Transcript Highlights:

• At the prohibited electioneering, I'm not really asking you to.
• Where school district electioneering has become an increasingly common event.
• and I understand the electioneering part as it might pertain to something on the ballot.
• There was a Denton principal who was indicted for illegal electioneering.
• Have there been any convictions for electioneering by school board members?

Bills: SB204, SB570, SB735, SB784, SB1207, SB1396, SB1447, SB2392, SB2540, SB747, SB875

Keywords: parental rights, education, school trustees, training, handbook, truancy, attendance policy, chronic absenteeism, school attendance, student absence notifications, parent notification, home visit, attendance officer, truancy court, school district, open-enrollment charter school, student support services, school counselor, principal, administrator

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 25 amends the definition of electioneering communication.
• Section 34 makes new language specifically providing disclaimers for electioneering communications.
• disclaimers for electioneering disclaimers for electioneering communications.<00:10:42.640> on
• coordinated electioneering coordinated electioneering communications<00:47:23.520> as<00:
• the disclaimer format for electioneering the disclaimer format for electioneering communications

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And my understanding is that that is electioneering.
• And my understanding is that that is electioneering.
• . electioneering. electioneering.
• Um because it's is that electioneering?
• We had a bill in the electioneering.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Page 23, 22, changing the distance in terms of electioneering on Election Day.
• As far as the electioneering, Missouri has one of the shortest electioneering buffers in the entire country
• The language in House Bill 1871 would change the barrier, the buffer of electioneering, from 25 feet
• Yeah, so NCSL actually has a really good article on electioneering laws across the states, and they show
• But think of the more candidates coming to our state to electioneer, spending more money here, and the

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• "Yes, we're voting for John Smith for that race," on their phones, and that would be electioneering.
• In fact, most of the places I've had either held elections or I've been electioneering.
• It was mainly about electioneering and also allowing the election workers to be okay doing things that
• The electioneering is already in law.
• So as long as we enforce the rules about electioneering, maybe there can be clarification that electioneering

Bills: HB1968, HB2279, HB2739, HB2803, HB3909, HB3918, HB4253, HB4475, HB5115, HB5430

Keywords: election services, contracting, political subdivisions, county elections, election code, voter registration, citizenship status, election law, cancellation, disqualification, Texas Election Code, voter identification, registration, election integrity, identification documents, election, watcher, polling place, removal, Texas Elections Code

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:42:56.760> by<00:42:56.880> public relative to electioneering by public relative
• <00:45:25.200> to electioneering to electioneering to you<00:45:26.360> know,<00:45:26.520
• >> Uh, so currently, um, electioneering only applies to, I believe, uh, C and D.
• Um, the other section, they would not—they currently are not covered by electioneering at all, which
• at all, which is um I electioneering at all, which is um I know<00:48:59.200> you<00:48:59.280

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference first took up House Bill 158 on public inspection of absentee ballot lists. The Senate explained that its amendment replaced the original bill with a requirement that the Secretary of State review absentee ballot data after each general election and report findings to the committees of jurisdiction, focusing on unusual patterns such as multiple ballots sent to the same address. After a brief caucus, the House agreed to the Senate position, and members voted individually to concur. The committee then discussed House Bill 281, which concerns making the electronic voter checklist available in a sortable format. The main dispute was whether the public list should include the mailing address where an absentee ballot was sent if it differs from the voter’s registered address. The Senate argued that including mailing addresses could expose where voters actually live or are away from home and could create safety concerns, while the House argued the information could help candidates reach voters and was not primarily a fraud measure. The parties also discussed a related nursing home verification provision and record-retention/public-records questions. After caucusing, the House agreed to the Senate’s position with the added nursing home signing language, and the committee closed the bill on consent. House Bill 340, concerning electioneering by public employees, was then taken up with a Senate amendment that narrowed the definition of electioneering by tying it to existing statutory language, added a prohibition on expressly or primarily political surveys, and created a civil penalty option alongside the misdemeanor penalty. Senators and representatives debated whether the penalties should be mandatory or discretionary and how the language would apply to certain categories of public employees. After further clarification and caucus, the House accepted the Senate’s amended replace-all language, and the committee closed HB 340. Finally, the committee opened House Bill 1062, authorizing the Secretary of State to conduct random audits of citizenship qualifications of registered voters. The Senate explained that its changes removed the need for a permanent audit power by allowing records to be checked against databases and by requiring identification for registration going forward, which is why it added a sunset clause. The House member objected to the sunset and wanted the authority to continue indefinitely, and discussion continued as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we carefully defined electioneering communication in Amendment 4, which is similar in some ways to
• We define digital and we include it within the definition of electioneering communication.
• Amendment 4 is the definition of electioneering communication.
• And then the later Amendment 12 just simply takes that definition of electioneering communication and
• Title 18, we have a consistent definition of what is an electioneering communication.

