Transcript Highlights:

• And also the hurting of our people will intensify and have a feedback effect and make the downturn even

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee held an informational hearing on California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or Rainy Day Fund, with opening remarks focused on the state’s long history of revenue volatility and the role reserves play in smoothing downturns. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that California’s personal income tax base is highly volatile because high-income earners’ income is tied to capital gains and other fluctuating sources, and that Proposition 2’s current reserve rules set aside 1.5% of General Fund revenues plus a share of excess capital gains, but cap constitutional deposits at 10% of General Fund taxes. The LAO said its analysis evaluates reserve policy over decades and found the current system would cover about 30% of funding shortfalls in a 90th-percentile downturn scenario over 50 years, which is an improvement over no reserve but still inadequate. The LAO recommended raising the reserve cap substantially, ultimately to 50% by 2055, with an immediate increase to 20% and gradual increases thereafter. It also suggested either replacing Proposition 2’s deposit formulas with broader rules that capture volatility across all tax revenues or, alternatively, depositing all excess capital gains rather than only a share. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s prior proposal similarly sought to raise the cap from 10% to 20% and exclude reserve deposits and withdrawals from the state appropriations limit, arguing those two constraints limited the state’s ability to save during recent revenue surges. Other panelists and members discussed whether reserves should be paired with broader structural changes, including unemployment insurance reform, safety-net funding, infrastructure reserves, and the projected surplus temporary holding account. The California Budget and Policy Center supported reserve reform but emphasized balancing savings with current needs and noted other tools such as revenue increases, borrowing from special funds, and the new surplus-holding account. Members debated the causes and effects of Proposition 13, the appropriations limit, business departures, and whether reserve policy should be more directly tied to protecting Californians’ access to health care, food assistance, child care, and other core services. No votes or formal actions were taken, as the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• And also the hurting of our people will intensify and have a feedback effect and make the downturn even

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee held an informational hearing on California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or Rainy Day Fund, with presentations from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Department of Finance, Practical Idealism Economics, and the California Budget and Policy Center. The LAO explained that California’s revenue volatility is driven largely by the personal income tax and high-income capital gains, and described how Proposition 2 deposits work, the 10% cap on the BSA, and the LAO’s evaluation that the current policy would cover only about 30% of funding shortfalls over 50 years in an unfavorable benchmark scenario. The LAO recommended raising the cap to 50% over time and either adopting broader deposit rules or depositing all excess capital gains. Finance said the administration had proposed raising the cap to 20% and excluding reserve deposits and withdrawals from the state appropriations limit. The Budget Center supported reserve reform but stressed balancing savings with current service needs and noted other tools such as revenue changes, borrowing from special funds, and the new Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account. Committee members debated the purpose and adequacy of reserves, the role of the state appropriations limit, and whether reserves should be paired with broader fiscal reforms. Several senators argued that reserves are needed to preserve core services during downturns and that the current system is too complicated and too small, while others emphasized the need to protect spending on health care, child care, and other services for working Californians. There was also discussion of infrastructure spending as a possible countercyclical tool and whether deposits for infrastructure should be treated differently under reserve and SAL rules. The LAO said the Legislature has flexibility in defining infrastructure spending and suggested an infrastructure fund could function as a separate reserve-like mechanism. A significant portion of the hearing turned to broader tax and budget policy, including repeated references to Proposition 13, the state’s revenue structure, business departures, unemployment insurance financing, and the impact of inequality on California’s fiscal resilience. Some members argued Prop. 13 was driven by affordability concerns for homeowners, while others said it created loopholes that benefit corporations and constrain local revenue. The hearing did not take any vote or formal action; it remained informational, with the chair indicating the committee would continue questions and public comment after the panel discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• And also the hurting of our people will intensify and have a feedback effect and make the downturn even

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I will be discussing and bringing up this issue for their feedback. Yeah.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that lots of multinationals bear this burden, you may be taxing the multinational, and some of that feedback

