Video & Transcript Research : 'Chapter 45'

Page 34 of 500
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Public Health Apr 7th, 2025

Public Health

Transcript Highlights:
  • 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
  • Is that what you're concerned, that it's only got one of the chapters?
  • -12.3, 45-12.4, 45-12.5.
  • OK. because it references this chapter.
  • That's. to chapter 311 of the government code. Right.
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

CPC Public Hearing - Thu Feb 5, 2026 @ 2:00 PM HST

Consumer Protection & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:
  • :45:47.680> work<00:45:47.920> at<00:45:48.319> trying<00:45:48.640> to bills
  • ><00:45:49.839> way<00:45:50.000> to<00:45:50.319> mitigate<00:45:51.440> um<
  • > that<00:45:53.440> so<00:45:53.680> many<00:45:54.079> people eliminate
  • Again, we aren't taking<00:45:56.640> a<00:45:56.880> position<00:45:57.200> on<
  • 00:45:57.440> this<00:45:58.160> uh<00:45:58.319> legislation taking a position
Summary: The committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on February 5, 2026, and heard testimony on several bills, beginning with HB 227 relating to eviction records. Supporters, including the Public First Law Center and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, argued the bill would help people who prevail in eviction cases avoid long-term housing harm from online court records, while the Public First Law Center said keeping records off eCourt Kokua would not violate the First Amendment because the records would still be available in person. Members discussed access-to-justice concerns, and a witness said legal aid attorneys could still access the records through the attorney-only Jeff’s system and the court’s access-to-justice room. The chair also asked about precedent, and a witness cited a Hawaii Supreme Court case as supporting removal from the online database rather than sealing records entirely. The committee then took up HP 1775 relating to foreclosures, but the transcript only shows in-person opposition comments from the Hawaii State Bar Association Collection Law Section, the Hawaii Credit Union League, and the Hawaii Bankers Association. The credit union and banking groups said they had concerns about broader negative impacts on mortgage lending and other requirements, but no detailed discussion or action was captured before the committee moved on. The next measure, HB 1560 relating to consumer protection, drew support from the Office of Consumer Protection and cryptocurrency companies including Coinflip and America Digital, which said they already use wallet-pinning and other safeguards to prevent fraud. AARP Hawaii did not take a formal position but said the bill addressed a real problem, noting that Hawaii residents, especially in Kona, had lost more than $920,000 in 2024 to cryptocurrency ATM scams and arguing that stronger oversight was needed. The committee also heard HB 1642, which would ban cryptocurrency kiosks. The Office of Consumer Protection supported the ban as the best way to protect consumers from fraud, while Coinflip, Bitcoin Depot, and America Digital opposed it, arguing kiosks provide cash-based access to crypto, especially for unbanked or underbanked consumers, and that targeted regulation would be better than an outright ban. AARP Hawaii took no formal position but strongly emphasized the harm caused by scams, saying victims are often frightened into acting quickly and that kiosk transactions currently lack enough friction or intervention. Finally, HB 1647, also on consumer protection, would impose liability on host businesses that provide space for crypto kiosks. The Office of Consumer Protection warned small businesses might not understand the liability, while Coinflip, Bitcoin Depot, and America Digital opposed the bill, saying it would unfairly shift enforcement duties to host stores and could discourage businesses from hosting kiosks, effectively creating a de facto ban. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.
FL

Florida 2026 Regular Session

Transportation Jan 27th, 2026

Transportation

Bills: S0086, S0422, S0706, S1054, S1670
Summary: The Senate Committee on Transportation met and considered several bills, beginning with CS/SB 86 on commercial motor vehicles operated by unauthorized aliens. The sponsor described the bill as a highway safety measure requiring commercial drivers to be lawfully present, hold a valid CDL, read English, and communicate with law enforcement, with vehicle impoundment, civil penalties, and out-of-service orders for violations. After questions about impacts on carriers and interstate operations, the committee adopted an amendment and reported the bill favorably, with one no vote. The committee then heard CS/SB 706, which would preempt naming of major commercial service airports to the state and rename Palm Beach International Airport as Donald J. Trump International Airport. An amendment added FAA approval, trademark authorization, and a flexible implementation period for Palm Beach County; county representatives supported the amendment and bill. The committee also approved CS/SB 1670 on the Outsider specialty license plate after an amendment reduced the Huber Brothers Foundation’s share of proceeds from 25% to 10%. Next, the committee considered CS/SB 1054, dealing with traffic infractions resulting in crashes with another vehicle. The bill would impose escalating fines and license suspensions for crashes caused by running red lights or stop signs, and require bodily injury insurance for a year when injury results. A clarifying amendment limited the insurance requirement to one year, and the bill was reported favorably after supportive testimony from law enforcement and advocacy groups. The final major bill was CS/SB 422 on automated dependent surveillance broadcast (ADS-B) data; it would bar use of ADS-B information to calculate or collect certain landing-related fees. Supporters argued the technology should remain focused on aviation safety and warned against false invoices and discouraging pilot training, while airport representatives said they currently use the data for fee collection and wanted further discussion. After an amendment narrowing the bill’s application, the committee reported CS/SB 422 favorably. The meeting then adjourned.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Doctor, you'd mentioned that this is a dangerous product for 45-year-olds.
  • Yes, that was among adults over 45.
  • So this bill only stops registered lobbyists who are required under Chapter 305.
  • The State Lobby Law, Chapter 305 of the Texas Government.
  • That Chapter 305 of the Texas Government Code doesn't permit that?
Bills: SB5, SB11, SB12, SB 5, SB 11, SB 12
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