Summary: The Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee met on May 20, 2026, with a quorum present and no minutes available for approval. The committee first heard HB 181, which would let the legislative auditor review income tax data to verify eligibility for Medicaid and, at LDH’s request, SNAP. The auditor said the work would be limited to internal data testing under sharing agreements and not disclosed to third parties. After questions about privacy and duplication, the bill was reported favorably to the floor without objection. The committee then took up HB 906 on presidential preference primaries and party nominating petitions. The Secretary of State and bill author said the measure would let major parties decide whether unaffiliated voters may participate in their primaries, with 180 days’ notice to the state, and would keep party rules consistent within presidential years so elections can be programmed properly. Several senators raised concerns that the bill would disenfranchise no-party voters and give parties too much control, but supporters said both major parties had approved the approach. The committee voted 4-3 to report the bill favorably. Members also advanced HB 398, which would require the judiciary to use the federal GSA meal per diem rate instead of the current higher state judicial rate; HB 1052, which strengthens confidentiality protections for child abuse investigations handled by child advocacy centers and multidisciplinary teams; HB 1245, which protects witness criminal history records from unintended public release in clerk of court records; HB 202, which requires state civil service or hiring agencies to notify applicants when a vacancy is filled or they are rejected; HB 540, which requires disclosure of paid digital election advertising; HB 9, designating stuffed shrimp as a Louisiana specialty; HB 1057, extending the validity of absentee-by-mail applications for military voters from one year to two; HB 225, proposing a constitutional amendment to limit governors to two lifetime terms; HB 177, allowing retired court reporters to contract with former public employers; and HB 459, requiring disclosure when campaign materials use AI, with amendments adopted after discussion of First Amendment and campaign finance concerns. The committee also rejected an amendment to HB 1057 that would have expanded Sunday early voting in certain parishes. After the bills, the committee held confirmation hearings for James Kelly and Charles Wilkinson to the Board of Supervisors of the Louisiana Community and Technical College System, both of whom described education and workforce development backgrounds and were favorably received.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, what it does is it removes the term from the definition of electioneer.
• <00:42:56.760> by<00:42:56.880> public relative to electioneering by public relative
• is guilty of a employee who electioneers is guilty of a misdemeanor. misdemeanor. misdemeanor.
• <00:45:25.200> to electioneering to electioneering to you<00:45:26.360> know,<00:45:26.520
• So currently, electioneering only applies to, I believe, C and D.

