Transcript Highlights:

• submarines, more nuclear energy, and, um, the community does have some concerns with that.
• </c><01:02:58.319><c> submarines,</c> inclusion of more nuclear submarines, inclusion of more nuclear
• submarines, more<01:02:59.280><c> nuclear</c><01:02:59.760><c> energy</c><01:03:00.400><c> and</c><01
• :03:01.359><c> um</c><01:03:01.760><c> the</c><01:03:02.000><c> community</c> more nuclear energy and
• um the community more nuclear energy and um the community does<01:03:02.640><c> have</c><01:03:02.880

Transcript Highlights:

• Development Fund comes from payments by utilities for the storage of dry casks of spent fuel located at nuclear
• 21st, and we'll be setting our first bill hearing up and we'll be beginning the conversation on a nuclear
• 00:42:36.559><c> a</c> be uh beginning the conversation on a be uh beginning the conversation on a nuclear
• 00:42:38.800><c> uh</c><00:42:39.200><c> so</c><00:42:39.920><c> be</c><00:42:40.200><c> ready</c> nuclear
• moratorium and uh so be ready nuclear moratorium and uh so be ready and<00:42:41.000><c> enjoy</c><00

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Authority to consult with the Arizona Corporation Commission to develop and adopt criteria for awarding a nuclear-ready
• Awarding a nuclear-ready community designation to communities that meet listed requirements, and with
• Madam Wip, members, as passed the House, awarding a nuclear-ready community designation to communities

Summary: The Republican caucus reviewed a long list of House bills returned from the Senate with amendments, generally asking staff to describe the changes and then confirming whether the sponsor concurred. Many measures were accepted with little or no debate, including bills on tax filing penalties (HB 2016), court-ordered restitution for homeless or indigent defendants (HB 2028), vaccination and mask restrictions (HB 286), bullion investments by the state treasurer (HB 2140), nursing care complaint timelines (HB 2195), privacy protections for county records (HB 2327), cold plunge regulation (HB 2439), medical records access timelines (HB 2557), licensing board procedures (HB 2660), school and public records provisions, AI governance (HB 2592), fingerprint clearance temporary work authorization (HB 2916), development fees (HB 2946), affordability infrastructure districts (HB 2999), distracted driving penalties (HB 2109), health aide scope of practice (HB 2189), eviction record sealing (HB 2244), backyard structure rules in planned communities (HB 2342), inmate transition services (HB 2440), nuclear-ready community designation criteria (HB 2456), address confidentiality protections (HB 2594), groundwater/medical reimbursement changes (HB 2932), traffic citation signature authority (HB 2369), advanced math enrollment (HB 2423), school district training and intervention requirements (HB 2435), job order contracting limits (HB 2482), special education and placement rules (HB 2621), DCS parent rights notice changes (HB 2661), domestic violence expert testimony standards (HB 2662), inmate mental health study committee provisions (HB 2673), legislative subpoena enforcement (HB 2745), ACA trade office oversight (HB 2752), utility reporting changes (HB 2756), Native American language proficiency credit (HB 2895), mental health judicial review timelines (HB 2923), mobile food vendor licensing (HB 2118), medical intervention/school attendance rules (HB 2248), school board finance training (HB 2379), and school board meeting access/video requirements (HB 2380). Sponsors repeatedly stated they concurred with the Senate amendments, and no roll-call votes were taken in the transcript. A few items were set aside or sent back, including HB 2035 and HB 2249, and one bill (HB 2594) was left pending because the sponsor had not yet responded.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:26:06.639><c> to</c> reasons for penalties is deterrence to reasons for penalties is deterrence
• </c> justice system are enough of a deterrent justice system are enough of a deterrent for<01:26:22.239
• But I firmly believe they need that option as a deterrent.
• deterrence deterrence with<02:05:43.520><c> what's</c><02:05:44.080><c> at</c><02:05:44.239><c> at</
• </c><02:05:57.840><c> Now,</c> we have enough of a deterrence. Now, we have enough of a deterrence.

