Video & Transcript Research : 'ejection policy'

Page 30 of 500
TX

Texas 89th 2nd C.S.

State Affairs Aug 15th, 2025

State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • This is not new information, and you've had experts and the people affected by policies like this tell
  • I'm the Strategic Policy Associate for Texas Values Action, the largest statewide Christian nonprofit
  • law and policy organization in Texas, standing for faith, family, and freedom.
  • Please don't ask me for a policy analysis of it yet because I haven't been able to do that.
  • Please don't ask me for a policy analysis of it yet because I haven't been able to do that.
Bills: SB6, SB7, SB8, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17
Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 8, the Texas Women's Privacy Act, and heard extensive public testimony both for and against the measure. Supporters, including representatives of Texas Values and Texas Values Action, argued the bill was needed to protect women’s privacy and safety in restrooms, locker rooms, showers, prisons, domestic violence shelters, and other government-controlled spaces, and said it would provide clear, sex-based rules. Opponents, including many transgender Texans, civil rights advocates, clergy, business and public safety voices, and others, argued the bill would invite harassment, gender policing, lawsuits, and invasive inspections, while harming trans, intersex, and gender-nonconforming people as well as cisgender women who do not fit stereotypes. Several witnesses said the bill would conflict with federal law or prison standards, worsen safety in shelters and prisons, and hurt Texas’s reputation and economy. The chair repeatedly noted the compressed special-session schedule and said flood relief remained the session’s top priority. Public testimony on SB 8 was eventually closed, and the bill was left pending. The committee then moved to Senate Bill 6, dealing with consumable hemp product restrictions. Testimony on SB 6 focused on whether the bill went too far in restricting hemp-derived THC products. Opponents argued hemp and THC have medical and economic value, that the bill would criminalize conduct and burden courts, and that regulation—not prohibition—was the better approach. Some witnesses supported tighter rules such as testing, child-resistant packaging, and limits on marketing to children, but still opposed the bill’s broad THC ban, higher fees, and age restrictions. Several speakers emphasized benefits for veterans, chronic pain patients, and small businesses, and warned that prohibition would push consumers toward the illicit market. The committee heard the testimony and then continued with additional witnesses, with no final vote or disposition reported in the excerpt.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Senate SessionReading and Referral of Bills Mar 17th, 2025

Texas Senate Floor Meeting

Bills: SJR 4, SCR 36, SCR 37, SCR 38, SCR 39, SCR 40, SCR 41, SCR 42, SB 7, SB 30, SB 31, SB 32, SB 33, SB 34, SB 36, SB 37, SB 38, SB 39, SB 1851, SB 1852, SB 1853, SB 1854, SB 1855, SB 1856, SB 1857, SB 1858, SB 1860, SB 1861, SB 1862, SB 1863, SB 1864, SB 1865, SB 1866, SB 1867, SB 1868, SB 1869, SB 1870, SB 1871, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1874, SB 1875, SB 1876, SB 1877, SB 1878, SB 1879, SB 1880, SB 1881, SB 1882, SB 1883, SB 1884, SB 1885, SB 1886, SB 1887, SB 1888, SB 1889, SB 1890, SB 1891, SB 1892, SB 1893, SB 1894, SB 1895, SB 1896, SB 1897, SB 1898, SB 1899, SB 1900, SB 1901, SB 1903, SB 1904, SB 1905, SB 1906, SB 1907, SB 1908, SB 1909, SB 1910, SB 1911, SB 1912, SB 1913, SB 1914, SB 1915, SB 1916, SB 1917, SB 1918, SB 1919, SB 1920, SB 1921, SB 1922, SB 1923, SB 1924, SB 1925, SB 1926, SB 1927, SB 1928, SB 1929, SB 1930, SB 1931, SB 1932, SB 1933, SB 1934, SB 1935, SB 1936, SB 1937, SB 1938, SB 1939, SB 1940, SB 1941, SB 1942, SB 1943, SB 1944, SB 1945, SB 1946, SB 1947, SB 1948, SB 1949, SB 1950, SB 1951, SB 1952, SB 1953, SB 1954, SB 1955, SB 1956, SB 1957, SB 1958, SB 1959, SB 1960, SB 1961, SB 1962, SB 1963, SB 1964, SB 1965, SB 1966, SB 1967, SB 1968, SB 1969, SB 1970, SB 1971, SB 1972, SB 1973, SB 1974, SB 1975, SB 1976, SB 1977, SB 1978, SB 1979, SB 1980, SB 1981, SB 1982, SB 1983, SB 1984, SB 1985, SB 1986, SB 1987, SB 1988, SB 1989, SB 1990, SB 1991, SB 1992, SB 1993, SB 1994, SB 1995, SB 1996, SB 1997, SB 1998, SB 1999, SB 2000, SB 2001, SB 2002, SB 2003, SB 2004, SB 2005, SB 2006, SB 2007, SB 2008, SB 2009, SB 2010, SB 2011, SB 2012, SB 2013, SB 2014, SB 2015, SB 2016, SB 2017, SB 2018, SB 2019, SB 2020, SB 2021, SB 2022, SB 2023, SB 2024, SB 2025, SB 2026, SB 2027, SB 2028, SB 2029, SB 2030, SB 2031, SB 2032, SB 2033, SB 2034, SB 2035, SB 2036, SB 2037, SB 2038, SB 2039, SB 2040, SB 2041, SB 2042, SB 2043, SB 2044, SB 2045, SB 2046, SB 2047, SB 2048, SB 2049, SB 2050, SB 2051, SB 2052, SB 2053, SB 2054, SB 2055, SB 2056, SB 2057, SB 2058, SB 2059, SB 2060
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