Keywords: 9:00am HB 158 9:10am HB 281 9:20am HB 317 9:30am HB 340 9:40am HB 1062 9:50am HB 1187 10:00am HB 1234 10:10am HB 1300 10:20am HB 1306 10:30am HB 1381 10:40am HB 1541, 928, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference first resolved House Bill 158, which concerns public inspection of absentee ballot lists. The Senate explained a revised approach that removed the broader bill language and instead directed the Secretary of State to review absentee ballot data after each general election for patterns such as common addresses and to report findings to the committees of jurisdiction. The House agreed to the Senate position, and the conference committee voted unanimously to concur. The committee then took up House Bill 281, dealing with a sortable electronic voter checklist. Members debated the Senate’s removal of language that would have included the absentee ballot mailing address when different from the voter’s registration address. Concerns were raised that releasing mailing addresses could expose where voters are not home and could affect overseas and military voters. The committee also discussed a related form for election officials who personally know a voter, including how long the form would be retained and whether it would be subject to public records law. After further discussion, the House agreed to the Senate changes with an additional requirement that the form be signed, and the committee voted to proceed with the amended Senate position. House Bill 317, concerning verification of a person’s identity by a supervisor of the checklist without identification, was also discussed at length. The Senate’s version preserved the ability for election officials to identify people they know, but required a signed form under penalty of perjury and added a nursing home-related provision. Members described the measure as balancing community-based identification with tighter documentation, and a House witness described local problems with inconsistent ID checks and concerns about voting in nursing homes. The House sought one additional change requiring the nursing home verification form to be signed, and the Senate accepted that addition; the committee then voted to move the bill forward on the consent calendar. The conference committee next considered House Bill 340 on electioneering by public employees. The chair presented a replace-all amendment that tied the definition of electioneering to existing law, added a prohibition on expressly or primarily political surveys, and created a civil penalty of up to $1,000 alongside the misdemeanor penalty. Members discussed clarifying when the misdemeanor versus civil penalty would apply and which categories of public employees were covered. After caucus, the Senate agreed to the House’s replace-all approach with the clarifying changes, and the bill was closed. The committee also resolved House Bill 1062 by agreeing to strike a sunset clause from the Senate version authorizing random audits of citizenship qualifications, and it began discussion of House Bill 1187 on the filing window for special-election candidates, where the House proposed requiring local election officials to arrange a filing time on the same day or next business day after being contacted.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is against the law for public school officials to electioneer on public property.
• Aren't all governmental employees barred from electioneering, utilizing public resources?
• Aren't all governmental workers barred from electioneering?
• ...electioneering utilizing government resources.
• School resources for electioneering.

Bills: SJR37, SJR57, SB7, SB8, SB16, SB108, SB125, SB207, SB318, SB371, SB379, SB396, SB406, SB503, SB533, SB565, SB578, SB599, SB686, SB689, SB707, SB763, SB854, SB857, SB875, SB878, SB920, SB924, SB961, SB965, SB985, SB988, SB1021, SB1024, SB1026, SB1038, SB1059, SB1185, SB1202, SB1207, SB1252, SB1330, SB1396, SB1484, SB1527, SB1535, SB1596, SB1619, SB1697, SB1737, SB1741, SB1841, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SJR37, SCR22, SCR12, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB1497, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB1215, SB1302, SB856, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB608, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB541, SB379, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB1352, SB785, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB961, SB1038, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741, SB7, SB927, SB1227, SB1229, SB1353, SB1366, SB1464, SB1709, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1816, SB1841, SB2188, SB1147, SB879, SB1008, SJR81, SJR50, SCR39, SB1536, SB2016, SB1453, SB1173, SB1163, SB996, SB27, SB568, SB1370, SB1321, SB1101, SB906, SB860, SB1563, SB993, SB693, SB1610, SB1537, SB836, SB1332, SB1307, SB963, SB493, SB922, SB984, SB1084, SB619, SB1098, SB1122, SB455, SB522, SB1057, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1664, SB1877, SB464, SB1277, SB32, SB732, SB660, SB731, SB921, SB268, SB1822, SB1188, SB1939, SB1589, SB397, SB1388, SB2230, SB1058, SB1036, SB1267, SB2112, SB1930, SB532, SB1035, SB2155, SB508, SB29, SB292, SB291, SB901, SB1333, SB1436, SB1494, SB964, SB779, SB1378, SB2312, SB1719

Keywords: voter ID, citizenship, election integrity, constitutional amendment, voting rights, water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability, immigration enforcement, ICE agreements, sheriff grants, law enforcement, county jail, federal immigration law, voter registration, proof of citizenship, Election Code, criminal offenses

Transcript Highlights:

• While the intention of Senate Bill 43 may have been to align New Hampshire's electioneering laws with
• New Hampshire made a decision to define electioneering and the ways it can be done through the use of
• <01:31:46.159> and decision to Define electioneering and decision to Define electioneering
• Electioneering in the polling place is still illegal. Thank you.
• Electioneering in the polling place is still illegal. Thank you, Senator.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that would be electioneering.
• Anywhere in line, anywhere in the room, anywhere in there, because you can be electioneering if you're
• It was mainly about electioneering and... ...concerns was any kind of security.
• The electioneering is already in law, and there is something to enforce that.
• A lot of people think it's within the electioneering zone, which is a hundred foot of the door.