House Children and Families Finance and Policy Committee 3/12/25

Children and Families Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • Seeing none, I will renew my motion<00:45:33.760> that<00:45:34.160> House<00:45:34.560
  • > in<00:45:39.200> favor<00:45:39.520> say<00:45:39.760> I.
  • > on<00:45:45.040> your<00:45:45.200> way<00:45:45.359> to<00:45:45.520><
  • <00:45:48.880> Thank<00:45:49.040> you<00:45:49.119> for<00:45:49.280> the
  • :56.719> sit<01:45:56.880> at<01:45:57.040> that<01:45:57.199> table<01:45
HI
Transcript Highlights:
  • ,<00:45:07.640> but<00:45:08.520> in<00:45:08.760> no<00:45:09.000> event
  • .<00:45:24.359> So,<00:45:25.520> at<00:45:25.680> the<00:45:25.760> end<
  • <00:45:29.800> is<00:45:29.920> that<00:45:30.280> at<00:45:30.480> least
  • <00:45:39.520> restriction,<00:45:40.400> and<00:45:40.760> 40<00:45:41.359>
  • > 60%<00:45:42.440> or<00:45:42.600> more,<00:45:43.120> and<00:45:43.320
Summary: The House Housing Committee opened its Friday morning hearing by noting potentially catastrophic flooding on the island and acknowledging that some members were absent helping their communities, so quorum for voting was uncertain. The committee then heard testimony on several housing-related measures, with most bills drawing support from housing agencies and community organizations and little or no opposition in the room. On SB 2069 SD2, SB 2177 SD2, and SB 2342 SD2, witnesses largely supported the measures. HHFDC supported SB 2069 and SB 2177, and HPHA supported SB 2342. For SB 2342, HHFDC raised concerns that the bill would alter the Qualified Allocation Plan outside the normal open, public process required by federal law and could exclude stakeholders; Kathy Charities echoed those concerns and also objected to changing point allocations in ways that could raise rents and weaken long-term affordability. Members questioned HHFDC about how the QAP is normally updated, the meaning of the point system, and whether a legislative working group could mandate changes; HHFDC said recommendations would still need public hearing and board approval. The committee also heard SB 2060 SD2, which would create a mixed-income subaccount in the rental housing revolving fund. HHFDC said the subaccount would likely use tier-two funds, estimated at about $100 million total, to support mixed-income projects above 60% AMI, citing Front Street Apartments as a possible example. Members asked about project selection and funding needs. On SB 2544 SD2, OHA opposed the bill’s Chapter 6E-related exemptions and mandatory review timelines, arguing that burial review protections should not be weakened and that the SPEED Task Force process was a better venue for streamlining. The sponsor later clarified that the bill was not meant to eliminate the 60-day review process but to make the deadline clearer. For SB 3011 SD1, which concerns public housing and pet ownership, HPHA and several humane organizations supported the measure, saying it would help low-income residents and seniors keep pets and benefit from animal companionship. HPHA explained its existing pet policy, including deposits, monthly fees, and restrictions, and said the requested funding would support ADA-accessible pet areas and related administration. Finally, on SB 2061 SD2, HCDA supported the bill while OHA opposed it unless protections for Hawaiian Crown and Government lands were strengthened. Committee members questioned the project’s 60/40 split between income-restricted and market-rate units, the 10-year owner-occupancy restriction, and the procurement exemption; the sponsor said the exemption was tied to a real estate transaction and that the project would still use 103D-like solicitation procedures. No votes were taken during the hearing, and several items were left for later action because quorum was uncertain.