ECD Public Hearing - Wed Mar 18, 2026 @ 8:30 AM HST

Economic Development & Technology

Transcript Highlights:
  • Several provisions in this bill are genuinely good policy: AI disclosure requirements, protections around
  • Young people don't have the luxury of waiting years for policy while these companions are rapidly becoming
  • don't have the luxury of waiting<01:11:15.200> years<01:11:15.480> for<01:11:15.600> policy
  • <01:11:16.320> while<01:11:16.480> these waiting years for policy while these waiting
  • years for policy while these companions<01:11:17.160> are<01:11:17.240> rapidly<01:11:
Summary: The committee heard testimony on several Senate bills, with most measures drawing broad support and a few generating significant opposition or policy questions. SB 2908 SD1 and SB 2671 SD1 were taken up first; both appeared to have majority support, with SB 2908 receiving seven in support, one in opposition, and one comment, and SB 2671 receiving five in support and two comments. SB 3085 SD2, related to film industry operations, drew 11 supporters and no opposition. Georgia Skinner explained that the bill would streamline the approval timeline for productions by reducing delays tied to Land Board review, and she said DLNR supported the effort. Committee members asked about the need for the change and the relationship between the film studio, DLNR, and the approval process. The committee then discussed SB 2907 SD1, which would create an Office of Marine Affairs. Testimony was largely supportive, including from DLNR, HTDC, the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, ocean industry representatives, and others. The governor’s office supported the bill’s intent but objected to placing the office within the Office of the Governor, urging instead that it be housed at HTDC. HTDC said it was willing and excited to take on the work and described ongoing stakeholder engagement. Members asked about the rationale for the placement and the long-term structure of the office. SB 2353 SD2, concerning the Aloha Stadium district and billboard/naming-rights issues, drew strong opposition overall, with four in support, 23 in opposition, and one comment. Andrew Pereira of the Stadium Authority argued the measure could generate revenue to help maintain and operate the stadium and said the district would remain self-contained; he also emphasized that the development would respect the character of the area. The committee then heard SB 2074 SD1, which had five in support and 26 in opposition; only one support testimony from the Carpenters was heard before the discussion moved on. Finally, SB 2360 SD1, an enterprise zones measure, received 14 supportive testimonies and two comments. Testimony focused on updating the program for modern business models, especially e-commerce and direct-to-consumer sales, while committee members questioned whether the program overlaps with higher tax burdens and whether businesses receiving subsidies should be monitored for job retention after graduation from the program.
TX

Texas 89th 2nd C.S.

