Transcript Highlights:

• This resolution gives lawmakers the opportunity to develop relationships and craft thoughtful and durable
• And one of the most profound things I learned was that the lawmakers ourselves, we flowed through this

Committee: House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Summary: The House Elections Budget Committee held a public hearing on several joint resolutions dealing with Missouri legislative term limits and chamber structure. Representatives Peggy McGaugh, Marty Joe Murray, Bruce Sassman, and Jeff Myers presented versions of HJR 104, 121, 122, 149, and related measures that would allow legislators to serve up to 16 total years in either chamber rather than being limited to eight years in one chamber and eight in the other. The sponsors argued the change would preserve institutional knowledge, reduce lobbyist influence, and let voters choose whether experienced members should continue serving. They also discussed leadership limits, with proposals to cap service as Speaker or President Pro Tem, and debated whether those limits should be consecutive or total terms. One proposal also would reduce the size of the House to 103 members, which Myers said would improve efficiency and avoid a senator controlling House members in a three-representative-per-Senate-district model. Committee members raised concerns about self-serving motives, the optics of extending service, possible gaps when members run for the Senate with time left on their 16-year limit, and whether smaller or larger districts would weaken rural representation or shift power toward population centers. Some members supported the concept as a way to preserve expertise and reduce the influence of lobbyists, while others argued the public may view the change skeptically, especially given the original 1992 term-limit vote. Myers defended the smaller House proposal as a way to lower costs, reduce staff redundancy, and improve legislative effectiveness, while opponents questioned whether the fiscal savings would offset the need for more staff and whether the change would actually solve the problems described. Public testimony was split. An opponent argued Missouri voters should not be asked to revisit a decision they made on term limits, said the General Assembly should not be trying to overturn the public’s earlier choice, and urged rejection of all the resolutions. He also criticized lobbyist influence and cited past corruption cases to argue for keeping strict term limits. After testimony concluded, the committee moved into executive session and passed House Bill 3146 by a vote of 10-2. The meeting then adjourned with no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• we do have kind of a fourth branch of government, and that's the rule makers, because they're not lawmakers
• Accountants and lawmakers do weird things.

Committee: House Government Efficiency

Transcript Highlights:

• When reporting is eliminated, lawmakers are asked to govern without information, and potential risks
• a state rights issue, and I acknowledge that this procedure is going to remain legal until other lawmakers

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

Committees: Senate Senate Judiciary , Senate House Judiciary

Keywords: SB30, induced abortion, abortion reporting, vital statistics, public health reporting, medical records, health care providers, repeal, New Mexico, pregnancy termination, abortion data, state reporting requirements, confidentiality, reproductive health, parole, life imprisonment, rehabilitation, criminal justice, victim rights, law enforcement

Transcript Highlights:

• When reporting is eliminated, lawmakers are asked to govern without information and potential risks or
• a state rights issue, and I acknowledge that this procedure is going to remain legal until other lawmakers

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

Committee: Senate House Judiciary

Summary: Senate Judiciary began by announcing that Senate Bill 136 would be rolled over because the sponsor was unavailable. The chair then addressed criticism from the floor over how a prior bill had been handled, defending the committee’s practice of using committee substitutes and amendments without waiting for a new version from council, and emphasizing his authority to set hard stops and limit debate when he believes discussion is repetitive or dilatory. Several members responded, with some supporting the chair’s approach and others arguing that contentious bills deserve more time and fuller committee vetting. The committee then heard Senate Bill 30, which would repeal New Mexico’s requirement that induced abortions be reported to the state registrar. The sponsors argued the reporting law is outdated, unnecessary for public health, and potentially dangerous because provider information can be disclosed under broader vital statistics statutes; supporters from the ACLU, League of Women Voters, Bold Futures, and NOW echoed privacy and safety concerns. Opponents argued the reporting requirement provides transparency and public health data. After debate, the committee approved SB 30 on a roll call vote. Next, the committee heard Senate Bill 43, a bipartisan measure to modernize the Adult Parole Board statute after a prior veto. The bill would update parole factors for life-sentenced inmates, authorize per diem and closed hearings, and prevent parole hearings from being scheduled on victims’ birth or death dates. It received support from corrections officials and victims’ advocates, and the committee passed it without objection. The final major item was Senate Bill 50, which would remove several statutory in-service training mandates for law enforcement and give the Standards and Training Council more flexibility to set curriculum. Supporters said the current requirements are outdated and too rigid; opponents warned the bill could weaken recurring training in domestic violence, sexual assault, crisis intervention, and other high-risk areas. A motion to table failed, and the committee ultimately passed SB 50 on a roll call vote, despite divided member views.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so those are the situations where I just feel that our job as lawmakers is to balance public safety
• Our lawmakers should be committing themselves to advocating for policies that will actually address the