Summary: The Juvenile Justice Oversight Council met on February 6, 2026, took roll, approved a motion to convene, and heard agency updates from materials in the packet. The council then took up Senate Bill 125 out of order because Senator Carol was present. The bill was presented as a collaborative effort focused on creating a secure, state-run high-acuity mental health facility for justice-involved youth who need specialized psychiatric care and cannot be appropriately served in detention or by private hospitals. Speakers said the facility would fill a gap in services, improve safety and treatment outcomes, and be designed with trauma-informed, medically equipped spaces rather than a jail-like setting. The presenters also outlined other parts of the bill, including a placement process in which DJJ and CHFS would evaluate youth and provide recommendations before the judge makes the final decision, with certain hospital-declination provisions to be delayed until the new facility is operating. They described payment incentives for hospitals treating high-acuity youth, confidentiality and escape-related disclosure provisions, and contracts with a public teaching university for clinical services. The proposed facility was described as a 24-bed center at Central State, with staffing to include mental health professionals and juvenile detention staff receiving enhanced training. Dr. Clark Lester said staffing needs would vary by youth and could include one-to-one supervision for some patients. The bill also addressed female juvenile detention capacity. Speakers said the number of detained girls has risen sharply since 2024, peaking at 51 in 2025, and that current facilities cannot meet the separation requirements for boys and girls or high- and low-level youth. The proposal would build two female detention centers, with possible locations discussed in central Kentucky and western Kentucky, and a third or fourth center could be added if population data show the need. Members asked about hospital placement authority, staffing, and average length of stay for girls; the presenters said the current court-order process would remain until the new facility is built and that they would provide additional data later. No vote was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So there has to be some type of deterrent and a penalty for people who do that if it's strictly for a
• type</c><00:39:03.200><c> of</c><00:39:03.720><c> um</c><00:39:04.720><c> uh</c><00:39:04.880><c> deterrent
• </c><00:39:05.440><c> and</c><00:39:05.520><c> a</c> some type of um uh deterrent and a some type of
• um uh deterrent and a penalty<00:39:06.000><c> for</c><00:39:06.200><c> people</c><00:39:06.400><c> who
• is going to actually have the impact of reducing assaults against first responders or serve as a deterrent

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• On the energy side, I wish that our state would, you know, find their brain and look at nuclear energy
• because that's the cleanest and safest energy in the world right. ...nuclear energy, because that's
• , but my understanding is no, that they use a hospital-level amount of tritium, but there's not a nuclear
• would be in fusion, excuse me, with fission or some of the other and how we think about historical nuclear

Committee: Senate House Appropriations & Finance

Summary: The committee first discussed the state budget and employee compensation, focusing on the 1% pay increase proposal and the broader cost of state employee raises and benefits. Members noted that over the past several years the state has invested heavily in payroll, pension contributions, pay studies, and band realignments, and several senators argued that the 80/20 health insurance change and other benefit improvements amount to significant compensation increases even without an additional raise. Others cautioned that recurring revenue is limited, that recent revenue collections were weaker than expected, and that the state should be careful about committing to ongoing costs given possible economic slowdown, federal uncertainty, drought, wildfire risk, and the possibility of future budget pressure. The committee then heard extensive testimony on SB 177, a major economic development proposal centered on quantum computing, advanced energy, robotics, synthetic biology, and related technologies. Supporters described the bill as a large strategic investment intended to leverage New Mexico’s national laboratories, universities, and existing quantum workforce to attract companies, create high-wage jobs, and diversify the economy. Testimony emphasized that much of the quantum workforce would be skilled trades and technicians rather than Ph.D.-level researchers, and members asked detailed questions about whether the state would receive long-term returns, how intellectual property and clawbacks would be handled, and whether the package included recurring costs. Witnesses also explained the bill’s trade association and workforce-development components, and several senators raised concerns about energy use, water use, guardrails, and ensuring the state does not subsidize outside interests without benefits returning to New Mexico. After debate, the committee moved to table SB 177 indefinitely, with members noting that the funding and structure were already incorporated into House Bill 2. The motion passed on an 8-0 vote, with several members excused. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> There's a lot of talk about nuclear, and I'm very personally pro-nuclear, and my boss, the governor
• There's a push to restart mothballed nuclear plants.
• Those will start to come nuclear plants.
• And if you want to talk about the next generation nuclear, that's even farther off.
• ,</c> talk about the next generation nuclear, talk about the next generation nuclear, that's<00:29:26.880