Bills: HB1968, HB2279, HB2739, HB2803, HB3909, HB3918, HB4253, HB4475, HB5115, HB5430

Keywords: election services, contracting, political subdivisions, county elections, election code, voter registration, citizenship status, election law, cancellation, disqualification, Texas Election Code, voter identification, registration, election integrity, identification documents, election, watcher, polling place, removal, Texas Elections Code

Summary: The committee first voted out two previously heard Senate bills without amendment: SB 688, relating to the date of the meeting of presidential electors, and SB 914, relating to authorizing certain cities to change the date of their general election for officers. Both motions passed on 8-0 votes with one member absent. The committee then heard HB 3909, which would change the current prohibition on wireless device use from a 100-foot boundary around a voting station to only inside the room where voting is taking place, with a committee substitute also adding state-prescribed signage. The author and supporters said the change would reduce confusion and make enforcement easier for election workers, while opponents argued the existing 100-foot rule helps prevent electioneering, recording, and possible technical interference with election equipment. The bill was left pending. Members also heard HB 1968, which would repeal a provision that requires counties to provide election services to certain political subdivisions in odd-numbered years but not even-numbered years, making county-provided election services consistent across years. Supporters said it would improve consistency for smaller cities and school districts, while opponents warned it could strain county equipment and staffing during heavy election cycles. The bill was left pending. HB 2279 would require voter registrars to remove a person from the rolls if the person swears under oath during jury service that they are not a U.S. citizen; supporters said this would streamline removal of ineligible voters, while opponents raised concerns about mistaken identity and loss of due process. The bill was left pending. Finally, the committee heard HB 2803, which would require a presiding judge to give a poll watcher a signed statement explaining any removal from service. Supporters said this would improve documentation and accountability, and one witness asked for clarification that improper removal would remain a criminal offense; the author said he would consider a floor amendment and further discussion. The committee also heard HB 4253, which would create a more uniform voter-roll maintenance process based on inactivity, sending confirmation notices to voters who have not voted in the prior 25 months and eventually removing those who do not respond after multiple election cycles. Supporters said it would clean up outdated records and help keep voters registered where they actually live, while opponents argued it could wrongly remove eligible voters who simply do not vote regularly. HB 4253 was left pending as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today I'm here to lay out SB 2742, which addresses electioneering by independent school districts, ISDs
• 2024 general election, the Office of the Attorney General was made aware of multiple cases of electioneering
• 2024 general election, the Office of the Attorney General was made aware of multiple cases of electioneering
• Senate Bill 2742 would create a means to deter ISDs from electioneering by establishing a civil penalty
• Senate Bill 2742 strengthens existing laws prohibiting electioneering with public resources by creating

Bills: SB1065, SB2117, SB2217, SB2363, SB2533, SB2742, SB2743, SB2881, SB2964, SB3013, SB3014

Keywords: SB 1065, handgun carry, license holder, concealed carry, open carry, government contracts, governmental entity, property lease, state agencies, local government, higher education, university, Texas Government Code, Penal Code 30.06, Penal Code 30.07, Penal Code 46.03, Second Amendment, gun rights, firearms, civil penalty

Summary: The Senate State Affairs Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 1065, which would require government property contracts to prohibit contractors from barring licensed handgun holders from carrying firearms on leased or owned public property, with civil penalties and attorney general enforcement for violations. Senator Hall and invited witnesses from the Texas State Rifle Association, NRA, and Texas Gun Rights argued the bill would close a loophole exposed by the State Fair of Texas gun ban and protect law-abiding Texans’ self-defense rights. Opponents, including Moms Demand Action/Everytown, said the bill would undermine event organizers’ ability to set site-specific safety rules and could increase liability and insurance costs. Public testimony was then closed and the bill was left pending. The committee next took up Senate Bill 2742, which would create civil penalties for independent school districts and officials who use public resources for electioneering, waive immunity defenses, and expand attorney general enforcement. Senator Hagan-Bood said current law bans the conduct but lacks meaningful penalties, making injunctions the only remedy. No public testimony was heard, and the bill was left pending. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 2743, also by Senator Hagan-Bood, which would allow a court to disqualify local prosecutors who refuse to prosecute election offenses and appoint the attorney general to handle the case, with a committee substitute adjusting the removal process through an adjacent-county judge. Opponents from the Texas Civil Rights Project argued the bill would undermine prosecutorial discretion and was vague and open to abuse, while a Harris County election official described past instances where alleged voter fraud cases were not pursued. After testimony, public comment was closed and SB 2743 was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was mainly about electioneering and also allowing the election workers to be doing things that they
• The electioneering is already in law, and that is there is something to enforce that.
• Language about electioneering. OK, so you're not even saying building.
• I can see the electioneering language still exists, the recording language still exists, is just the
• The rules about electioneering and then maybe can there can be clarification that electioneering, including

