Bills: HB147

Keywords: government contracting, business program, discrimination, state procurement, equity, underutilized businesses

Summary: The House Committee on Agriculture and Livestock met with a quorum present and heard several bills, all of which were left pending. HB 1113, by Rep. Cain, would update Texas hemp law to keep state rules aligned with federal changes, require timely rule amendments by the Department of Agriculture, and create hemp research permits for universities and nonprofits. Supporters from the Texas Hemp Coalition said it would improve research, licensing, testing, and enforcement while helping the industry stay compliant and competitive; the author said the bill was intended to reward good actors and deter bad ones. HB 1203, by Rep. Gonzalez, would create an Office of Food System Security and Resiliency within the Department of Agriculture to address food insecurity and coordinate local food access efforts. Gonzalez said the office would build on a prior Department of Agriculture study and help connect farmers, agencies, schools, and local governments; members asked about the fiscal note, consumer costs, and whether the office would overlap with existing programs. HB 1269, HB 1276, and HB 1277 focused on plant disease and pest prevention, including a grant program and studies to identify gaps and track outbreaks. Gonzalez emphasized the need for a more intentional state response, citing crop losses from pests and a recent cotton disease outbreak in his district. HB 1437 would create a pollinator task force to address threats to Texas honeybees and related pollination industries. A Texas Beekeepers Association witness described major recent colony losses, emerging threats such as mites and hornets, and the need to bring agencies and researchers together; Gonzalez noted prior work adding a bee specialist at AgriLife Extension. Finally, HB 147, by Chairman Guillen, would modernize cattle brand registration by moving it to an electronic system at the Texas Animal Health Commission while keeping county clerks involved. Supporters said it would improve efficiency, accuracy, and access for ranchers and law enforcement, while an opponent warned about possible electronic tracking implications and costs for small producers. The committee took no final votes and adjourned after leaving HB 147 pending as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• And let's not forget the algorithms that... ...and let's not forget the algorithms that are designed

Bills: HB235, HB276, HB285

Keywords: social media, age verification, minors, under 16, children online safety, online privacy, platform regulation, deceptive trade practice, Attorney General, civil penalties, punitive damages, consumer protection, account creation, algorithmic feeds, internet safety, youth social media, minor safety, child online safety, teen accounts, parental controls

Transcript Highlights:

• Before<00:54:26.480> anti-discrimination<00:54:27.480> laws, Before anti-discrimination
• experiencing how data and algorithm experiencing how data and algorithm management<00:58:21.560>
• It's just that if wage discrimination were not part of the bill, it's just price discrimination, it wouldn't
• <01:14:11.680> didn't example if wage discrimination didn't example if wage discrimination
• having to do with wage discrimination having to do with wage discrimination shouldn't<01:14:34.160

Bills: HF3878, HF4131, HF3796, HF4097

Keywords: airport workers, wage standards, labor rights, minimum wage, economic equity, surveillance, price discrimination, wage discrimination, consumer rights, automated decision systems, Minnesota Statutes, suitable seating, employee seating, workplace seating, occupational safety, workplace safety, labor standards, employer requirements, chair, stool

Transcript Highlights:

• except to ensure colorblind and race-neutral hiring in accordance with state and federal anti-discrimination
• This bill requires all public employees to be hired by merit and not by racial or sex discrimination.
• This bill requires all public employees to be hired by merit and not by racial or sex discrimination.
• In practice, DEI doesn't just give an excuse to discriminate against whites, Asians, and men.
• It's also helpful to anyone willing to give lip service to this discrimination.

Bills: SB1013, SB1023

Keywords: merit-based hiring, public employees, non-discrimination, employment practices, Arizona Revised Statutes, optometrists, eye exams, eyeglass prescriptions, healthcare, vision care, 1182, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 1023, which would require optometrists to conduct eye exams according to the standard of care in the community at a recommended one-year interval, while allowing eyeglass prescriptions to be extended up to two years or shortened based on risk factors. The sponsor described it as a compromise between a longer prescription period and existing practice, and the Arizona Optometric Association supported the bill as codifying best practice and clarifying the standard. The committee moved the bill and gave SB 1023 a do pass recommendation on a 7-0 vote. The committee then took up Senate Bill 1013, a merit-based public hiring bill that would prohibit state and local public employers from using policies or practices that base hiring on race, ethnicity, sex, or national origin, while preserving compliance with anti-discrimination laws. An amendment was offered to clarify that the bill would not limit voluntary veterans’ preference employment policies, and the committee adopted that amendment. Supporters argued the bill would ensure public jobs are awarded based on qualifications and protect taxpayers; opponents argued it could undermine diversity efforts and that the veterans language was unnecessary or awkwardly drafted. After testimony from supporters and debate over the amendment and the bill’s effect on diversity, veterans’ preferences, and prior criminal history in hiring, the committee voted on SB 1013 as amended. The bill received a due pass as amended recommendation on a 4-3 vote, and the committee then adjourned.