Committee: House General Laws

Summary: The committee first met in executive session and established a quorum. It took no action on House Bill 2155. On House Bill 2682, the committee adopted a House Committee Substitute that removed a reference to the 11th Amendment in the portion waiving state immunity, then voted the bill do pass by a roll call vote of 6-3. The committee then held a public hearing on House Bill 2308, which would require parenting time lost during a child abuse investigation to be made up if the allegation is unfounded. Representative Holly Jones presented the bill as a way to restore time to falsely accused parents and children. Testimony in support came from Robert Garza and Lincoln Brewbaker, both of whom described extensive personal experiences with repeated false allegations, CPS involvement, court orders, and lost parenting time; they argued the bill would deter misuse of the system and conserve investigative and court resources. Several members raised concerns about logistics, fairness to the other parent, judicial discretion, and whether the bill should apply only when the accuser is the other parent. No opposition testimony was offered. The committee also heard House Bill 2176, a broad firearms measure described by the sponsor as combining prior committee-approved provisions, including limits on red flag laws, preemption of local gun ordinances, changes to self-defense immunity, and lowering the concealed carry permit age from 19 to 18. Supporters from the Missouri Firearms Coalition and Women for Gun Rights argued the bill protects due process and the Second Amendment and prevents abuse of gun seizure laws. Opponents from Moms Demand Action argued it weakens public safety, undermines local control, and could worsen gun violence and suicide. Members questioned the bill’s dangerous felony carve-out, the scope of the $50,000 civil penalty, and how the bill would affect firearms at home or in mental health crises. The hearing concluded without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that, you know, I'm not a lawmaker.
• But, you know, I think, again, I'm not a lawmaker, but, you know, with the sources of funding that we

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services heard a presentation on the governor’s proposed fiscal year 2026-27 budget for the health and human services silo, which totals $48.5 billion. Agency leaders outlined major requests for AHCA, APD, DCF, DOEA, DOH, and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, including behavioral health redesign, Medicaid rate changes, developmental disability services, child welfare and opioid programs, senior services, cancer research, public health initiatives, and veterans’ facility and technology needs. The committee also received an overview of the overall state budget, which was described as $117.4 billion, up 1.1% from the current year. AHCA’s presentation focused on $71.6 million for a Medicaid behavioral health redesign, including funding for residential treatment, a serious mental illness waiver, and higher inpatient psychiatric rates for youth, plus $7.1 million to raise private duty nursing reimbursement in fee-for-service Medicaid, $2.5 million for the background screening clearinghouse, and $124.4 million for the Health Care Connection System (FX). APD requested funding to continue moving people off the pre-enrollment list and to support developmental disability centers, a new forensic facility, an electronic health record system, and higher operating costs. DCF highlighted $81.9 million for eligibility and system integrity, $187.5 million for opioid prevention and treatment, $35.5 million for community-based care lead agencies, and $72.7 million to expand behavioral health bed capacity, including 474 new beds at state hospitals. DOEA sought additional funding for Alzheimer’s services, home care, and community care for the elderly. DOH emphasized $278 million for cancer research and innovation, $5 million for food and product safety testing, $5 million for the Florida FIRST blood-on-ambulance initiative, and $5.7 million for a public lab feasibility study. Veterans Affairs requested funds for facility improvements, cybersecurity, and medication management equipment. Members asked detailed questions about several items, especially the proposed changes to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), which would reduce eligibility and the number of people served. Senators and public witnesses criticized the lack of transparency and urged the department to pause the changes and work with stakeholders; the Surgeon General said the issue was driven by funding constraints and federal changes, not a legal barrier, and that the agency was exploring alternatives. Questions also addressed the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity, the Kids Care/CHIP expansion implementation, the cancer research funding structure, and the timeline and cost of the FX system. Public testimony focused heavily on ADAP, with speakers warning that thousands could lose medication access and calling for community involvement and a review of the program’s finances. The committee adjourned after the presentations and questions, with no votes taken on the budget items during this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that, you know, I'm not a lawmaker, but I think that there are funding approaches to address
• But, you know, I think, again, I'm not a lawmaker, but, you know, with the sources of funding that we