Transcript Highlights:

• we'd like to remove Section 24.3 and instead amend NRS 293.361 to help clarify the areas where electioneering
• I just had a question about the amendment on the back in regards to addressing electioneering.
• So I was just wondering, are we doing this change because we're still seeing issues with electioneering
• I just want to follow up on a question from my colleague about the electioneering at a building or in
• No electioneering, I'll paraphrase, no electioneering in or within 100 feet from the entrance to the

Bills: AB534, AB562, AB595, AB597, AB600, SB74, SB226, SB422, SB488

Keywords: election reform, voter accessibility, conditional ballots, voter registration, mechanical voting systems, election audits, voter access grants, provisional ballot, voting technology, AB562, Nevada, Secretary of State, elections, elections management system, HAVA, Help America Vote Act, automatic voter registration, AVR, election technology, state appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• attestation form on the form that we provide that says that if they are allowed to participate in electioneering
• attestation form on the form that we provide that says that if they are allowed to participate in electioneering
• If they are already registered with the state and especially with the ability to do electioneering as
• we have a bunch of electioneering laws, why do we need something that's duplicative?
• put something on our form that attests that they either know they shouldn't be participating in electioneering

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Subcommittee heard House Bill 651, described by sponsors as the Florida Farm Bill and a comprehensive FDACS agency package. The bill combined technical agency updates with several policy provisions, including changes to water additive rules, labeling requirements for meat, milk, poultry, and eggs, criminal penalties related to drones over agricultural land, mail theft, and retail fuel theft, updates to disaster recovery loan programs, an FFA scholarship, school infrastructure provisions, land purchase authority for converted agricultural land, and a Florida Farmer Financial Protection Act addressing ESG-related banking practices. A major portion of the discussion focused on the bill’s fluoride language, with supporters arguing for local choice and consumer consent and opponents warning about public health impacts and loss of local control. Members also questioned the C-4 registry language and whether it was duplicative or could affect organizations’ status. Public testimony was split. Opponents included Florida for All and the Florida Dental Association, with testimony arguing the bill protected agribusiness interests and that removing fluoride would harm dental health, especially for low-income families. Proponents included Heritage Action, Heartland Impact, and several individuals who argued the bill protected farmers from ESG-driven banking restrictions and supported informed consent and the removal of fluoride from public water. Several agricultural and advocacy groups also waved in support. During debate, some members praised portions of the bill such as housing for agricultural workers, drone penalties, and school-related provisions, but said they could not support the fluoride preemption or the C-4 language. Others supported the fluoride provision as a matter of individual and local choice. On final passage, the committee reported HB 651 favorably. The vote was 11-4, with Chair Esposito, Vice Chair Botana, Representatives Barnaby, Benaroch, Black, Mayfield, Mooney, Plasencia, Salzman, and Weinberger voting yes, and Representatives Alvarez, Bartleman, Henson, and Rainer voting no.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I'd like to thank the Senate for considering the House's anti-electioneering bill by public employees
• for considering the<00:18:08.960> House's<00:18:09.600> uh<00:18:09.760> anti-electioneering
• <00:18:10.720> bill the House's uh anti-electioneering bill the House's uh anti-electioneering
• two questions. one relating<00:19:23.520> to<00:19:23.679> the<00:19:23.840> electioneering
• <00:19:25.280> portion relating to the electioneering portion relating to the electioneering