Bills: HB146, HB276

Keywords: youthful offender, criminal justice, capital murder, public safety, victims' rights, social media, minor safety, child online safety, teen accounts, parental controls, age verification, digital privacy, online platform regulation, content moderation, deceptive trade practice, Attorney General enforcement, cyber safety, mental health, youth mental health, screen time

Transcript Highlights:

• And then it says, "No employer shall discriminate against a pharmacist on the basis that the pharmacist
• And then, Chairman Scott, with respect to your question, that language about not discriminating against
• against a pharmacist that discriminating against a pharmacist that chooses<00:10:40.959> to<00
• <00:11:08.640> And want to feel discriminated against.
• And want to feel discriminated against.

Bills: HB0143, HB0129

Keywords: health care providers, free speech, discrimination, governmental agencies, civil remedies, physician access, internationally trained physicians, medical licensing, provisional license, healthcare workforce, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Under HB 143, no state agency, department, board, or commission may discriminate against a health care
• HB 143 defines discrimination including adverse licensing actions, reprimands, loss of privileges, or
• Under HB 143, no state discrimination.
• HB43 defines<00:05:22.960> discrimination defines discrimination defines discrimination including
• they were found to have discriminated they were found to have discriminated against<00:15:38.240

Bills: HB0143, HB0129

Keywords: health care providers, free speech, discrimination, governmental agencies, civil remedies, physician access, internationally trained physicians, medical licensing, provisional license, healthcare workforce, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh Chris Coffiel, IMUA Alliance. comprehensive anti-discrimination laws comprehensive anti-discrimination
• For us, non-discrimination protections are essential survivor protection policies.
• , non-discrimination Uh for us, non-discrimination uh<00:04:45.480> protections<00:04:46.560><
• :05:16.320> not<00:05:16.560> separate discrimination for us is not separate discrimination
• often who face housing discrimination often who face housing discrimination are<00:05:26.280>

Bills: SCR11, SR9

Keywords: Civil Rights Act, discrimination, employment, housing, public accommodations, LGBTQ+ rights, gender identity, sexual orientation, Equality Act, civil rights, federally funded programs, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs, Transportation, and later Judiciary heard two sets of resolutions. The first, SCR 132 and SR 124, urged the City and County of Honolulu to take steps to finalize the Makakilo Drive Extension Project. Testimony from a Makakilo resident emphasized the lack of a second access route and raised safety concerns about being trapped in the area in an emergency. Both committees voted to pass the resolutions unamended. The second set, SCR 11 and SR 9, requested that the U.S. Congress amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, federally funded programs, credit, and jury service. Supporters from the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women, IMUA Alliance, and Pride at Work in Hawaii argued that stronger anti-discrimination protections are needed to reduce vulnerability to violence, housing insecurity, and exploitation, and to provide federal protections that mirror state law. One senator asked whether state protections already exist and was told the resolutions seek federal-level protections because federal law can supersede state law. Both committees adopted recommendations to pass SCR 11 and SR 9 unamended, with votes in favor and some members excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• and then the third, more substantive change is adding some reasonable person language to a non-discrimination
• , more substantive change that you can see is adding some reasonable-person language to a non-discrimination
• partners, adding some language around a reasonable person, and it is modeled after other non-discrimination
• other<00:06:14.080> uh it is modeled after other uh it is modeled after other uh non-discrimination
• non-discrimination non-discrimination um<00:06:16.400> sections<00:06:17.039> and<00:06

Bills: HF3676, HF3593, HF3785, HF3774, HF4111, HF3513

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Transcript Highlights:

• discrimination discrimination based<00:59:28.799> on<00:59:29.680> disability.
• So that is the first form of discrimination that I experience is sex discrimination in education.
• Um, I I I qualify as a person under Um, I I I qualify as a person under discrimination discrimination
• sex discrimination for 35 years. sex discrimination for 35 years.
• sex discrimination in education. sex discrimination in education.