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services heard presentations on the governor’s proposed fiscal year 2026-2027 budget for the health and human services agencies. Kendall Kelly outlined the overall HHS budget at $48.5 billion, with AHCA accounting for the largest share, and agency heads then highlighted major proposals for Medicaid behavioral health redesign, APD waiver enrollment and facility needs, DCF child welfare, opioid, and mental health investments, DOEA funding for Alzheimer’s, home care, and community services, DOH funding for cancer research, public health initiatives, and lab capacity, and VA funding for facility improvements, cybersecurity, and medication management. Several members praised specific proposals, including increased reimbursement for private duty nursing, Alzheimer’s supports, and the Florida FIRST blood-in-ambulance initiative. Senators also questioned the proposed changes to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), with the Surgeon General explaining that the department expects a reduction in covered patients from about 30,000 to about 20,000 because of funding pressures tied to rebates, federal changes, and premium tax credit issues. Public testimony strongly criticized the ADAP changes, citing lack of transparency and warning that many patients could lose access to medications. Other questions focused on the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity, DCF’s substance abuse and mental health data dashboard, Kids Care/CHIP expansion implementation, APD bed and facility planning, and the FX Medicaid technology project. DCF said about $7 million is set aside for the dashboard system, and AHCA said the governor’s budget includes $124.4 million for FX maintenance and continued module development, with $13.5 million to begin claims processing work. The committee did not take a substantive vote on the budget presentations and adjourned after questions and public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so I'm trying to figure out, as we are held accountable to our Constitution as the lawmakers, how
• I think the obligation that we have as lawmakers is to really direct you in where we really need to go

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Governor, lawmakers have estimated the number at least a billion.
• Governor, lawmakers have estimated the number at least a billion. Have you asked for that number?

Transcript Highlights:

• What advice do you have for state lawmakers to be able to focus on next year to help improve the situation
• What advice do you have for state lawmakers to be able to focus on next year to help improve the situation

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Biotechnology and Medical Technology held an informational hearing on the role of biotechnology industries in wastewater treatment, hosted at Bakar Labs on the UC Berkeley campus. Opening remarks emphasized California’s water scarcity, the rising cost of wastewater infrastructure, and the need to reuse and clean contaminated water. Committee members framed the hearing as a look at both current treatment challenges and emerging technologies that could improve water quality, affordability, and resilience over time. The first panel focused on statewide wastewater challenges. BACWA Executive Director Laurie Fono described wastewater plants as part of a broader circular economy, noting their roles in recycled water, environmental enhancement, biosolids management, carbon sequestration, and renewable energy generation. She highlighted major challenges including aging 1970s-era infrastructure, nutrient reduction mandates, sea level rise, evolving regulations, and PFAS source control. She said Bay Area agencies face about $11 billion in nutrient reduction costs, with rate increases, state revolving funds, WIFIA loans, and bonds as the main financing tools. Members asked about regional differences, energy revenue opportunities, smaller decentralized plants, and agricultural collaboration. The second panel featured researchers and lab experts discussing biotechnology solutions. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab’s Dr. Romine Chakarvati described using microbial communities and machine learning to help break down PFAS and treat produced water. CEL Analytical’s Dr. Yigi Dearborn explained pathogen testing for direct potable reuse, wastewater monitoring, and the need for larger sample volumes and more funding to validate methods for viruses and protozoa. Stanford’s Dr. Chunhung-Shin presented an anaerobic membrane system that turns domestic wastewater into clean water and energy with less biosolids and lower operating costs. Committee members asked about AI, assay development, scaling technologies, and funding priorities. Public comment from the California Association of Sanitation Agencies stressed the need to balance scalability, reliability, and affordability, and the hearing adjourned without any formal vote or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• City lawmakers and community members should be able to create their city budget without interference
• We urge the lawmakers to reject SB 11 and instead defend both freedom of religion and freedom from state-sponsored

Bills: SB6 , SB11 , SB33

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: electric power, interconnection, utilities, ERCOT, large load customers, water supply, sewer service, demand management, school prayer, Bible reading, religious text, public schools, Texas Education Code, student prayer, silent prayer, meditation, religious liberty, First Amendment, Establishment Clause, church and state

Transcript Highlights:

• This is why we have such amazing nonpartisan staff to guide us on the journey of lawmaking.
• We were at the White House last summer with other state lawmakers throughout the country to discuss how

Bills: HF1367 , HF2732 , HF1897 , HF1424 , HF1383 , HF2728 , HF2863 , HF1685 , HF2929

Committee: House Children and Families Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• I AM ASKING MY LAWMAKERS. HIS INTENTION WAS TO SEND ME HOME TO DIE.
• WHEN I COME TO THE LAWMAKERS AND THE BOARD OF HEALTH FOR ANSWERS I GET NOTHING.