Criminal Jurisprudence Apr 15th, 2025

Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • I represent the Texas Public Policy Foundation and we are in support of HB 2507.
  • They had a general policy that they would not make them public. We have another one.
  • Chairman: ...on behalf of Texas Public Policy Foundation for the bill, correct?
  • I'm a policy analyst representing the Texas...
  • I'm a policy analyst representing the Texas Public Policy Foundation here to testify in support of HB
Bills: HB200
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Criminal Jurisprudence Apr 15th, 2025

Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:
  • I represent the Texas Public Policy Foundation. Foundation and we are in support of HB 2507.
  • I'm a policy attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project. here in opposition to HB 4075.
  • My name is Kristen Dunlap, again, a policy attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project.
  • I'm a policy analyst.
  • I'm a policy analyst representing the Texas Public Policy Foundation, here to testify in support of HB
NH

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

House Science, Technology and Energy (02/11/2025)

Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:
  • has changed that so law state policy has changed that so that<00:38:25.319> now<00:38:25.480>
  • Really, tax policy just needs to be caught up a little bit with the energy policy.
  • Tax policy just needs to be caught up a little bit with the energy policy.
  • restructuring policy restructuring policy principles<04:06:13.120> which<04:06:13.279>
  • We encourage New Hampshire maybe to revisit this policy in a few years.
Keywords: 1189, house, all
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

HSH-HLT Joint Public Hearing - Thu Mar 19, 2026 @ 9:30 AM HST

Human Services & Homelessness

Transcript Highlights:
  • More importantly, this bill moves against the direction of evidence-based homelessness policy, because
  • ,<01:18:37.160> because<01:18:37.440> federal homelessness policy, because federal
  • homelessness policy, because federal housing<01:18:38.200> research<01:18:38.640> continues
  • >> Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii on Zoom. And opposition. Aloha, Madam Chair, members.
  • Uh, Nikos Leverenz with Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, and also Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center
Summary: The committee heard SB 709 SD2, which would require the Department of Health to respond to reports involving persons with severe mental illness, assess eligibility for assisted community treatment, and coordinate treatment when appropriate. Testimony from the Department of Human Services and the Department of Health supported the measure, with DOH saying it generally supported the bill but had comments on one section it viewed as unnecessary. The Department of Law Enforcement later explained that the bill would shift certification and standards for crisis intervention officer training from DOH to DLE, while still involving DOH in the training process. Opposition came from the Hawaii Disability Rights Center and an individual testifier, both of whom argued the bill expands state authority over people with mental illness and could worsen forced treatment practices. The Disability Rights Center also raised procedural concerns, saying the bill was effectively moved from a prior administration measure that had not been heard this session, and questioned whether the bill’s changes to assisted community treatment, blood tests, urinalysis, and living arrangements went beyond current law. The individual testifier argued the bill would further entrench harmful psychiatric drugging and urged the committee to defer it. Committee members questioned the administration about the bill’s process, the role of the Attorney General in treatment-over-objection proceedings, and the practical effects of moving CIT certification to DLE. The Attorney General’s office said the bill was intended to fill a gap by allowing it to assist with treatment proceedings, while public defenders would continue to represent respondents and due process protections would remain in place. DLE and DOH said the change would better align certification with law enforcement training needs, improve speed in crisis response, and still keep DOH involved; members also discussed whether WAM counted as a hearing and whether the bill should more explicitly preserve DOH’s role. No vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