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined California’s taxation of multinational corporations, especially the Water’s Edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. Chairs opened by framing the issue as a review of whether current rules fairly and sufficiently tax foreign subsidiary income, given profit shifting concerns, budget pressures, and the long history since Water’s Edge was adopted in the 1980s. The first panel from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and Franchise Tax Board explained the mechanics of unitary taxation, apportionment, and the Water’s Edge election, and provided filing data showing Water’s Edge filers are a small share of returns but account for a large share of corporate tax liability. FTB witnesses said the agency already administers both methods and could handle a shift to mandatory worldwide reporting with education and outreach, though revenue estimates are difficult because foreign affiliate information is not directly available. Committee members asked about foreign government pushback, administrative burden, industries with more profit shifting, revenue uncertainty, and whether companies would leave California. LAO and FTB witnesses said pushback from foreign governments was plausible, but they did not expect major business flight because California’s tax is largely based on sales rather than physical presence. They also said worldwide reporting could reduce profit shifting but might increase revenue volatility and litigation risk. A second panel of academic and tax policy witnesses argued that Water’s Edge is a loophole that rewards aggressive tax planning, that worldwide combined reporting would better capture income tied to California, and that modern federal and international rules such as NCTI/GILTI, CAMT, and Pillar Two reduce compliance concerns and make a return to worldwide reporting more feasible. They also said California’s current system can create selection effects and may under-tax large multinationals. In the next panel, a California Budget and Policy Center witness urged eliminating the Water’s Edge election, calling it a costly loophole that benefits large global corporations over smaller domestic businesses and deprives the state of billions in revenue that could support health care and other services. A Silicon Valley Leadership Group witness gave historical context for why Water’s Edge was adopted and began outlining concerns about compliance, double taxation, and the risk of overreaching beyond income truly connected to California. No bill was voted on or advanced; the hearing was informational only, with members using the testimony to weigh the policy trade-offs and possible transition periods if the Legislature were to change the current rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• that lots of multinationals bear this burden, you may be taxing the multinational, and some of that feedback

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that lots of multinationals bear this burden, you may be taxing the multinational, and some of that feedback

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined California’s taxation of multinational corporations, especially the state’s water’s-edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. The LAO and Franchise Tax Board explained the basic mechanics of unitary taxation, apportionment, and how water’s-edge generally excludes most foreign subsidiaries while worldwide reporting includes the full unitary group. FTB officials said water’s-edge filers are a small share of corporate filers but account for a large share of tax liability, and they described filing trends, industry mix, and the administrative steps needed to administer either system. Members and witnesses debated the policy trade-offs. Supporters of moving away from water’s-edge argued that it enables profit shifting, especially for large multinational and IP-heavy firms, and that eliminating it could raise significant revenue and improve fairness for smaller domestic businesses. They cited estimates of billions in potential revenue and said California already has the audit and reporting infrastructure to handle worldwide reporting, though some transition time would be needed. Opponents argued that worldwide reporting would tax foreign activity unrelated to California, create double taxation, increase compliance burdens and litigation, and could be difficult for foreign-based multinationals to document. They also warned that some of the revenue estimates are highly uncertain because foreign affiliate income is not directly observable. Committee members asked about foreign government pushback, the risk of companies leaving California, the effect on intellectual property shifting, and whether federal or Supreme Court action could block a change. Witnesses generally said major firms would be unlikely to leave because California taxes sales rather than physical presence, but some costs could be passed on to consumers. The panel also discussed alternatives such as conforming to federal international tax rules like NCTI/GILTI and adding anti-abuse rules. No vote or bill action was taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• that lots of multinationals bear this burden, you may be taxing the multinational, some of that feedback

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on California’s taxation of foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations, especially the state’s water’s-edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. Committee members and witnesses discussed how unitary taxation and sales-factor apportionment work, why multinational corporations are a small share of filers but a large share of tax liability, and how foreign income, profit shifting, and double taxation concerns affect policy choices. The Franchise Tax Board explained current filing rules, the seven-year water’s-edge election, and recent filing statistics showing about 21,562 water’s-edge returns in 2023, roughly 6% of C corporation filers but about half of corporate tax liability. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and FTB staff emphasized that revenue effects from eliminating water’s edge are uncertain because foreign affiliate income is not directly observable, and they noted possible revenue volatility and administrative complexity. Several committee members asked about foreign government pushback, the burden on FTB, whether certain industries are more likely to shift profits, and whether companies would leave California; witnesses generally said there was no strong evidence that firms would exit the state because tax liability is driven mainly by California sales. They also discussed how California already administers both methods, how the election can be advantageous or disadvantageous depending on a firm’s facts, and how federal reforms like GILTI/NCTI, CAMT, and OECD Pillar Two may affect the issue. The second panel presented sharply contrasting views. One professor and a tax policy advocate argued that water’s edge creates unfairness, encourages profit shifting, and leaves California with billions in lost revenue, while a Tax Foundation witness argued that mandatory worldwide reporting would tax the wrong income, create double taxation and litigation risk, and impose heavy compliance burdens, especially for foreign-based multinationals. A later panel from the California Budget and Policy Center supported closing the “water’s-edge loophole,” saying it would raise needed revenue for public services and level the playing field between large multinationals and smaller domestic businesses. No vote or formal action was taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you also for saying that the PED is open to feedback on rulemaking, because I think that's a real