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• It seems to me the greatest deterrent for driving without insurance with your change, Senator Jinsky,
• So it seems to me, to Senator P’s point as well, that the deterrent comes in people knowing that the
• So it seems to me, to Senator P’s point as well, that the deterrent comes in people knowing that the
• So it seems to me, to Senator P’s point as well, that the deterrent comes in people knowing that the
• That just exemplifies why I'm looking at this: they actually do that, and it is a deterrent.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• This way, we have a deterrent from abusers hijacking our court systems to go... ...after their victims

Bills: HJR144 , HJR218 , HB40 , HB 101 , HB 112 , HB146 , HB168 , HB214 , HB413 , HB1523 , HB493 , HB521 , HB594 , HB557 , HB305 , HB549 , HB854 , HB 1057 , HB 1052 , HB842 , HB3174 , HB3311 , HB2486 , HB3196 , HB824 , HB 1039 , HB2529 , HB2713 , HB4936 , HB4995 , HB4830 , HB4864 , HB5219 , HB5263 , HB5154 , HB2674 , HB5525 , HB5623 , HB2545 , HB2587 , HB2625 , HB5520 , HB5436 , HB4926 , HB1573 , HB5165 , HB4811 , HB5081 , HB4755 , HB3179 , HB4310 , HB4611 , HB2159 , HB4626 , HB3637 , HB3153 , HB3066 , HB2786 , HB2966 , HB638 , HB640 , HB876 , HB497 , HB5539 , HB4809 , HB5308 , HB4687 , HB4070 , HB4421 , HB4412 , HB3284 , HB3369 , HB3420 , HB3449 , HB4098 , HB4281 , HB4120 , HB4504 , HB4370 , HB 1106 , HB2370 , HB2404 , HB3863 , HB2407 , HB2253 , HB2273 , HB2040 , HB1586 , HB3788 , HB3993 , HB4690 , HB4309 , HB4696 , HB2308 , HB 1142 , HB1533 , HB1621 , HB2242 , HB2012 , HB2193 , HB2442 , HB2464 , HB2348 , HB2313 , HB2289 , HB1942 , HB2011 , HB1629 , HB2993 , HB3592 , HB3824 , HB4076 , HB4535 , HB4623 , HB4773 , HB 1091 , HB5115 , HB5515 , HB3372 , HB5659 , HCR118 , HB 1233 , HB2239 , HB2379 , HB2863 , HB3368 , HB3787 , HB3815 , HB3898 , HB4023 , HB4285 , HB4329 , HB4331 , HB4429 , HB4646 , HB4904 , HB5200 , HB5320 , HB5651 , HB5662 , HB5668 , HB5670 , HB5672 , HB5674 , HB5676 , HB5679 , HB5688 , HCR108

Keywords: regional mobility, transportation authority, local law, constitutional amendment, public projects, Texas energy fund, energy efficiency, retail electric customers, electric generating facilities, business court, civil procedure, litigation, jurisdiction, arbitration, Texas State Guard, task force, professionalization, state missions, critical infrastructure, science park district

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no deterrent. That's another myth.
• reasons that we've already heard from the sponsor: that it's not fiscally responsible, that it's not a deterrent
• . ...sponsor that it's not fiscally responsible, that it's not a deterrent, that it is not equally applied
• And we hear a lot about deterrence. States with the death penalty...

Committee: House Corrections and Public Institutions

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no deterrent. That's another myth.
• reasons that we've already heard from the sponsor: that it's not fiscally responsible, that it's not a deterrent
• And we hear a lot about deterrence.
• And we hear a lot about deterrence.