03/10/2026 - Senate Natural Resources

Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:
  • was developed in response to proposals around commingling that were brought to the Governor's Water Policy
  • was developed in response to proposals around commingling that were brought to the Governor's Water Policy
Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 27 and March 3, 2026, and then heard several natural resources and water-related measures. House Bill 2013 would require ADEQ to submit an exceptional event demonstration to EPA when wildfire smoke from federally managed land affects Arizona air quality. The sponsor said this would help Arizona’s ozone/nonattainment position, while Sierra Club and ADEQ raised concerns that the bill duplicates an existing process and could waste staff time and resources. The bill passed 5-3. House Bill 2156 would appropriate $250,000 to the Livestock Compensation Fund. Supporters argued ranchers need help with livestock losses and drought impacts, while opponents criticized the board’s transparency and said the program already receives federal and prior state funding. The bill passed 5-3. House Bill 2113 would require RUCO to intervene in utility rate cases when a proposed increase reaches 100% or more; the sponsor said rural customers are being overlooked, while RUCO said it would need significant additional staff and funding and could not absorb the workload without more resources. The bill passed 6-2, with members noting they expected a future amendment to add funding. The committee also approved House Concurrent Memorial 2011, which urges Congress to delist the Mexican gray wolf and return management to states and local authorities. Supporters cited livestock losses and ranching impacts, while opponents said the species remains endangered and recovery decisions should remain science-based; the memorial passed 5-3. House Bill 2026, concerning how ADWR evaluates water availability when supplies are commingled, passed 5-3 despite concerns that it could weaken groundwater safeguards. House Bill 2056, which funds a feasibility study for brackish groundwater desalination sites, also passed 5-3 after debate over whether the study was necessary given existing groundwater accounting and treatment efforts. House Bill 2098, modernizing Pinal County Water Augmentation Authority bonding authority, passed unanimously 8-0. Finally, House Concurrent Resolution 2057, supporting a geothermal permitting roadmap and agency coordination for next-generation geothermal development, passed unanimously 8-0.
FL

Florida 2026 Regular Session

Community Affairs Feb 3rd, 2026

Community Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • This bill recognizes that housing affordability, traffic congestion, and land use policy are all deeply
  • I'm a policy analyst of the James Madison Institute, focusing on technology and innovation.
  • It means stronger parental leave policies.
  • I'm the Florida Policy Director for the Southern Poverty Law Center.
  • Diversity, equity, and inclusion policies are not a benign request for inclusion.
Summary: The committee heard several housing, local government, utility, and transparency bills. SB 1342 on transportation infrastructure and land development regulations, by Sen. Rouson, was presented as a housing-affordability measure modeled on the Live Local Act for transit corridors. After adopting an amendment that removed the bill’s compelling-governmental-interest language in enforcement provisions, the committee heard testimony from local-government and housing interests both supporting and opposing the bill’s zoning preemption approach. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also reported favorably CS/SB 1614, by Sen. Leek, which was amended to remove stormwater and code-enforcement spending provisions and to tighten restrictions on local governments seeking state appropriations after audits or without required affirmations. SB 1548, the next Live Local Act iteration by Sen. Claddie Ude, was also reported favorably; it expands where Live Local projects may be located and adds fair-housing protections. SB 968 on home backup power systems, by Sen. McLean, was reported favorably after testimony from builders and energy-related stakeholders, with the sponsor noting he was still working on amendments to refine permit provisions. The committee then approved CS/SB 698, by Sen. Martin, which allows building permits for single-family homes to be issued before septic permits are finalized if application has been made, while still requiring septic approval before occupancy. Builders testified that septic permit delays were causing lengthy project delays and contract cancellations. The committee also reported favorably SB 1320, by Sen. Martin, requiring county tax-increase referenda to include a Department of Financial Services spending analysis if available; the sponsor said the goal was to give voters more standardized fiscal information, while opponents argued existing law already provides similar transparency. SB 484, by Sen. Avila, on data centers, was reported favorably after an amendment adding a knowledge requirement to the foreign-country-of-concern service prohibition; the bill addresses local planning authority, nondisclosure agreements, utility tariff requirements, and water-use limits for large data centers. The committee also reported favorably SB 1118, by Sen. Avila, creating a one-year public-records exemption for data-center location and proprietary information, with testimony split between economic-development supporters and transparency concerns. Finally, the committee took up SB 706, by Sen. Mayfield, preempting naming of major commercial service airports to the state and designating Palm Beach International Airport as Donald J. Trump International Airport subject to federal and trademark conditions; it was reported favorably after questions about local input and airport naming. The committee then heard extensive public testimony on SB 1134, by Sen. Yarbrough, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from funding, promoting, or taking official actions related to DEI and would create penalties and a private right of action for residents. The sponsor argued the bill was aimed at preventing taxpayer-funded DEI programs and cited examples from Jacksonville and other jurisdictions; opponents said the bill was vague, overbroad, and would chill local programs, public education, and civil-rights-related activities. The transcript ends during continued public testimony on SB 1134, with no final committee action shown in the excerpt.