Bills: SB23, SB73, SB210, SB234, SB243, SB244, SM16

Keywords: student use, wireless devices, public schools, policy implementation, education technology funding, driver education, driver's ed, driving school, motorcycle safety, traffic safety, vulnerable road users, pedestrian safety, bicycle safety, cyclist, bike lane, micromobility, scooter, moped, motorcycle training, DWI prevention

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, we do give them a new slate of things each year, and we do take their feedback on what their priorities

Summary: The committee heard the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services present its FY 2027 budget request, with Director Sarah Wilson and budget staff describing the department’s mission, major divisions, and the impact of federal funding shifts, especially the FMAP change that will shift costs to general revenue. Wilson emphasized prevention, public health infrastructure, workforce capacity, and data modernization, while several members praised the department’s responsiveness and cost-cutting efforts. The discussion repeatedly focused on lapses, excess authority, and the department’s stated practice of spending federal and other funds before general revenue where possible. Members asked detailed questions about local public health agency support, nutrition programs, rural health and primary care, newborn screening, the state public health lab, and the department’s use of flexibility and reallocations. There was extended discussion of substance use disorder funding: the department explained that some funding is being reduced in its own budget because transfer authority is being added for the Department of Mental Health and the Department of Corrections, while some other SUD-related lines are actual reductions. Members also questioned tobacco prevention and cessation cuts, maternal and infant health programs, fetal infant mortality review, and minority health initiatives, with staff explaining program purposes and noting that some reductions were tied to excess authority or to moving programs to other departments. The committee also reviewed specific operational items such as the Health Initiatives Fund transfer, debt offset escrow for loan repayment defaults, donated funds authority, emergency preparedness, environmental health, health informatics, HIV/STI/hepatitis services, local public health incentives, and the COVID/ARPA authority reductions. Several members requested follow-up information on vacancies, lapse trends, grant spending plans, and program details. No final vote or formal action was taken in the portion provided; the chair recessed briefly and the hearing continued with additional budget testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then once we got some feedback from some partners, we looked at the veto message.

Bills: HB99, HB49, HB164, SB30, SB43, SB50, SB136

Keywords: medical malpractice, malpractice reform, patient's compensation fund, PCF, health care liability, tort reform, damage caps, punitive damages, hospital liability, physician liability, nurse practitioner, certified nurse-midwife, outpatient facility, ambulatory surgical center, urgent care, free-standing emergency room, insurance surcharge, superintendent of insurance, New Mexico hospitals, medical review process

Transcript Highlights:

• And then once we got some feedback from some partners, we looked at the veto message.

Bills: HB99, HB49, HB164, SB30, SB43, SB50, SB136

Keywords: medical malpractice, malpractice reform, patient's compensation fund, PCF, health care liability, tort reform, damage caps, punitive damages, hospital liability, physician liability, nurse practitioner, certified nurse-midwife, outpatient facility, ambulatory surgical center, urgent care, free-standing emergency room, insurance surcharge, superintendent of insurance, New Mexico hospitals, medical review process

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 99, which would make changes to the Medical Malpractice Act, especially around punitive damages. The chair and sponsor said the bill would not be voted on that day and that public comment would wait until Monday, when a fuller presentation and any recommended substitute would be considered. Dr. Brooke Baker, a physician-lawyer, gave a long presentation on physician wellness, malpractice stress, and the effect of litigation on staffing and burnout, while also discussing hospital ownership structures, private equity, and rural hospital vulnerability. She argued that punitive damages are often pled too broadly in New Mexico, that the amendment language was unclear about which entities would be capped, and that better oversight and internal quality systems—not punitive damages—are the better tools for addressing bad actors and unsafe care. Committee members from both sides asked extensive questions about the patient compensation fund, indemnification, corporate structures, the effect of caps on insurance and recruitment, and whether the bill would protect physicians’ personal assets. No vote was taken on HB 99, and the committee recessed before moving to the next bill. The committee then returned to House Bill 49, a public safety measure increasing penalties for felons who possess firearms. The sponsors and law enforcement witnesses said the bill is aimed narrowly at serious violent felons who are already prohibited from having guns, and that it would align state sentencing with federal law and give police and prosecutors a stronger tool against repeat violent offenders. An amendment was offered to narrow the bill further, add destructive devices, and make the offense a second-degree felony rather than escalating to first degree on repeat offenses. The amendment was adopted without opposition. Public testimony on HB 49 was largely opposed. The Law Office of the Public Defender argued the bill criminalizes possession without a new act of violence, that current law already punishes felon-in-possession conduct, and that New Mexico has repeatedly increased penalties without evidence of reduced gun crime. The ACLU of New Mexico also opposed the bill, saying increased penalties are not a proven deterrent. The transcript cuts off as additional online opposition testimony was beginning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, the feedback was clear from these manufacturers.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Great feedback. Exactly. I'm sorry? It was a good comeback? Okay. Yeah.