Transcript Highlights:

• of study to try to identify those issues in advance, identify what those risks are so that we as lawmakers
• But as a lawmaker generally, I think that before we legislate, we should investigate investigate in the

Transcript Highlights:

• I urge my fellow citizens and lawmakers to reject this costly and unconstitutional measure.
• I urge my fellow citizens and lawmakers to reject this costly and unconstitutional measure.

Committee: Senate Governmental Oversight and Accountability

Summary: The Committee on Governmental Oversight and Accountability met with a quorum present and took up two bills and one presentation. Senate Bill 108, on administrative procedures, was presented by Senator Burgess on behalf of Senator Grall. The bill would require agencies to systematically review rules over five years old, submit annual regulatory plans and reports, and take action on reviewed rules; it also would speed publication of proposed rules after new rulemaking authority and expand transparency for incorporated materials and rule histories. Americans for Prosperity appeared in support, there was no debate, and the bill was reported favorably on a roll call vote. The committee then heard a presentation from State Board of Administration Executive Director Chris Spencer on implementation of statutory investment restrictions affecting state funds. He reviewed the SBA’s structure and fiduciary duties, said the agency must maximize financial return using only pecuniary factors, and described the Protecting Florida’s Investments Act restrictions involving Northern Ireland, Cuba, Venezuela, Israel, Sudan, Iran, and China. He noted recent changes, including expanded Iran restrictions after the October 7 attacks, the addition of China-related divestment requirements, and the SBA’s move to eliminate China and Hong Kong from its global equity benchmarks; he said the agency is ahead of schedule on required divestment and in compliance with the law. Senate Bill 100, on display of flags by governmental entities, was then presented by Chair Fine. The bill would prohibit political flags on government buildings and allow active-duty service members and veterans to use reasonable force to stop flag desecration. The committee heard extensive public testimony, with supporters arguing government buildings should not display political messages and opponents raising First Amendment, vagueness, and enforcement concerns, especially regarding LGBTQ-related flags and school settings. Senators also questioned the bill’s definitions and the reasonable-force provision. After debate, the committee voted to report SB 100 favorably, with Senators Arrington and Polsky voting no and Senators Brodeur, McClain, Rodriguez, Fine, and Chair DeSiglie voting yes. At the end of the meeting, Senator Rodriguez was recorded as voting yes on SB 108, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 18 establishes penalties for lawmakers who intentionally break quorum for the purpose of bringing

Bills: HB18 , HB18

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Transcript Highlights:

• it's probably hard to get that information, but it would just be good to know how effective our lawmaking
• Shooting into an occupied dwelling—could that be, like, some of the lawmakers in the state, someone targeted
• on here in KRQE, crime rates in New Mexico remain high, well above the national average, despite lawmakers
• And thank you for your very tailored approach to lawmaking.
• And thank you for your very tailored approach to lawmaking.

