funding could come from the DPI budget or other sources. Supporters, including North Dakota United, the North Dakota Catholic Conference, a pediatrician, and the American Heart Association, said universal meals improve student health and learning, reduce family costs, and are better handled in statute than by constitutional amendment. No opposition testimony was offered, and the chair closed the hearing for later work-session action. The committee then took up House Bill 1627, introduced by Rep. Tye Dressler, which would raise the income threshold for the state-funded school lunch program from 225% to 300% of poverty, with an estimated cost of about $7 million for 2026-27. Dressler said the bill is intended as a targeted, budget-friendly alternative to the ballot measure and emphasized that the state should maximize federal meal dollars while improving participation in the current program. Members questioned whether raising the threshold would actually increase utilization, whether a dollar amount would be clearer than a percentage, and how the change would affect federal reimbursements and application rates. DPI said it could quickly calculate additional percentage levels, and the chair closed the hearing, directing DPI to prepare more numbers for the work session. Finally, the committee opened Senate Bill 2403, presented by Sen. Schiable, to create a short-term bridge-loan program for financially distressed hospitals, centered on Jacobson Memorial Hospital in Elgin. The bill would authorize up to $5 million per loan, with a $10 million appropriation available on a first-come, first-served basis, and would run only through June 30, 2027. Schiable said the hospital’s debt and operating problems threaten local health care, ambulance service, and the community’s economy, and that the proposal was designed narrowly with Bank of North Dakota review to avoid creating a broad precedent. Committee members asked whether the appropriation could be reduced and whether the bank would still apply commercial feasibility and repayment standards; Schiable said yes, the bank would still evaluate the loan and could reject it if it was not sound.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion?
• Any further discussion?
• Any discussion? Seeing none.
• Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion on that?

Committee: House Crime and Public Safety

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Further discussion.
• </c> discussion. The Senator Pappas. discussion. The Senator Pappas.
• Further<00:37:49.360><c> discussion.</c> Further discussion. Further discussion.
• discussion, Senator Senator Further discussion, Senator Senator Pratt.
• </c> uh canopy discussion. uh canopy discussion.

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: 1187, senate, all