Summary: The Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee heard and voted on several bills, beginning with SB 190, which would authorize revenue bonds for Gila Regional Medical Center to replace an aging linear accelerator for cancer treatment. The sponsor and hospital representatives said the project is critical for rural patients who otherwise travel long distances for radiation therapy. After a brief amendment changing the bond term from 20 to 30 years, the committee advanced the bill 7-0. The committee then took up SB 152, a broadband affordability and rural telecommunications bill that would keep money in the broadband fund for maintenance, expansion, and a new affordability program after the federal ACP lapsed. The sponsor and broadband stakeholders said the bill is needed to close the digital divide, while some industry witnesses supported the affordability goal but wanted changes to broaden eligibility and adjust program rules. The committee heard public testimony from supporters and opponents, then passed the bill 8-0. Next, SB 77 would require certain highway and public works contractors to contribute to apprenticeship training funds; labor groups supported it as workforce development, while highway and asphalt contractors opposed it as an added cost and argued they already run their own training programs. After extended debate about whether the 60-cent-per-hour contribution would raise project costs or simply redirect existing prevailing-wage funds, the committee advanced SB 77 on a 5-3 vote. The committee also heard SB 182, a dyed diesel gross receipts tax deduction for agricultural use, but held it for the tax package without a vote. SB 151, a corporate income tax decoupling bill intended to recover revenue lost to federal tax changes, drew strong support from tax and advocacy groups and strong opposition from business, oil and gas, and chamber representatives who called it a tax increase that would hurt investment and competitiveness. Committee members raised concerns about long-term revenue stability and business impacts, but the sponsors said the bill would restore state tax capacity and selectively decouple from federal provisions; the bill was held for later consideration in the tax package. Finally, the committee heard SB 133 on eliminating gross receipts tax on medical providers for medical equipment and supplies, and SB 212 on a ski-area construction equipment gross receipts tax exemption, with sponsors arguing both would improve competitiveness and support industry investment; both were discussed as possible tax-package items and held for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, the feedback was clear from these manufacturers.

Summary: The Select Committee on Economic Development and Technological Innovation held a hearing on California’s industrial policy and manufacturing competitiveness. In opening remarks, the chair and Senator Wahab emphasized manufacturing’s role in good jobs, climate leadership, and regional economic growth, while noting barriers such as regulatory uncertainty, energy costs, permitting delays, and the loss of manufacturing jobs over time. They highlighted California Jobs First, workforce development, and the need to keep innovation and manufacturing in-state rather than losing scale-up opportunities to other states. The first panel featured California Forward and the Center for Manufacturing a Green Economy, along with an industry representative. Witnesses argued that California needs a durable, regionally based economic development system with ongoing funding, stronger state coordination, and sector-specific industrial roadmaps. They focused on advanced manufacturing and clean industry, especially batteries, bioeconomy, offshore wind, and heat pumps, and said industrial policy should help bridge the “missing middle” between research and commercial production. The industry witness stressed that power reliability, time to power, and coordinated utility engagement are decisive in site selection, and that California must better align utilities, state agencies, universities, and labs to compete for major projects. Senator Niello raised concerns about California’s business climate, including regulations, labor laws, energy reliability, K–12 education outcomes, and the cost impacts of climate policy. Panelists responded that California can compete by improving coordination, packaging existing state resources, and targeting strategic industries rather than racing to the bottom on taxes or wages. The second panel, from labor organizations, supported a worker-led industrial policy with strong labor and environmental standards, public financing, procurement, and targeted support for manufacturing firms. They cited examples such as union apprenticeship pathways, revolving loan funds, and programs with labor standards, and argued that manufacturing jobs can support both climate goals and middle-class employment. The final panel began with Fremont city officials, who described Fremont as the state’s leading manufacturing city and a model of intentional local policy. They said the city has protected industrial land, streamlined support for manufacturers, and doubled its manufacturing technician workforce over the past decade. The hearing concluded with discussion of how state and local governments can better coordinate to attract and retain manufacturing investment, with members and witnesses agreeing that California has strong assets but needs more proactive, integrated economic development tools.