Committee: House Corrections and Public Institutions

Summary: The Committee on Corrections and Public Institutions met with a quorum and heard testimony on three bills, with no executive session. House Bill 2153, by Rep. Jim Murphy, would repeal the death penalty in Missouri. Murphy argued the death penalty is costly, not a deterrent, irreversible when mistakes are made, and harmful to victims’ families through repeated appeals. Supporters included Archbishop Mitchell Rozanski, Baptist minister Brian Kaler, Public Defender Director Matthew Crowell, Dr. Heidi Moore of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty, former inmate Clifton Davis, Empower Missouri’s Gwen Smith Moore, the Innocence Project, Mid-Missouri Fellowship of Reconciliation, and former Rep. Tony Lobotto. Testimony focused on moral objections, wrongful convictions, racial arbitrariness, the burden on victims’ families, and significant state and defense costs. Several members asked about costs, retroactivity, and the effect on current death-row inmates; Murphy said the bill would apply prospectively only. No vote was taken. House Bill 3154, by Rep. Bennie Cook, would update Missouri Gaming Commission fingerprint/background-check requirements to explicitly include sports wagering and fantasy sports applicants, suppliers, and key persons. Cook said the bill is intended to ensure proper criminal background checks through the Highway Patrol and to align the statute with newer gaming activities. Missouri Gaming Commission Executive Director Mike Lira testified in support, explaining that fingerprints are needed to identify out-of-state criminal histories and that federal guidance requires specific statutory language for sports wagering background checks. The committee asked a few clarifying questions, and there was no opposition. House Bill 3535, also by Rep. Bennie Cook, would add fireworks-related authority and clarify that state fire marshals, who are already post-certified peace officers, may act in exigent circumstances and assist other officers during investigations or emergencies. State Fire Marshal Tim Bean supported the bill, saying it would give fire marshals another tool and help with illegal fireworks investigations. One witness opposed the bill, objecting to the phrase “exigent circumstances” as too subjective and potentially harmful to Fourth Amendment protections. The hearing concluded without a vote, and the chair then dismissed the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• I created this to help as a deterrent.
• But I'm here because any meaningful deterrent matters.
• Right now, our system of consequences for impaired driving is failing to act as a sufficient deterrent
• Deterrence works when consequences are certain, visible, and meaningful.

Committee: House Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence

Summary: The committee held public hearings on House Bill 3144 and House Bill 3160, both dealing with appeals of preliminary injunctions. The sponsors said the bills would allow a party to appeal a preliminary injunction more broadly, rather than limiting that right to the Attorney General, and they described the measure as a response to prior litigation and equal protection concerns. Supporters, including a Campaign Life Missouri lobbyist and Attorney General’s office counsel, argued the change would align Missouri practice with federal interlocutory appeal rules and protect both sides from harm while litigation is pending. Some members questioned whether the bills were aimed at pending Amendment 3 litigation and raised concerns about fairness and whether the language should apply evenly to all parties; the sponsors said one bill would be amended to match the other. No vote was taken on these bills during the hearing. The committee then heard House Bill 1910, “Bentley and Mason’s Law,” which would require a person convicted of driving while intoxicated or drug-impaired driving that causes the death of a parent or guardian to pay child maintenance to the surviving children, with support continuing until age 18 or longer if the child is in college, and with arrearages addressed after release from incarceration. Representative Williams and several family members and victims testified in strong support, describing the bill as a deterrent and a way to hold impaired drivers financially accountable for the children left behind. Supporters said similar laws have passed in other states and cited a Tennessee case as an example of the law working in practice. Committee members asked about how maintenance would be calculated, whether the offender’s income would be considered, how civil judgments would interact with the maintenance order, and whether arrearages should accrue during incarceration; the sponsor said the bill could be refined and that those issues could be worked out. Opposition to HB 1910 was limited, but one law enforcement witness said he supported the concept despite being listed as opposition, and another witness from MADD strongly endorsed the bill. The hearing ended with no action on HB 1910. In executive session, the committee voted HJR 130 do pass by a vote of 13-0. It then considered HB 2086, a bill relating to the practice of law, which drew constitutional and separation-of-powers concerns from several members; the final vote was 7-7, and the bill was reported as due pass despite the tie.

Transcript Highlights:

• screening process works and we'll make adjustments as needed to ensure screening is efficient and not a deterrent
• not</c><00:03:18.959><c> a</c> screening is efficient and not a screening is efficient and not a deterrent
• 03:20.159><c> want</c><00:03:20.400><c> to</c><00:03:20.560><c> come</c><00:03:20.720><c> to</c> deterrent
• to people who want to come to deterrent to people who want to come to the<00:03:21.120><c> capital.