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 25, which would prohibit a juvenile who committed a firearm-related delinquent act that would be a felony if committed by an adult from legally owning or possessing a firearm for 10 years after disposition. The sponsor and supporters said the bill is intended to address serious youth gun violence without lengthening juvenile sentences or unsealing records, and they emphasized that the substitute language was meant to clarify, not change, the bill’s intent. Support came from law enforcement, the district attorney’s office, CYFD, and business interests, while opponents including the Public Defender, ACLU, and criminal defense advocates argued it conflicts with juvenile-code principles, creates civil disabilities based on juvenile conduct, and could raise Second Amendment and sealing-record concerns. Members raised extensive questions about how the NICS background-check process would work, what offenses would qualify, whether the measure would apply retroactively, and how sealed juvenile records and pardons would be handled. After discussion, the committee adopted the committee substitute, but no final vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided; members discussed possibly working on the language further in Judiciary or tabling it. The committee then took up House Bill 15, the Medical Injury and Collaborative Resolution Act, described by the sponsor as New Mexico’s version of a candor law. The bill would create a protected adverse outcome conference process allowing patients and providers to discuss medical injuries or undesirable outcomes outside of court, with the goal of improving communication, giving patients answers, and reducing litigation. A family medicine doctor and a trial lawyer testified in support, saying patients often want explanations more than money and that open conversations can sometimes resolve disputes early. Public commenters also supported the concept, though one noted concerns about how pro se litigants would fit into the process. Committee questions focused on how the bill would define injury, how confidentiality would be enforced, whether statements could be used in court, who would pay for the process, and how it would interact with existing malpractice procedures. The sponsors said the conference would be voluntary, not require an apology, and would be protected by evidentiary rules; if protected statements were introduced at trial, they said remedies such as mistrial could apply. The discussion continued into procedural details, but no final action on HB 15 appears in the provided portion.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it also behooves us lawmakers to be realistic when projects come before us and our local units of
• And it also behooves us lawmakers to be realistic when projects come before us and our local units of
• And it also behooves us lawmakers to be realistic when projects come before us and our local units of
• And it also behooves us lawmakers to be realistic when projects come before us and our local units of
• And it also behooves us lawmakers to be realistic when projects come before us and our local units of

Committee: House Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• And we obviously, as state lawmakers, have multiple decisions.
• And we obviously, as state lawmakers, have multiple decisions.
• And we obviously, as state lawmakers, have multiple decisions.
• And we obviously, as state lawmakers, have multiple decisions.
• And we obviously, as state lawmakers, have multiple decisions.

Committee: Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention

Transcript Highlights:

• the invitation to speak today about social media, LGBTQ-plus youth, and the considerations that lawmakers
• The choice for lawmakers is not between accepting today's platform environment and cutting young people
• California lawmakers have been working on youth online safety for years, and we understand that many

Summary: The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational hearing on the impact of social media on LGBTQ+ youth, focusing on benefits, risks, and possible safeguards. Chair members framed the discussion around the tension between protecting young people from addictive design, harassment, hate speech, exploitation, and mental health harms while preserving access to affirming resources, community, and crisis support that many LGBTQ+ youth rely on online. Members emphasized that the hearing was meant to inform future policy rather than relitigate prior bills, and several members of the LGBTQ+ Caucus attended or participated. The first panel featured lived experience and advocacy testimony from Madi Roby of Alliance for Trans Youth Rights, Shea Gardner of LGBT Tech, and Casey Pick of the Trevor Project. Roby described social media as essential to exploring identity, finding trans language and safety information, and connecting to Trevor Project resources during a family crisis, while also acknowledging online hate and bullying. Gardner argued that lawmakers should regulate harms more precisely rather than impose broad age-based exclusions, warning that account bans and age-gating could cut off access to community, privacy-protective pseudonymity, and crisis resources. Pick testified that LGBTQ+ youth are more likely than peers to attempt suicide, that social media can be both a lifeline and a risk, and that Trevor Space and other moderated online spaces can improve mental health and reduce isolation; she also cautioned against policies that would push youth into less visible, less moderated spaces. Committee members questioned the witnesses about algorithmic feeds, addictive design, age verification, and whether platforms should be required to do more to protect youth. Several lawmakers distinguished between personalized feeds and addictive features such as infinite scroll and autoplay, and asked for more targeted prescriptions. Witnesses generally supported stronger privacy protections, limits on data collection and use, better reporting and moderation tools, digital literacy, and design changes that reduce harmful engagement patterns without eliminating access to community. The discussion also touched on the loss of LGBTQ-specific 988 services at the national level and the importance of maintaining alternative support pathways. The second panel presented research from Common Sense Media, UC Irvine, Hope Lab, and LGBTQ+ Health Australia. Researchers reported that LGBTQ+ youth often arrive online with higher depressive symptoms and limited in-person support, encounter homophobic and transphobic content at high rates, and may self-censor because of fear of harassment. At the same time, many said social media helps them feel less alone and find affirmation. Dr. Sean Young emphasized a harm-reduction approach, noting that online environments can be designed to support health and that policymakers should measure whether restrictions actually reduce harm or simply displace it. Dr. Amy Green echoed that social media is both harmful and supportive for LGBTQ+ youth, underscoring that the policy goal should be to make youth safer rather than less visible online.