Transcript Highlights:

• original request, and then the remaining three were the ones that we added on after we took the feedback

Summary: The committee heard budget presentations from the Secretary of State, the State Land Office, the Attorney General, and the State Auditor. The Secretary of State said its requested general fund budget of $15.88 million was intended to maintain baseline operations, replace lost federal cyber and election support, and address a 12% vacancy rate. Officials warned that the House recommendation still left major gaps for election security, tabulator replacement, campaign finance system upgrades, overseas and military ballot services, ballot tracking, and a new tax lien filing system. Senators pressed about the election fund, county burdens, and the risk of underfunding election administration; the office said the House had provided $15 million for the election fund for the primary and another $15 million for the general election, but not enough for operations or all capital needs. The State Land Office said it was satisfied with the House budget action and had no additional request. Staff described the office’s record revenues, low vacancy rate, clean audits, and proposed new positions tied to forestry, economic development, petroleum, geothermal, and royalty compliance work. Senators asked about long-term revenue trends, forest thinning and biomass opportunities, and bookkeeping around the land maintenance fund; the office said the new positions were intended to generate revenue and support land management, including fire mitigation. The Attorney General’s office presented a budget built around a 0% general fund increase, greater use of the Consumer Settlement Fund, and $4.5 million in special/extraordinary litigation funding. The AG emphasized active litigation and investigations involving consumer fraud, Medicaid fraud, federal funding cuts, Meta and other technology platforms, AI and child safety, gaming compacts, tobacco, and possible litigation over abandoned uranium mine cleanup. Senators asked about scam enforcement, the structure of settlement funds, and whether the office could take on uranium-related litigation; the AG said the office could prepare a litigation budget but warned such efforts would require sustained funding. The State Auditor said the House budget added only modest increases while the office faced about a 40% vacancy rate, difficulty recruiting auditors, and a shrinking pool of public accounting firms, creating risks for constitutional audit responsibilities.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we provide services, we provide feedback, and subject matter expertise around services for children

Bills: SB48, SB64, SB100

Keywords: State Fairgrounds District, fairgrounds bonds, public financing, bond authorization, gross receipts tax, gaming tax, tax-backed bonds, infrastructure funding, Albuquerque fairgrounds, State Fair Tid, economic development, municipal bonds, revenue pledge, capital projects, New Mexico finance, special education, office of special education, deputy secretary, public education department, IEP

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we'll get some good feedback.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have not received any feedback.

Bills: SB1095, SB1127, SB1170, SB1208, SB1211, SB1237, SB1239, SB1240, SB1243, SB1244, SB1259, SB1283

Keywords: gender transition, minors, irreversible surgery, health professionals, puberty-blocking drugs, medical procedures, prohibition, Arizona Revised Statutes, reporting abuse, child neglect, mandatory reporting, child safety, medical treatment, faith exemptions, penalties, narcotic drugs, fentanyl, sentencing, drug offenses, juvenile justice

Transcript Highlights:

• I work with students, meet with families, and am constantly absorbing feedback on how to improve the

Summary: The committee first heard HB 133, which would lower the minimum age to purchase a long gun from 21 to 18. The sponsor said the bill restores the rights of law-abiding 18-year-olds. Public testimony was sharply divided, with supporters from Gun Owners of America and Florida Carry arguing that adults 18 and older should have equal Second Amendment rights and that current law is inconsistent with other adult responsibilities, while opponents, including gun violence prevention advocates, students, parents, and Parkland-related speakers, said the bill would reverse a post-Parkland safety measure and increase risks of suicide, accidental shootings, and school violence. Several members debated the bill, with opponents emphasizing Parkland, the Florida State shooting, and public polling showing broad opposition; supporters stressed parental responsibility, mental health, and constitutional rights. HB 133 was then reported favorably on a roll call vote of 13 yeas, with several members voting no. The committee then took up CS/HB 289, which would revise Florida’s wrongful death law to allow parents to recover damages for the death of an unborn child. The sponsor said the bill is intended to let grieving parents seek civil remedies, and members questioned how it would apply in situations involving surrogacy, rape, ectopic pregnancy, medical care, and damages calculations. The sponsor said the bill would not allow suits against the mother, would not apply to lawful non-negligent medical care, and would be handled through ordinary wrongful death damage proof before a jury. Public testimony was again split: supporters from pro-life and faith groups said the bill recognizes unborn children and aligns Florida with many other states, while opponents from civil liberties, reproductive rights, and advocacy groups warned it could be used to target abortion providers, helpers, and even families or businesses in miscarriage-related cases, and could be weaponized by abusive partners. The transcript ends during testimony on HB 289, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.