Summary: Minnesota Department of Public Safety Commissioner Bob Jacobson and State Patrol Colonel Christina Bogoich announced that weapon screening will begin Tuesday at the Minnesota State Capitol, at the start of the 2026 legislative session. They said the change is based on an independent security assessment and the Axtell report’s top recommendation, and is intended as an added layer of protection rather than a weapons ban or a change in state law. Both officials emphasized that the Capitol should remain open, accessible, and welcoming while reducing preventable risks, citing increased threats nationwide and the recent murders of Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and Mark Hortman and the shootings of Senator John Hoffman and Yvette Hoffman. Officials said visitors will enter through four public access points, with all other exterior doors closed to public entry. The primary entrance will be the south ground-level entrance, with additional access through tunnels connecting to the Senate building, State Office Building, Parking Lot C, and the Judicial Center. They said the screening process should take only seconds for most people, with bags scanned separately and additional checks only if needed. Prohibited items will not be stored by the Capitol, and the public was told to plan ahead, carry fewer items, and follow staff instructions. The Capitol will close to the general public at 4:30 p.m. on weekdays unless legislative business is still underway, in which case accommodations will be made. In questions, officials said people with valid permit-to-carry authorization may still bring a firearm if it is otherwise legal, but they must declare the permit, show government ID, and go through screening. Elected officials are exempt and will have a separate lane, while staff will be screened. They also said the tunnels will be locked with restricted key-card access, and that the Senate is implementing its own screening, with questions about Senate doors referred there. Jacobson said the State Patrol will cover the costs within its existing budget, and that the process will be evaluated and adjusted as needed to keep it efficient and not a deterrent to visitors.

Transcript Highlights:

• The argument that it creates a deterrent effect, that this is going to save a bunch of lives, is overstated
• Why this is important is because this is a deterrent for wrongful drivers.
• Why this is important is because this is a deterrent for wrongful drivers. this is important is because
• this is a deterrent for wrongful drivers to deny liability where it should be easy to establish.

Summary: The House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee held a public hearing on HB 2095, which would create training requirements for law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges on negligent driving involving vulnerable users of public ways, and would establish a rebuttable presumption of negligence in certain civil claims when a vulnerable user is injured or killed in a protected area such as a sidewalk, crosswalk, bike lane, or similar designated space. Staff explained that the bill also allows recovery of actual damages, statutory damages, attorney’s fees and costs, and, in limited circumstances, punitive damages if the defendant has previously injured or killed three or more vulnerable road users. Members questioned the unusual nature of punitive damages, the burden-shifting presumption, the three-incident threshold, and whether the education component was tied to the bill’s purpose. The prime sponsor said the training is meant to improve reporting and understanding of existing vulnerable-road-user laws, and said the bill was intended to narrow liability to protected areas and could be amended further, including on the punitive-damages threshold. Supporters, including a widow whose husband was killed while bicycling, Washington Bikes, trial attorneys, a bicycle commuter advocate, and a physician, argued the bill would better protect pedestrians and cyclists, improve police reporting, and reduce the burden on injured people and families who currently must prove negligence after serious crashes. They said the presumption would encourage safer driving and align Washington with similar frameworks used elsewhere. Opponents, including defense lawyers, the Association of Washington Cities, the Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, the Washington Trucking Associations, and the Washington Liability Reform Coalition, said the bill would expand litigation, create uninsurable risks through fee shifting and punitive damages, and could draw cities, businesses, and taxpayers into lawsuits. Some opponents also urged narrowing the bill to individuals and clarifying the protected areas and training requirements. No vote was taken; the chair closed the hearing and encouraged follow-up and amendment requests before executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• This approach increases deterrence and ensures courts have the flexibility to impose fair, proportionate
• world is calling for us to increasingly crack down on some of the behaviors because apparently the deterrents
• So we have deterrence for violence. Senator Caballero, then Cortezzi.
• So we have deterrence for violence. So we have deterrence for violence.
• into not wanting to be able to come back again and again to worship peacefully, I think a stronger deterrent