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Summary: The committee of conference first met on Senate Bill 221, which concerned annual voter roll verification and the lookback period for checking voter registration lists. The Senate favored looking back to presidential elections to reduce the number of voters removed, while the House argued for annual verification with a one-year lookback because the voter roll database now makes the process easier and because of population mobility and student turnover. Members discussed possible refinements to the 30-day letter process and agreed to recess and return Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. to continue negotiations. The committee then took up Senate Bill 213 and Senate Bill 218, both involving absentee voting and public employee electioneering restrictions. On SB 213, the discussion focused on clarifying identification/documentation requirements for absentee ballot-related applications and on a House amendment to preserve the ability of certain public employees to provide factual information to the public about official matters without violating the bill. On SB 218, the Senate wanted to remove outer envelopes from absentee voting materials, while the House supported keeping the bill but clarifying that only applicable documentation is required. Members raised concerns about voter access, clerks’ procedures, and whether the electioneering language was too broad; both bills were held over and recessed for further work. The committee also considered Senate Bill 287, which dealt with public employee electioneering and a related carve-out for factual responses by appointed public employees. The House and Senate discussed combining amendments, but the House member said the underlying bill was needed to curb partisan electioneering while still allowing factual public information. The committee then moved to Senate Bill 118, which would adjust a personal needs allowance for nursing home residents, address Hampstead Hospital employee bonuses, and create a maintenance fund for the hospital. The Senate objected to a House-added cannabis cultivation provision, saying it was unrelated to the bill and could jeopardize the measure because of the Senate’s and governor’s opposition to cannabis language; the committee recessed to revisit the issue later, with the House noting the base bill’s importance to nursing home residents and Hampstead Hospital.

Transcript Highlights:

• stipulate that a charity that is already required to register with the Department of State as an electioneering
• So they do if they have anything to do politically in electioneering.
• Yes, for the purpose of electioneering. Okay. I'm not sure if that's the case. Okay.
• But sometimes a charity doesn't know that simply registering with us does not fulfill the electioneering

Summary: The Senate Committee on Agriculture met and considered four bills. SB 178, by Senator Rouson, created an agronomic study to be conducted by Florida A&M University, subject to appropriation, to identify viable crops or products for land taken out of production by disease or weather and to assess environmental and economic impacts; it passed unanimously and was reported favorably. SB 980, by Senator Bernard, created a one-year Hunger-Free Campus Pilot Program within FDACS to help postsecondary institutions address student hunger through task forces, SNAP assistance, food pantries, and related measures; DACS support was noted, one student government representative appeared in support, and the bill was reported favorably. SB 786, by Chair Truenow, prohibited assignment of assessments on agricultural improvements for agricultural purposes on lands classified as agriculture; it also passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then took up SB 700, the FDACS “farm bill,” via a strike-all amendment. The amendment included a broad package of technical and substantive changes, including restrictions on additives to public water systems, limits on ESG considerations in agricultural lending, criminal penalties related to drone harassment, updates to disaster loan programs, truth-in-labeling provisions, charity registration changes, on-farm worker housing provisions, and support for FFA and 4-H dues. A major point of discussion was the provision preempting local governments from deciding whether to fluoridate water; supporters argued for statewide consistency and consumer choice, while opponents, including the Florida Dental Association and local officials, warned it would remove local control and harm public health, especially for low-income residents. Other speakers addressed concealed carry due process concerns, landowner rights, and labeling issues. The strike-all was adopted, and CS/SB 700 was reported favorably, with some senators noting they would continue working on concerns before later stops. At the end of the meeting, Senator Burton asked to be recorded as voting yes on SB 178, SB 980, and SB 786, and the committee agreed. The chair also welcomed Warner University agriculture policy students visiting the Capitol, and the meeting adjourned without objection.