Bills: HF3661, HF2380, HF3468, HF3483

Keywords: facial recognition, privacy, government surveillance, public safety, data protection, civil liberties, disability rights, discrimination, accommodations, employment, housing, public services, education, civil action, failure to render aid, damages, Minnesota Statutes, legal liability, trespass, civil immigration enforcement

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 24 and February 26. It then took up House File 3661, a bill originally authored by Representative Gomez and presented by Representative Feist, which would ban government use of facial recognition technology and be re-referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. The committee adopted the A1 amendment, described as a technical amendment based on House Research recommendations, before hearing testimony on the bill. Representative Feist said the bill is aimed at preventing serious privacy and civil-liberties harms, including secretive surveillance, racial and gender bias, and the lack of statewide rules governing government use of facial recognition. Supportive testimony came from Chad Marlo of the ACLU, who argued the issue is bipartisan, the technology has accuracy problems, and government use is expanding against vulnerable groups. Chris Wayland of Restore the Fourth Minnesota also supported a ban, emphasizing the inability to opt out of facial recognition and the lack of standards, disclosure, and community input. Rich Newmeister urged stronger transparency measures, including agency policies and public notice in buildings using the technology. Major Spencer Baky of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office opposed an outright ban, saying facial recognition is used only as an investigative lead, not for positive identification or real-time surveillance, and that results are corroborated before use. He said the office has used the tool in hundreds of investigations and supports a statutory framework with safeguards instead of a ban. In member discussion, Representative Hudson argued a blanket ban was too broad and suggested a more targeted evidentiary approach, while Representative Moller and Representative Kurr expressed concern about misuse and the federal government's use of the technology. Representative Durant asked whether there was a current Minnesota problem and whether stakeholders and law enforcement had been involved in drafting the bill. No final vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided, beyond adoption of the amendment and the committee’s continued consideration of HF 3661.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, you talk about discrimination.
• Uh, excuse my ignorance, but can you already sue for discrimination?
• are among the most common types of housing discrimination reported.
• They may not even know that they're being discriminated against. I'll give you an example.
• So, people are discriminated against all the time. It's not a delay tactic.

Bills: HB303, HB 1107, HB 1063, HB1517, HB1991, HB2464, HB3509, HB3527, HB303

Keywords: municipality, local government, Type A, Type B, Type C, change authority, emergency medical services, civil service status, municipal government, public safety, local government code, school funding, education, state budget, local control, equity, tenant legal services, eviction, low-income tenants, disability rights

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that we've seen that there are algorithms targeting kids.
• Yeah, the bill is very specific about slowing down the algorithm for kids.
• We know that social media algorithms...
• It cannot discriminate under two classes.
• Our code prohibits discrimination by real estate professionals.

Bills: SB1361, SB2105, SB2690, SB2713, SCR38, SB2637, SB2881

Keywords: SB 1361, Texas disaster recovery loan, small business loan, micro-business loan, community development financial institution, CDFI, economic disaster assistance, post-disaster financing, business recovery fund, Texas Economic Development Bank, zero-interest loan, working capital, payroll support, health benefits, job retention, declared disaster, small business relief, microenterprise, franchise exclusion, private equity-backed business

Transcript Highlights:

• Um section six prohibits discrimination<00:10:10.720> of<00:10:10.959> a<00:10:11.120><
• c> participant<00:10:11.600> based<00:10:11.920> on discrimination of a participant
• based on discrimination of a participant based on their<00:10:12.640> participation<00:10:13.279
• but it's a little more of an expansion that gets to proof of intent, like there's an intent to discriminate

Bills: HF3676, HF3683, HF3395

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Summary: The committee first approved minutes from February 19 and February 26, while skipping the February 24 minutes because of a drafting error that would be corrected later. It then took up House File 3676, a Safe at Home program bill described by Rep. Nash as arising from a constituent’s dangerous identity exposure and intended to tighten protections for participants, including allowing emancipated minors to enroll. Testimony from the Secretary of State’s office explained that the bill would clarify who may apply for a minor, require proof of guardianship, strengthen court findings before a participant’s physical address can be disclosed, increase penalties for harmful disclosure, prohibit discrimination based on participation, require state agencies to designate a Safe at Home contact person, allow use of the Safe at Home card as proof of residence for certain ID purposes, and require judge training. Members raised concerns about federal compatibility, constitutionality of court-related provisions, and the need for a fiscal note on the felony penalty. Several sections were noted as being removed or modified in a later engrossment, and the committee voted to re-refer HF 3676 to the Transportation Finance and Policy Committee. The committee then heard House File 3683, which would direct the state budget forecast to include the estimated cost of fraud. Rep. Nash argued that fraud is a significant but unquantified drain on state resources and said the bill would adapt existing forecast language used for inflation to track fraud costs. Minnesota Management and Budget Deputy Commissioner Anna Mingi testified that fraud is unacceptable and that the agency works to prevent and detect it, but said the twice-yearly forecast is not the right tool for this kind of retrospective analysis. She explained that if fraud is identified, the forecast would reflect reduced spending through program integrity actions rather than a separate fraud-cost line item. The bill was moved and referred to the general register after a roll call was requested.

Transcript Highlights:

• Smith: Our federal fair housing laws and state fair housing laws, um, we cannot discriminate against

Bills: HF2296, HF1566, HF1854, HF1385, HF1142

Keywords: landlord-tenant, victim confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, tenant privacy, housing law, eviction, unpaid rent, damages, release of information, shared database, protective order, victim of violence, Minnesota Statutes 504B.206, housing finance, civil law, autism, rental properties, reasonable accommodation

Bills: SB875

Keywords: banking regulation, federal agencies, reputational risk, financial services, supervision, FIRM Act, bank supervision, depository institutions, federal banking agencies, FDIC, OCC, Federal Reserve, NCUA, CFPB, credit unions, Operation Choke Point, financial discrimination, safety and soundness, supervisory guidance, examination manual

Summary: This meeting focused on the markup of the Genius Act and the FIRM Act, two significant pieces of legislation addressing stablecoin regulation and the financial industry's regulatory framework. The Chairman noted the importance of providing clarity to the digital asset community and protecting American consumers, while also promoting innovation and competition within the financial sector. Members of both parties expressed varying viewpoints, with some highlighting concerns related to national security and the potential risks associated with stablecoins.

Transcript Highlights:

• In section six, we're seeking to prohibit discrimination of a participant based on their status as a
• And we modeled this after other anti-discrimination laws throughout statute and are still working on
• In section six, we're seeking to prohibit discrimination of a participant based on their status as a
• And we modeled this after other anti-discrimination laws throughout statute and are still working on
• :54.160> laws after other anti-discrimination laws after other anti-discrimination laws throughout

Bills: HF3676, HF2959, HF3233

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Bills: HB19, HB170, HB171, HB173, HB174, HB19, HB170, HB171, HB173, HB174

Keywords: Ebony Alert, missing youth, public safety, law enforcement, racial equity, HB170, supplemental appropriations, Education Trust Fund, Alabama education budget, school funding, K-12 education, local boards of education, textbook adoption, school buses, school safety, charter schools, summer programs, afterschool programs, reading intervention, college and career readiness

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:35.040> price prohibits the use of algorithmic price prohibits the use of algorithmic
• And um, you know, I think technically that county the 90% AMI is an algorithm of sorts.
• And um, you know, I think technically that county the 90% AMI is an algorithm of sorts.
• algorithms algorithms um<01:16:23.280> especially<01:16:23.679> after<01:16:24.080>
• <01:17:09.199> thing wondering where this algorithm thing wondering where this algorithm thing

Bills: HB2611, HB2102, HB1710, HB1868, HB1920, HB1812, HB1733, HB1715, HB1723, HB1724, HB1727, HB1711

Keywords: HB2611, Hawaii antitrust, rental housing, rent price-fixing, algorithmic pricing, algorithmic rent-setting, property management software, pricing algorithms, rent coordination, price-fixing, collusion, cartel, multifamily housing, landlord software, occupancy levels, lease terms, Attorney General, public education program, consumer protection, housing affordability

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Before that, it talks about discriminating. What is, I don't know what discriminating is.
• vote as far as discrimination is a pretty broad term.
• It would call that discrimination, so now you're starting to get into really breaking some... ...some
• There is a risk of licensure revocation or suspension for discriminating against a covered entity or
• There's no definition of discrimination, which we've talked about a little bit earlier in the bill.

Bills: HB712, HB722, HB946, HB1687, HB1809, HB1899, HB2528, HB2583, HB2741, HB2750, HB3021, HB3150, HB3265, HB3658, HB3812, HB3960, HB4392, HB4432

Keywords: prostate cancer, health benefit plans, insurance coverage, cost sharing, preventive health care, auto insurance, total loss evaluation, disclosure, insurance materials, vehicle appraisal, HB 946, Texas Insurance Code, automobile insurance claims, oral release, written release, settlement agreement, claim release, property damage, bodily injury, psychological injury

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1809 seeks to expand protections against insurance discrimination for widowed women, known
• The code explicitly prohibits insurers from discriminating against consumers. ...on the basis of several
• financial stability for those who are grieving and navigating a challenging time in their lives. from discriminating

Bills: HB712, HB722, HB946, HB1687, HB1809, HB1899, HB2528, HB2583, HB2741, HB2750, HB3021, HB3150, HB3265, HB3658, HB3812, HB3960, HB4392, HB4432

Keywords: prostate cancer, health benefit plans, insurance coverage, cost sharing, preventive health care, auto insurance, total loss evaluation, disclosure, insurance materials, vehicle appraisal, HB 946, Texas Insurance Code, automobile insurance claims, oral release, written release, settlement agreement, claim release, property damage, bodily injury, psychological injury