Committee: Senate Public Safety

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Public Safety met on March 24, 2006, first as a subcommittee until a quorum was reached. The committee heard several bills in file order, beginning with SB 1056 by Senator Grayson, which would require protective orders for sexually explicit material involving adult victims in criminal cases. The author and survivor witnesses argued the bill would prevent unnecessary copying and dissemination of highly sensitive evidence while preserving defendants’ access to discovery; public defenders and criminal defense groups opposed it as vague, overbroad, and potentially harmful to due process. After committee amendments were accepted, SB 1056 passed on a due pass as amended motion to Appropriations, with the bill held on call. The committee then heard SB 937 by Senator Gonzalez, which would restrict law enforcement use of flashbang devices for crowd control and ban their use in immigration enforcement. Supporters described serious injuries and community fear from recent deployments, while sheriffs’ and police groups objected that the bill was vague, could limit necessary tactics, and might conflict with existing law and task-force operations. Members raised concerns about overuse of force but also about drafting details and exceptions for exigent circumstances; the bill was moved on a due pass motion to Appropriations and held on call. Next, SB 1070 by Senator Grove sought to make intentional disruptions of worship services a wobbler offense, allowing felony charges in more serious cases. Faith leaders and supporters said the bill was needed to deter coordinated disruptions and protect religious exercise, while opponents, including civil liberties and public defender groups, argued it would criminalize speech, raise constitutional concerns, and impose excessive penalties for conduct better addressed through existing law or restorative justice. After extended debate, the committee rejected the bill on a roll call vote, and the motion to reconsider was granted without objection. The committee also heard SB 1130 by Senator Reyes, which would update privacy law for wearable recording devices such as smart glasses by restricting surreptitious recording in places with a reasonable expectation of privacy and limiting technologies that disable recording indicators. Supporters said the bill addressed a growing privacy threat, while industry groups warned it could create liability for manufacturers and businesses and needed tighter definitions. After committee amendments reducing penalties and removing manufacturer provisions from the criminal code, SB 1130 passed as amended to Rules, with the bill held on call. Finally, the committee heard SCA 2 by Senator Troy, a constitutional amendment to bar governors from pardoning themselves or immediate family members. Supporters framed it as an accountability measure, while some members objected that it addressed a hypothetical problem and could unnecessarily restrict legitimate clemency. The transcript ends during the roll call on SCA 2, with the vote in progress.

Transcript Highlights:

• This approach increases deterrence and ensures courts have the flexibility to impose fair, proportionate
• world is calling for us to increasingly crack down on some of the behaviors because apparently the deterrence
• world is calling for us to increasingly crack down on some of the behaviors because apparently the deterrence
• So we have deterrence for violence. So we have deterrence for violence.
• into not wanting to be able to come back again and again to worship peacefully, I think a stronger deterrent

Summary: The committee met first as a subcommittee because a quorum was not initially present, and it heard several bill presentations. SB 1056 by Senator Grayson would require courts to issue protective orders for sexually explicit material involving adult victims in criminal cases, limiting copying and dissemination while preserving discovery and trial rights. Supporters, including Aaron and Denise Heskins-Quinn and the California District Attorneys Association, said the bill would prevent retraumatization and close a privacy gap; opponents, including public defenders and criminal defense groups, argued it was overbroad, vague, and could interfere with defense preparation. The committee adopted amendments narrowing the bill’s scope and sent it to Appropriations on a due pass as amended vote, with the bill held on call. SB 937 by Senator Gonzalez would restrict law enforcement use of flashbang devices for crowd control and ban their use in immigration enforcement. Supporters described injuries and fear caused by flashbangs and explosive breaching charges, including incidents involving protests and a home entry in Huntington Park; opponents from sheriffs’ and police groups argued the bill’s definitions were vague, could limit tactical discretion, and might conflict with existing law and task force operations. Members expressed both support and concern about definitions and exigent circumstances, and the bill was moved due pass to Appropriations on a vote, with the final roll held on call. SB 1070 by Senator Grove would make intentional disruptions of worship services a wobbler offense, allowing felony charges in more serious cases. Faith leaders and supporters said the bill was needed to deter coordinated disruptions and protect religious exercise, while opponents including the Friends Committee on Legislation, ACLU California Action, and public defenders argued it would criminalize speech, rely on a content-based statute, and impose disproportionate felony penalties. Several committee members raised constitutional and restorative-justice concerns, and the bill failed on the roll call, though reconsideration was granted. SB 1130 by Senator Reyes would update privacy law for wearable recording devices such as smart glasses, limiting surreptitious recording in places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy and restricting technologies that disable recording indicators. Supporters said the bill responds to emerging surveillance risks; opponents from TechNet and industry groups warned it could create liability for manufacturers and businesses beyond the actual wrongdoers. The committee accepted amendments reducing penalties, removing manufacturer provisions from the bill’s core criminal section, and creating civil penalties in the Business and Professions Code; the bill was moved due pass as amended to Rules, with the vote held on call. The committee also heard SCA 2 by Senator Troy, which would bar governors from pardoning themselves or immediate family members; there was no public opposition, but some members questioned the need for a constitutional amendment given the lack of evidence of abuse, and discussion was ongoing when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• This approach increases deterrence and ensures courts have the flexibility to impose fair, proportionate
• world is calling for us to increasingly crack down on some of the behaviors because apparently the deterrence
• So we have deterrence for violence.
• So we have deterrence for violence. So we have deterrence for violence.
• into not wanting to be able to come back again and again to worship peacefully, I think a stronger deterrent