Bills: SB2033, SB2487, SB2497, SB2471, SB2829

Keywords: renewable energy, grid-ready homes, interconnection process, electric utility, energy independence, surcharge, customer access, energy storage, smart inverters, Public Utilities Commission, PUC, electric utility rates, ratemaking, performance-based regulation, performance-based incentives, performance incentive mechanisms, revenue adjustment mechanisms, cost control mechanisms, reward and penalty mechanisms, alternative ratemaking

Summary: The committee first reconvened on SB 2471 and SB 2829, both relating to the powers of artificial persons. After discussion with the Attorney General’s office and a prior Q&A period, the chair said the committee would defer decision-making again, with the intent to return with amended versions of both bills that could gain support from the administration and its lawyers. The measures were deferred to Tuesday, February 10, 2026, in Conference Room 229 at 9:30 a.m. The committee then took up SB 2180, relating to deposits of public funds. Members noted late testimony from the prior day’s joint hearing with the Housing Committee and moved to pass the bill out with amendments, including a defective effective date. The motion carried unanimously among those voting: the chair, vice chair, Senator Lamosao, and Senator Awa voted aye; Senator McKelvey was excused. The measure was adopted. A joint hearing followed on SB 2033, relating to renewable energy and a streamlined grid-ready homes interconnection process. The PUC supported the bill’s intent but raised concerns about the time, resources, and stakeholder input needed to establish the proposed process, and asked for clarification of terms such as “grid-ready homes” and the role of HERA. Hawaiian Electric said it supported the intent but opposed the proposed process and HERA funding use. The Hawaii Solar Energy Association strongly supported the bill, arguing that faster interconnection is needed to meet rooftop solar goals and lower costs over time. Testimony totaled 27 in support, two in opposition, and four with comments. Members questioned costs, consumer protections, and whether the bill would burden low- and moderate-income households; the bill’s supporters said amendments could clarify the definition of grid-ready homes and add guardrails, while acknowledging that upfront costs and interconnection costs would still need to be addressed.

Transcript Highlights:

• No training that counts towards continuing education under this subchapter may include electioneering
• Should we allow continuing education credits that include electioneering?
• It's just when you start hiring, lobbying, and when you start electioneering that the problem occurs.
• , my understanding is the challenge here that we don't want our property tax dollars going to electioneering
• blah, blah—or— or by a person who engages in election—person, entity, or other—that engages in electioneering

Bills: SB 13, SB 27, SB 57, HB1325, HB1655, HB3312, HB5526, SB13, SB57, SB207, HB441, HB591, HB5019, SB27, SB843

Keywords: lobbying, public funds, political subdivision, local government, county association, municipal lobbying, registered lobbyist, Texas Legislature, taxpayer lawsuit, injunctive relief, attorney's fees, government finance, county dues, state association of counties, sheriffs association, law enforcement officers, legislative advocacy, bill tracking, legislative alerts, Government Code Chapter 556

Transcript Highlights:

• It talks about, in the previous sentence, electioneering signs on vehicles and things like that having
• So a candidate could be able to stand there and pass something out, electioneer, hold up their campaign
• Pass something out, electioneer, hold up their campaign sign at 25 feet, but if you're not the candidate
• It talks about, in the previous sentence, electioneering signs on vehicles and things like that having
• So a candidate could be able to stand there and pass something out, electioneer, hold up their campaign

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and approval of the previous day’s journal by a 129-0 vote. Members then spent considerable time on points of personal privilege and introductions, including remarks recognizing law enforcement wellness, personal health updates, legislative service and family sacrifices, interns, visiting students, and special guests such as a St. Louis entrepreneur honored with a House resolution and a visiting governor from Samarkand, Uzbekistan. The chamber then received Senate messages and committee reports before moving to conference requests on Senate Bills 835 and 1111 and Senate Bill 1020, both of which were approved for conference committees. The House also passed Senate Bills 977 and 1011, a measure barring international organizations or foreign law from exercising authority in Missouri or being used to deny “fundamental rights,” after debate over its scope and concerns about foreign-law venue rules and its practical effect; the final vote was 99-45. Senate Bill 1470, dealing with legislative research and statutory publication procedures, was amended and passed 148-1 after debate over reducing committee size, shifting publication to a primarily web-based format, and preserving printed archival copies. The House then adopted and finally passed Senate Bill 1940, the public notices/newspaper bill, by 142-1, with discussion focused on modernizing notice publication rules and election-related deadlines. It also took up Senate Bill 1871, which included county clerk and election administration provisions and a Senate amendment incorporating campaign finance language; debate emphasized ballot testing timelines and election transparency. The transcript ends during discussion of that bill, before a final vote is shown.