Committee: Senate Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• Item 4, the Texas Nuclear Energy Fund and Texas Nuclear Energy Supply Chain Fund.
• The Texas Advanced Nuclear Reaction Work Group released the required report to the upcoming Legislature

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met to review Article 8, regulatory agencies, and began Article 9, general provisions, before recessing for floor action. The committee first heard budget presentations from the Public Utility Commission (PUC) and the Office of Public Utility Counsel (OPUC). The PUC budget recommendation was about $5.07 billion in all funds, including an additional $5 billion for the Texas Energy Fund, plus funding for staffing and technology needs tied to contested cases, infrastructure resiliency, and outage mapping. PUC witnesses emphasized the agency’s growing workload, the need for more staff and modern systems, and oversight of the Texas Energy Fund. OPUC’s recommendation was about $6.9 million, with a reduction in authorized FTEs to better match actual staffing; the agency requested additional funding for salaries, expert witnesses, and budget flexibility, and members highlighted OPUC’s role representing residential and small commercial consumers in utility proceedings. The committee then heard from the Behavioral Health Executive Council (BHEC), whose recommendation was just over $11.2 million. BHEC’s main requests included funding to fill vacant positions, money for continuous National Practitioner Data Bank queries, and a proposed Texas-owned psychology licensing exam in response to concerns about changes to the national exam. Agency leaders also discussed a rider request that would shift responsibility for certain judgments or settlements to the comptroller. Members asked about prior complaint backlogs, and BHEC said those backlogs had been cleared. The Board of Chiropractic Examiners followed, with a recommendation of just under $2.4 million; the board sought support for staffing, training, broadband, and salary retention, and described its work regulating chiropractors and workers’ compensation-related doctors. The Board of Dental Examiners was the last agency heard before the committee recessed. Its recommendation was just under $10 million, and it requested a 10% salary increase for eligible staff, three additional licensing staff, one staff member to handle required background checks, an additional attorney, and an executive director salary adjustment. Dental board witnesses said licensure growth, increased complaints, and low salaries were straining licensing and enforcement operations, even though the agency reported strong performance and high case completion rates. The chair ended the hearing early because the Senate had to return to the floor, and the committee remained in recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• He understood that an armed citizenry is the ultimate check on government excess, a deterrent to would-be
• impact the the um actual deterrent impact the the um impact<01:29:50.639><c> that</c><01:29:50.880><
• deterrent effect of the<01:30:07.679><c> legislation.
• And finally, the lack of a real, tangible impact on the deterrence of criminal activity.
• Thank you, Madam President. minimal, uh, deterrent effect on minimal, uh, deterrent effect on criminal

Transcript Highlights:

• We've made tough decisions on the advanced nuclear study, sending a unanimous yes vote from all Republican
• </c><00:47:41.760><c> study,</c> decisions on the advanced nuclear study, decisions on the advanced nuclear
• same spirit as we approve<00:48:24.319><c> the</c><00:48:24.559><c> advanced</c><00:48:24.880><c> nuclear
• </c><00:48:25.280><c> study</c><00:48:25.599><c> for</c> approve the advanced nuclear study for approve
• , which you touched on, hydro, nuclear, which you touched on, hydro, natural<01:34:03.920><c> gas,</c

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate