Video & Transcript Research : 'parenting time'
Page 34 of 500
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Education Policy and Administration (02/19/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- Freedom account impact and parental Freedom account impact and parental satisfaction surveys<01:
- Thank you very much for your time.
- c> which As time marched on, parents, which includes me—I was a public school parent at the time—grew
- Of course, it should be up to the parents, not school bureaucrats, who, like 99% of the time, just defer
- <05:29:03.360>
and healed in time and proper with time and healed in time and proper with
Summary:
The committee opened with House Bill 184, which would create a committee to study changing school start times. Members discussed Amendment 0394, which made the study committee’s duties more investigative and adjusted reporting recipients, including the Governor. Several members raised questions about whether the committee should review evidence-based studies, local district decisions, and existing district reports; supporters said the amendment would better allow the committee to gather information and recognize local control. The amendment passed 17-0, and the bill as amended also passed 17-0. Representative Litchfield noted that no one had testified in opposition and encouraged the future study committee to review an Oyster River School District report on school start times.
The committee then took up House Bill 394, concerning cooperative school district budget committees and board member representatives. Amendment 0476 was adopted 17-0 after discussion that it clarified the bill’s language and reflected work with the School Boards Association. The committee then voted OTPA on the bill, which also passed 17-0. House Bill 738, requiring background checks for employees and volunteers at certain non-public schools or education service providers receiving public funds, was moved inexpedient to legislate. Supporters said the bill would create practical and legal problems for private citizens and homeschooling families, and the motion passed 15-2 with no minority report, placing the bill on consent.
The committee next considered House Bill 235, which would amend the educator code of ethics and conduct to add responsibilities to parents. Supporters argued parents should be explicitly included in the code, while opponents said parents were already covered in existing ethics language and statute. The bill passed narrowly, 9-8. The committee then returned to House Bill 532 on alternate dispute resolution and individualized education plan team meeting facilitation. Amendment 0480H clarified that different rules would apply separately to neutral conference, mediation, and IEP facilitation; it passed 17-0, and the bill as amended also passed 17-0. Finally, the committee moved to House Bill 564, concerning adoption of school administrative unit budgets, and voted to retain the bill for further review because members said there was still confusion about how it would apply to single-district and multi-district SAUs.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Social media platform requirements related to minors 3/17/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- Either a parent or legal guardian can give verifiable parental consent.
- But one could argue, shouldn't parents just be better parents and limit the amount of time their kids
- just be better parents and limit parents just be better parents and limit the<00:08:41.519>
amount - hit each time you watch a new video. hit each time you watch a new video.
- form video content to pass the time. form video content to pass the time.
Summary:
The committee took up House File 4138, a bill aimed at limiting harmful social media practices for minors by requiring verifiable parental consent for accounts and restricting addictive features and targeted advertising for youth users. Chair Scott offered an A2 amendment, with an oral clarification striking specific language and two commas; the committee adopted the amended A2, and the bill was then discussed as amended. The bill author described social media as addictive by design and said the measure would use age-estimation technology to identify users 15 and under, require parental consent, and provide a different, less addictive experience for youth.
Supportive testimony came from the Minnesota Catholic Conference, parents Jerry and Giana Cox, and a Minnesota high school student, all arguing that social media harms youth mental health, encourages excessive use, and exposes children to manipulation, cyberbullying, and addictive design features like infinite scroll and autoplay. They said the bill would help parents, protect children, and reduce exploitation of minors’ data. Several committee members also spoke in favor, saying the bill addresses corporate negligence, youth mental health, and the need to act even if the proposal needs more work.
Opposition testimony came from industry groups including the Computer and Communications Industry Association, the Information Technology Industry Council, and NetChoice. They argued the bill is vague and narrow in scope, could create uneven coverage, and may push platforms toward intrusive age-verification or digital-ID-like systems that raise privacy and data-breach concerns. They also said restrictions on personalized or algorithmic features could weaken safety tools and make it harder to protect young users. No final vote on the bill itself was taken in the excerpt, but the amended A2 was adopted and the bill remained under discussion.
MS
Mississippi 2026 Regular Session
Judiciary, Division B - Room 409, 3 February, 2026; 5:15 P.M.
Judiciary, Division B
Transcript Highlights:
- >
can't <00:04:02.319>register parents because the child can't register parents because - charge a parent with a felony over that. charge a parent with a felony over that.
- parent wouldn't be breaking the law. parent wouldn't be breaking the law. Correct. Correct.
- single parent that's there. single parent that's there.
- no jail time. no jail time.
Summary:
The committee took up Bill 2802, which would address falsifying residency or enrollment documents to place a child in a different school district. Senator Rhodes explained that the current penalty is a felony with a large fine and possible prison time, but that prosecutors rarely use it; the bill would add a misdemeanor-level penalty to create a more realistic enforcement option. He also proposed an amendment changing language that would have required expulsion of the child, replacing it with language making the child ineligible for enrollment in that district so the child would not have an expulsion on record. The committee adopted that amendment by voice vote.
Members then debated the bill’s broader policy effects. Supporters argued the measure is needed because districts have reported problems with parents using false addresses or other fraudulent documents, and they said the bill simply creates a lesser penalty while preserving enforcement. Opponents said the bill punishes parents who are trying to secure a better education for their children, may not increase prosecutions, and could harm families and children who did nothing wrong. One senator compared the issue to other criminalized conduct involving rule violations, while another questioned whether the state should be creating a misdemeanor for conduct that is already a felony.
The committee also discussed a proposed amendment to remove the felony component entirely and make the offense only a misdemeanor. That amendment was debated at length, with concerns raised that the broader statute covers more than school enrollment fraud and could affect other forms of false statements to government entities. The transcript ends during that discussion, with no final recorded disposition on the bill itself in the excerpt provided.
US
US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session
Hearings to examine children's safety in the digital era, focusing on strengthening protections and addressing legal gaps. Feb 19th, 2025 at 09:15 am
Senate Judiciary
Transcript Highlights:
- Times.
- and easy-to-use parental controls.
- If you are a parent, and I'm the parent of three young children, three little kids, if you're a parent
- And that is why it is high time. It is past time.
- In fact, I tell people all the time it is really hard to be one of the first generations of parents trying
Summary:
The committee meeting focused on the pressing issues surrounding child safety online, with a particular emphasis on recent legislative efforts aimed at curbing child sexual exploitation and harmful content accessible through social media platforms. Senators engaged in a heated discussion regarding the implications of Big Tech's lobbying efforts against vital bills such as the Stop CSAM Act and the Kids Online Safety Act. Noteworthy testimonies highlighted real-life impacts of online dangers, including tragic cases of child exploitation and drug-related fatalities linked to social media interactions. The bipartisan nature of the committee's commitment to address these issues showcased a collective determination to make the digital environment safer for the younger generation.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Education Policy and Administration (03/05/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- There was a time four years ago I was contacted by one of the parents up in the North Country and one
- There was a time four years ago I was contacted by one of the parents up in the North Country and one
- Thank you for your time.
- That's very parent-friendly.
- You leave the parenting to the parents.
Summary:
The committee first took up House Bill 763, an early bill concerning AED access at athletic events and venues. Representative Morris offered amendment 0743H to clarify the bill by removing charter schools from the language and tying AED placement to American Heart Association guidance, emphasizing that AEDs should be readily accessible within a reasonable walking distance rather than mandated on every field. The amendment and then the bill as amended both passed 17-0, and the bill was reported out as Ought to Pass with Amendment.
The committee then considered House Bill 781, requiring school districts to adopt cell phone-free education policies, and a related bill, House Bill 131. HB 781 was amended to include charter public school boards, cover other personal electronic communication devices, require at minimum restrictions on student personal cell phones during class instruction, allow superintendent-approved exceptions for medical or language needs, protect students with medical needs or disabilities under Section 504, and set an effective date of July 1, 2025. Some members argued the amendment was too prescriptive and limited local control, while supporters said it still left districts flexibility outside classroom instruction. The amendment passed 16-1, and the bill then passed Ought to Pass as Amended 16-1. HB 131, described as a mirror bill, was then retained by a 17-0 vote.
House Bill 398, a title bill requiring Holocaust and genocide studies to include impacts on people with disabilities, was moved to ITL after Representative Selig reported the genocide commission believed the topic was already being covered. That motion passed 17-0. The committee also agreed to hold several bills for later consideration, including HB 754, HB 1221, HB 360, and HB 699, citing the need for more review or missing copies.
Finally, the committee took up House Bill 361, prohibiting mandatory mask policies in schools. Supporters argued the bill would preserve individual choice while preventing statewide or districtwide mandates in future public health emergencies, and cited a Department of Health and Human Services letter saying masks remain effective but decisions should be based on individual choice and risk assessment. Opponents emphasized local control and the need for districts to respond to different public health conditions. The transcript cuts off before the final vote on HB 361 was completed.
MN
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Limiting access to child care center facilities discussed 3/4/26
Minnesota House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- :23.919>
ensuring parent, I completely support ensuring parent, I completely support ensuring - A child is taken, a parent.
- A child is taken a parent. parent. parent.
- Parents skip is now a food pantry.
- This time, a fire truck.
Summary:
The committee took up House File 3415, a bill aimed at limiting immigration enforcement activity at child care centers. House Research explained the DE1 amendment, which defined key terms and barred child care employees from consenting to civil immigration enforcement entry without a judicial warrant, while requiring officials to identify themselves and state their purpose; the amendment also clarified that it would not block officials administering child care programs. After brief debate, members adopted the DE1 amendment.
The bill author, Representative Sensor Mura, said the measure was intended to address fear and disruption in child care settings caused by recent immigration enforcement activity and to keep those spaces safe for children and families. Supporters, including a pastor, a Children’s Defense Fund representative, parents, child care workers, and an ACLU policy counsel, testified that immigration enforcement near daycares has caused fear, staff absences, lockdowns, and emotional harm to children. They argued the bill would not stop lawful enforcement but would require warrants and basic identification before entry, protecting children from witnessing raids or arrests and giving providers clear rules.
Several witnesses described specific incidents involving ICE activity near Spanish immersion daycares in Minneapolis and St. Paul, including staff members being detained, parents organizing safety watches, and children showing distress. Testimony emphasized that many affected children are U.S. citizens in immigrant families and that visible enforcement can create toxic stress and separation anxiety. No final action on the bill was taken in the portion of the meeting provided beyond adoption of the DE1 amendment and continuation of testimony.
AL
Transcript Highlights:
- . time. time.
- Uh, what time I get? 15 20 minutes. 20 Uh, what time I get? 15 20 minutes. 20 Uh, what time I get?
- And at this time, I'd like to make final this time, I'd like to make final this time, I'd like to make
- Normally, the parents or somebody because we're parents or somebody because we're parents or somebody
- Parents have the freedom of choice. Parents have the freedom of choice. Parents have the choice.
Bills:
SJR 39, SJR 68, SCR 29, SCR 42, SB 30, SB 33, SB 37, SB 217, SB 240, SB 331, SB 393, SB 505, SB 530, SB 546, SB 552, SB 584, SB 586, SB 618, SB 619, SB 636, SB 732, SB 769, SB 801, SB 825, SB 826, SB 844, SB 847, SB 870, SB 884, SB 957, SB 1065, SB 1150, SB 1184, SB 1257, SB 1261, SB 1262, SB 1299, SB 1314, SB 1325, SB 1398, SB 1413, SB 1455, SB 1539, SB 1577, SB 1583, SB 1596, SB 1620, SB 1624, SB 1642, SB 1643, SB 1667, SB 1717, SB 1727, SB 1760, SB 1789, SB 1791, SB 1804, SB 1868, SB 1870, SB 1883, SB 1901, SB 1923, SB 1924, SB 1927, SB 1951, SB 1960, SB 1962, SB 1963, SB 2010, SB 2018, SB 2023, SB 2024, SB 2037, SB 2051, SB 2052, SB 2056, SB 2066, SB 2073, SB 2127, SB 2129, SB 2161, SB 2183, SB 2185, SB 2207, SB 2252, SB 2323, SB 2332, SB 2368, SB 2405, SB 2439, SB 2626, SB 2717, SB 2743, SB 2774, SB 2949, SB 1, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SJR 68, SCR 12, SCR 39, SCR 38, SCR 37, SCR 42, SCR 29, SB 2023, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1539, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 957, SB 1502, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1349, SB 1433, SB 1434, SB 264, SB 1364, SB 1376, SB 1585, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1163, SB 619, SB 1122, SB 1877, SB 732, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 2143, SB 261, SB 1247, SB 1882, SB 618, SB 393, SB 2243, SB 1919, SB 1791, SB 651, SB 826, SB 1079, SB 1243, SB 1504, SB 1851, SB 1879, SB 2237, SB 1257, SB 2034, SB 1522, SB 1151, SB 596, SB 1191, SB 226, SB 570, SB 870, SB 991, SB 60, SB 1401, SB 1728, SB 586, SB 529, SB 217, SB 209, SB 1923, SB 1839, SB 387, SB 1874, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1921, SB 1883, SB 1620, SB 1838, SB 2024, SB 2429, SB 1999, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 2166, SB 510, SB 1860, SB 1314, SB 1398, SB 855, SB 2037, SB 1759, SB 1924, SB 1818, SB 1762, SB 1968, SB 1977, SB 2077, SB 2321, SB 1662, SB 1663, SB 2124, SB 2204, SB 1855, SB 863, SB 2252, SB 2253, SB 825, SB 1184, SB 2018, SB 2206, SB 1901, SB 2368, SB 1963, SB 1960, SB 1643, SB 1625, SB 1299, SB 841, SB 668, SB 584, SB 231, SB 1085, SB 2431, SB 2231, SB 1490, SB 530, SB 1261, SB 2180, SB 1804, SB 1937, SB 1936, SB 2569, SB 1372, SB 1868, SB 2314, SB 769, SB 1409, SB 434, SB 1214, SB 1951, SB 2183, SB 2046, SB 1667, SB 1870, SB 1727, SB 2405, SB 2127, SB 1975, SB 1760, SB 1734, SB 1335, SB 2066, SB 2129, SB 2246, SB 2439, SB 1624, SB 1244, SB 1468, SB 2717, SB 1612, SB 1262, SB 604, SB 2395, SB 2185, SB 1832, SB 1745, SB 1746, SB 2207, SB 1784, SB 1524, SB 528, SB 437, SB 269, SB 1137, SB 968, SB 636, SB 747, SB 1325, SB 1789, SB 1455, SB 2056, SB 1940, SB 2052, SB 2010, SB 1579, SB 2068, SB 3034, SB 844, SB 1920, SB 1558, SB 1236, SB 1044, SB 884, SB 463, SB 331, SB 227, SB 240, SB 517, SB 1200, SB 1410, SB 1626, SB 1845, SB 1863, SB 2216, SB 2681, SB 1717, SB 2053, SB 546, SB 2141, SB 2949, SB 2323, SB 2200, SB 2332, SB 2199, SB 1642, SB 1150, SB 1757, SB 2050, SB 1138, SB 2051, SB 2626, SB 2458, SB 1864, SB 2201, SB 1862, SB 1583, SB 1055, SB 2660, SB 1898, SB 2662, SB 2161, SB 2964, SB 2881, SB 1065, SB 801, SB 2743, SB 2533, SB 1413, SB 2073, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 2774, SB 2702, SB 2629, SB 2443, SB 2349, SB 2167, SB 2145, SB 2121, SB 758, SB 648, SB 647, SB 512, SB 438, SB 1721, SB 2268, SB 1495, SB 2705, SB 2366, SB 1422, SB 1369, SB 1013, SB 682, SB 2692, SB 2570, SB 2797, SB 2111, SB 1896, SB 1164, SB 1020, SB 663, SB 2371, SB 1152, SB 2196, SB 2383, SB 2581, SB 2798, SB 330, SB 646, SB 843, SB 1998, SB 1418, SB 2788, SB 1169, SB 2873, SB 1754, SB 1534, SB 1718, SB 2779, SB 2004, SB 1143, SB 1756, SB 912, SB 2119, SB 2032, SB 527, SB 1580, SB 1952, SB 2601, HJR 4, SJR 85, SJR 84, SCR 4, SCR 18, SCR 43, SCR 46, SB 2322, SB 2448, SB 1777, SB 1283, SB 407, SB 2392, SB 2076, SB 2786, SB 3031, SB 2877, SB 2876, SB 2284, SB 2225, SB 1540, SB 2920, SB 2929, SB 1395, SB 1972, SB 2540, SB 1183, SB 2742, SB 2595, SB 2217, SB 2117, SB 715, SB 2330, SB 1964, SB 1383, SB 500, SB 1640, SB 39, SB 2001, SB 2080, SB 2722, SB 506, SB 2514, SB 2623, SB 2658, SB 1574, SB 2900, SB 23, SB 2753, SB 2398, SB 401, SB 1241, SB 2927, SB 2173, SB 2538, SB 898, SB 467, SB 1449, SB 2529, SB 1531, SB 2846, SB 2476, SB 2031, SB 986, SB 1181, SB 2075, SB 2154, SB 2864, SB 2, SB 260, SJR 68, SB 217, SB 331, SB 530, SB 546, SB 586, SB 1150, SB 1184, SB 1261, SB 1398, SB 1620, SB 1923, SB 1951, SB 1960, SB 2051, SB 2129, SB 2183, SB 2185, SB 2252, SB 2368, SB 2405, SB 2949, SB 825, SB 1870, SB 2010, SR 434, SB 3048, SB 3049, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3055, SB 3048, SB 3049, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3055
Keywords:
constitutional amendment, veto override, legislature power, governor, Texas Constitution, impeachment, public officers, removal from office, disqualification, El Paso, Boot Capital, cultural heritage, economic development, Western footwear, gender identity, biological sex, women's rights, immutability, policy, higher education
FL
Florida 2026 5th Special Session
Commerce and Tourism Feb 4th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- Parental consent requires notice to parents of material app changes and clear disclosure of app content
- There's going to be parents who do really good and parents who do really bad. Guess what?
- There's going to be parents who do really good and parents who do really bad. Guess what?
- Apple's Family Sharing and Google's Family Link allow parents to approve every download, set time limits
- But parents are not required to give their child a device that has an app store on it. but parents are
Summary:
The committee first took up SB 1236, which would condition state economic development incentives on employers at subsidized companies using secret-ballot union elections and prohibiting neutrality agreements. The sponsor said the bill is meant to protect workers and taxpayer dollars, and he noted he would amend the Attorney General enforcement language to allow appeals. Supporters argued it protects secret ballots and transparency, while opponents said it is a form of union-busting, could conflict with federal labor law, and would burden contractors and workers. After debate, the committee reported the bill favorably on a roll call vote, with Senators Bracey Davis, Smith, and Errington voting no and the remaining recorded votes in favor.
The committee then heard CS/SB 198, which regulates cryptocurrency kiosks to combat fraud, especially against seniors. The bill requires kiosk registration, fraud warnings, blockchain analytics, transaction limits, receipts, and refund protections for certain first-time transactions involving non-U.S. wallets. Supporters from consumer and senior advocacy groups said the bill would help stop widespread scams, while one industry witness praised the bill’s fraud protections but suggested narrowing the daily limits and new-customer period. The committee reported the bill favorably by roll call vote.
Next, the committee considered CS/SB 1356 on dog breeding, pet sales, and breeder registration. The sponsor described it as a work in progress aimed at ending inhumane breeding conditions, improving consumer disclosures, and creating breeder standards and penalties; an amendment removed state oversight of local animal shelters. Pet store representatives supported many animal welfare provisions but objected to the three-day financing waiting period, shelter-space requirements, expanded reimbursement, and litigation exposure. Animal welfare supporters backed the bill, and the committee reported it favorably.
The committee also heard SB 1722 on app stores and minors’ access to apps. The bill requires age verification, parental consent for minors, notice of app changes, and enforcement by the Department of Legal Affairs. Supporters said it would better protect children online and help enforce existing age-based restrictions, while opponents warned it could require overcollection of personal data, create privacy and constitutional problems, and duplicate tools parents already have. After debate, the committee reported the bill favorably. Finally, the committee took up CS/SB 422, which would bar use of ADS-B aviation data to calculate or collect certain airport fees, with an amendment adding departures to the covered activities. A pilot supported the bill as a safety and privacy measure, while airport advocates opposed it, saying it would undermine airport finances and force less efficient fee collection methods. The transcript ends during testimony on this bill, before final action is shown.
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Education Policy and Administration (02/03/2025)
Transcript Highlights:
- time time for our hearing officers time for<03:39:17.680>
the <03:39:17.760>parents <03: - get is the first time that the parents get is the first time that the parents get in<03:40:17.199
- every single time a parent filed a every single time a parent filed a complaint<03:42:50.720>
- that a parent so every single time that a parent requests<03:46:34.640>
or <03:46:34.840>that - apply or how many of times a parent can apply or how many times<04:34:53.240>
they <04:34:53.320
Summary:
The House Education Policy and Administration Committee heard testimony on HB 222, which would repeal the requirement that a chartered public school and the resident school district sign a memorandum of understanding on how students with disabilities will receive special education services. The prime sponsor, Rep. Peggy Balboni, said the bill was requested by the New Hampshire Association of Special Education Administrators and the New Hampshire Alliance for Public Charter Schools. She argued that federal and state law already require districts to provide FAPE and that the MOU requirement has created extra work, legal costs, and delays without improving services. She said many MOUs remain unsigned, but students are still receiving services and complaint numbers have not changed.
Rep. Mooney also supported repeal, calling the MOU duplicative and impractical because IEPs and 504 plans already govern services. Testimony from Jane B. Brulu of the special education administrators’ association and Beth McLure of the charter schools alliance echoed that view, saying the MOU has not helped students, has added hours of work and legal fees, and has mostly been a source of disputes over funding and service costs. McLure said her school has worked with more than 15 districts and has always been able to reach agreements, though the first year of the requirement took substantial time and money. Committee members asked about the original purpose of the law, unsigned MOUs, and whether disputes could be resolved without the requirement.
A representative from the Department of Education said the MOU was originally proposed to address reports that some students were not getting services on time and to provide some oversight, but the department has no authority to order charter schools or districts to agree and no appeal process if they cannot. The department also said it does not currently audit charter school special education services because it lacks authority to monitor charter schools directly, and it urged the committee to consider some alternative oversight if the MOU requirement is repealed. The hearing on HB 222 was then closed, and the committee announced it would begin the hearing on HB 699 after a short break.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Education Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Joint Committee on Education
Transcript Highlights:
- From time to time, you may see me get up and leave. That's because the House is in formal session.
- time.
- committee in the time ahead.
- committee in the time ahead.
- I am here today because parents like me, So I am here for those parents.
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Education held a hearing focused primarily on special education-related bills, with testimony centered on two major themes: transition planning for students aging out of school-based services at age 22, and the fiscal strain special education costs place on districts. Committee members explained hearing procedures, noted the House was in formal session, and periodically stepped out for votes while staff recorded testimony. A separate bill on special education due process was also taken up briefly, along with a bill on special education finance and another on equitable access/data reporting.
On House Bill 752 and Senate Bill 313, witnesses from the Arc of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress, the Developmental Disabilities Council, families, self-advocates, and Senator Comerford described the “Turning 22” transition as a crisis point that often leaves families without adult placements, services, or clear communication. Testimony emphasized earlier planning, more accountability, better data collection, and a commission to improve coordination and residential placement. Several parents and advocates shared personal accounts of traumatic transitions, delayed placements, and the need for plans to begin at least a year before age 22. The committee later closed testimony on these bills after hearing from all signed-up speakers.
House Bill 4217, on special education due process, drew support from Representative Sullivan-Almeida, parents, and advocates who argued that the burden of proof should shift from families to school districts. Testimony described costly legal battles, delays, and parents having to become experts in reading instruction or hire advocates and attorneys to secure services. Brody Dwyer, a 10-year-old student with dyslexia, and his mother described how evidence-based instruction helped him after years of struggle. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 546/Senate Bill 317, which would require DESE to publish cross-tabulated data on race, disability, gender, income, and other factors; advocates said this would better expose disparities and help address the school-to-prison pipeline. Finally, on House Bill 691/Senate Bill 430, school leaders, educators, and union representatives testified that special education costs are outpacing district budgets and that increasing circuit breaker reimbursement and creating a commission to study long-term sustainability would help prevent staffing cuts and service reductions. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee repeatedly closed testimony on individual bills as speakers finished and moved through the agenda.
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Seclusion Working Group - 01/14/26
Minnesota Senate Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- from time to time, I felt this was taking a tool away from school districts without providing anything
- , time, time, uh,<00:03:29.040>
who <00:03:29.360>needed <00:03:29.920>seclusion - from time to uh, who needed seclusion from time to time,<00:03:31.840>
I <00:03:32.159>felt - by the Senate was that before a parent by the Senate was that before a parent or<00:12:44.720>
- Until that time, these are the things that are going to be put into place to add additional parental
Summary:
The Seclusion Working Group approved the prior meeting minutes and then spent most of the meeting discussing draft recommendations and a Senate amendment, 007-7, related to seclusion in schools. The chair explained the history of the issue, including Minnesota’s 2023 ban on seclusion from birth through grade 3, and described 007-7 as a compromise developed with stakeholders that would extend the ban through grade 6 unless strict conditions are met. Those conditions include explicit written informed consent from all parents or guardians in their primary language, oral translation of safeguards, showing the seclusion room before consent, mandatory follow-up IEP meetings after repeated use, outreach and education for families, and data reporting on use of seclusion. The chair also said the amendment would prevent judges or other officials from ordering seclusion over a parent’s objection.
Members then reviewed the draft recommendations line by line. They agreed to revise language to add “and fund” after “mandate” in the first section, and discussed changing references from “level three and level four” to “level three and higher,” though several members ultimately preferred keeping the focus on school settings and not expanding into medical or correctional settings. They also discussed replacing the word “subjected” with more neutral language such as “experience” or “whose IEP includes seclusion.” Another issue was whether the recommendations should distinguish between students whose IEP already includes seclusion and students who experience seclusion in an emergency but do not have it in their IEP; members suggested splitting that into separate recommendations and possibly adding a new item for the latter situation.
A final discussion focused on whether the working group should recommend a mandated alternative-to-seclusion program and whether such a mandate should be tied to funding. School district representatives said many districts already use programs such as CPI, but others, especially outstate districts, charter schools, hospitals, and residential settings, may face significant costs if required to adopt new programs like Ukeru. Members generally agreed that if the legislature is asked to require implementation of new alternatives, funding should accompany the mandate. The chair also noted that existing law already requires an IEP team meeting after restrictive procedures are used twice in 30 days, and encouraged members to compare that with the 007-7 language before finalizing recommendations.
AL
Transcript Highlights:
- I ain't getting ready to call no parent and tell them about some time for something or anything.
- <02:27:44.920>
and parent, that's between the parent and parent, that's between the parent - , or my time, our time.
- We'll start with one at a time. I saw the ball throw that time. So, one at a time.
- this time. this time.
Summary:
The Alabama Senate convened with prayer, the pledge, and a quorum present, then quickly handled routine motions to excuse absent senators, dispense with the prior journal, and allow bills and committee reports throughout the day. The chamber first took up House amendments to Senate Bill 19 on insurance, including a changed start date and a bill name honoring David McHanie and Roy Johnson. On a long roll, the Senate concurred 22-0 with one abstention. Senator Singleton then used personal privilege to present a Black History observance highlighting Nat King Cole, Louis Armstrong, Benjamin O. Davis Sr., and Mahalia Jackson.
Committee reports followed, with the Senate confirming Brandy Williams to the Alabama Fire College and Personnel Standards and Education Commission and Lynn Brewer to the Alabama Board of Heating, Air Conditioning, and Refrigeration Contractors. Senator Singleton spoke at length in support of the trades-related confirmation, emphasizing the importance of skilled labor, contractor oversight, and workforce training, while also discussing the need to support such professions and the role of boards in protecting consumers. The Senate also received favorable reports from Judiciary, Education Policy, Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development, Tourism, and Local Legislation on a range of bills, many with amendments or substitutes, and placed them on the next day’s calendar.
In motions and resolutions, Senator Elliott recommitted Senate Bill 310 to local legislation and introduced Senate Joint Resolution 50 honoring Coach Tim Carter, which was sent to rules. The Senate adopted Senate Joint Resolution 51 mourning Junior Harold Sorrells and several House resolutions from the Rules Committee, including recognitions for the Alabama State Games, Mack McCutcheon’s retirement, the Black pioneers of Macon County, Alicia Cannon, Joseph William Jones Jr., and Louis Vuitton the Pitbull Day. The chamber also recognized several school leaders in the gallery and then moved into local bills, beginning with Senate Bill 266, a proposed constitutional amendment regarding Covington County, for which a bill reading was requested using the previous roll.
FL
Florida 2025 Regular Session
Appropriations Committee on Pre-K - 12 Education Jan 15th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Chair of first time it like Senator Bradley said first time on education approach.
- But we also have parents services and then those parents services.
- and parent training.
- So I'm I'm I'm just a firm believer in parent mediated interventions, parent engagement.
- Thank you for your time.
FL
Florida 2026 Regular Session
Appropriations Committee on Pre-K - 12 Education Mar 11th, 2025
Appropriations Committee on Pre-K - 12 Education
Transcript Highlights:
- It has been shown time and time again, and us moving the threshold without ensuring that a child is proficient—I'm
- and let the parents and the school's partnership decide what time their school should start.
- Shifting high school start times to 8:30 or later would add more vehicles during peak traffic times to
- Thank you for taking the time to reconsider this school start times.
- Even if they're working, a parent can control that they don't work until a certain time.
Summary:
The Appropriations Committee on Pre-K-12 Education met with a quorum present and observed a moment of silence for Senator Geraldine Thompson. The committee first took up CS/SB 102, a bill by Senator Gates directing the Department of Education to develop a workforce credential program for students with autism spectrum disorder or students on a modified curriculum, in coordination with the Florida Center for Students with Unique Abilities and OSHA. Supporters said the bill would help autistic students gain job skills and workplace safety credentials, while an opponent argued the bill should clearly make participation voluntary, expand to other exceptional student groups, include funding, and add stronger accountability. The bill was reported favorably.
The committee then considered SB 166, the Administrative Efficiency in Public Schools bill by Senator Simon. The bill would reduce or remove several state mandates and give districts more flexibility on testing, teacher evaluations, contracts and certification, school board operations, instructional materials timelines, audits, facilities planning, emergency make-up days, federal fund use, and public VPK oversight. Senators asked about the impact on student proficiency, teacher evaluations, and the transfer of public VPK oversight to districts; Simon said the tests would remain but count as 30 percent of the grade, districts would retain flexibility in evaluation measures, and only public VPK would shift to districts. Public testimony was largely supportive, with some speakers praising reduced testing and local control, while one senator cautioned that Florida still has a math proficiency problem. The bill was reported favorably.
Finally, the committee heard CS/SB 296 by Senator Bradley, which would repeal the 2023 statewide mandate requiring later middle and high school start times and return the decision to local districts, while still requiring districts to inform the community about the health, safety, and academic impacts of sleep deprivation and consider later start times. Supporters argued the mandate created transportation, staffing, and scheduling problems and that local control was more practical, while opponents emphasized sleep science and the benefits of later start times for teens. Several senators discussed the tension between research and district resources, and the bill sponsor said the measure preserves the conversation about sleep while allowing local scheduling decisions. CS/SB 296 was reported favorably, and the committee then adjourned.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Education Jun 21st, 2026 at 11:00 am
Joint Committee on Education
Transcript Highlights:
- And I do not want the government having to decide, as a parent, I'm speaking as a parent, I do not want
- Massachusetts law already requires schools to notify parents and allows parents to review curricula and
- opt their child out at any time.
- opt to their child. requires schools to notify parents and allows parents to review curricula and opt
- their child out at any time.
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Education heard testimony on a wide range of bills, with the largest portions focused on the Healthy Youth Act (S.340/H.656), comprehensive and inclusive curriculum bills (H.655/S.371 and related measures), climate literacy education (H.560/S.391), computer science coursework (H.534/S.362), arts education funding and STEM-to-STEAM proposals (H.561 and H.4297), and a homeschooling reporting bill (H.518). Supporters of the Healthy Youth Act argued it would preserve local control while requiring medically accurate, age-appropriate, LGBTQ-inclusive sex education and regular updates to state health frameworks; opponents raised parental rights, age-appropriateness, and opt-out concerns, with some calling for fetal development content. Supporters of inclusive curriculum bills said they would improve representation, belonging, and civic understanding, while opponents argued they could undermine parental authority or promote ideological content. Climate, computer science, and arts advocates emphasized workforce readiness, student engagement, and the need for state support and funding to expand access and teacher training.
Testimony on the climate literacy bill described increasing climate impacts in Massachusetts and argued that interdisciplinary instruction would prepare students for science, policy, and green careers; witnesses said the bill was not a mandate but a support and funding measure. Computer science supporters said access remains uneven, especially for girls, students of color, and students with disabilities, and urged stronger statewide requirements and AI-related standards. Arts advocates backed both the STEM-to-STEAM bill and the Lowell Mason arts funding proposal, citing research on student achievement, attendance, creativity, and the economic importance of the arts sector. The homeschool bill was supported by a homeschool advocacy group as a modernization of reporting requirements.
The committee closed testimony on numerous bills where no one remained signed up or testimony had concluded, including several education, curriculum, and commission proposals. No votes were taken during the hearing itself. At the end of the session, the committee closed out the remaining testimony and adjourned after a motion and second.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- first parents are that I listed parents first parents are a<00:24:50.480>
critical <00:24:50.919 - So there are times that a parent may decline special education services because they may not feel that
- At any time, we are able to have a conversation with parents about if a child may need services in the
- So there are times that a parent may decline special education services because they may not feel that
- At any time, we are able to have a conversation with parents about if a child may need services in the
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Education Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Joint Committee on Education
Transcript Highlights:
- There are going to be senators and representatives coming to join us from time to time.
- So single parents have a very difficult time, even with vouchers.
- I was working full time.
- Take your time, you know?
- And many times we have a single parent who, that's only mom working to pay the rent, to put food on the
Summary:
The Joint Committee on Education held its sixth public hearing and took testimony on a large slate of bills, with the chair moving H. 542/S. 341 on family, friend, and neighbor (FFN) child care to the top of the agenda so young constituents would not have to wait. Witnesses from labor, community organizations, and FFN providers strongly supported the bill, saying FFN care fills critical gaps for families working nonstandard hours, especially in low-income, immigrant, and BIPOC communities. Testimony emphasized that FFN providers are currently underpaid, often receive only about $24 per child per day, and should be guaranteed at least the state minimum wage. Witnesses also backed changes to the voucher system to allow families to combine formal and FFN care more flexibly, and they supported creating an FFN advisory council. Committee members asked about the difference between FFN and center-based care, registration requirements, fingerprinting/background checks, EEC’s ongoing study group, and the fiscal impact; witnesses said the current annual cost is about $1.8 million and could rise to about $6 million if all current FFN providers were paid minimum wage, still under 1% of the EEC budget. The committee then closed testimony on that bill.
The committee next heard testimony on several preschool and universal pre-K bills, including H. 707 on public preschool facilities, H. 687/S. 339 on universal pre-K and mixed delivery, and related bills such as H. 606, H. 523, H. 618, H. 522, H. 510, and H. 615, many of which were later closed without additional witnesses. A Lowell school official testified that space and facilities funding are major barriers to expanding preschool and that the city has hundreds of children on voucher waitlists. Other witnesses and organizations, including the Early Care and Education Consortium and AFT Massachusetts, supported mixed-delivery universal pre-K and warned that public-school expansion should not undermine community-based providers, whose preschool tuition helps subsidize infant and toddler care. Several witnesses also urged stronger standards for preschool teachers, better staffing ratios, and more integrated special education and support services. The committee accepted written testimony on some bills and closed testimony on the others when no one else came forward.
A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 541/S. 373, which would ban school exclusion in pre-K through third grade. Advocates from Massachusetts Advocates for Children, Mass Appleseed, Citizens for Juvenile Justice, AFT Massachusetts, and the Mental Health Legal Advisors Committee argued that suspensions and expulsions at young ages harm learning, worsen inequities, and contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline. They cited data showing disproportionate impacts on Black and Latinx students, students with disabilities, and low-income children, and described personal stories of children whose behavior improved when schools kept them in class and addressed underlying needs. Committee members asked for updated data on the number of students and districts affected, and witnesses said they would provide more detailed written information. After testimony on this and a few other bills, including S. 372, S. 357, and H. 275/S. 133, the committee closed testimony and adjourned.
NH
Transcript Highlights:
- 00:34:35.359>
parent, parent speaking to another parent, parent speaking to another parent, that's - So unless parents are spending all of their time trying to figure out what is coming before their child
- So unless parents are spending all of their time trying to figure out what is coming before their child
- So unless parents are spending all of their time trying to figure out what is coming before their child
- So unless parents are spending all of their time trying to figure out what is coming before their child
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- And many times they end up misleading parents and bringing frivolous actions against the school districts
- And a lot of the times, it's not the parents making motion after motion after motion.
- A lot of time.
- At this time, we'll open up public testimony on Senate Bill 2600. pass this cost along to parents.
- "Many a time, more times than not, they've hired lawyers."
Summary:
The Committee on Education K-16 heard several bills focused largely on special education transparency, school safety, and student support services. Senate Bill 1908, by Senator Zaffirini, would direct the Higher Education Coordinating Board to study the feasibility of a statewide system for coordinating clinical training placements, including regional portals for healthcare clinical slots, with a report due by December 1, 2026. A representative of the Texas Nurses Association and the Nursing Legislative Agenda Coalition testified in support. The bill was left pending subject to the call of the chair.
The committee then took up Senate Bill 111, by Senator Hall, which in its committee substitute was narrowed to a reporting bill requiring school districts to disclose legal proceedings involving special education due process complaints when legal fees exceed $10,000, rather than capping spending. Several parents and advocates testified that districts spend large sums on litigation against families of children with disabilities and that greater transparency is needed; some senators raised concerns about unintended consequences, including possible pressure to settle cases. The committee adopted the substitute and left the bill pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 1551 on automated external defibrillators in public schools, Senate Bill 865 on CPR instruction requirements for certain volunteers, Senate Bill 1032 on the Governor’s University Research Initiative, and Senate Bill 571 on school employee misconduct reporting and access to the Do Not Hire Registry; each was reported favorably after committee substitute adoption and roll-call votes.
Additional bills discussed included Senate Bill 1884, which would formalize and expand dedicated staff support for the State Board of Education and give the board chair hiring authority over that staff; members questioned whether it duplicated TEA functions, while a witness argued the workload increase justified the change, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 625 would replace the current half-credit economics requirement with a half-credit in personal financial literacy; educators and advocates strongly supported making the course required, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 582 would make TEA settlement agreements in special investigations publicly available when sanctions are imposed, and Senate Bill 2600 would bar transportation fees for students living within two miles of campus unless districts do not receive state transportation funding; both were left pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 2751, which would require TEA inspections of non-public special education programs to consider medical standards of care and crisis-prevention training; testimony from a program operator described severe student behaviors and the need for more flexibility, and the bill was left pending after the substitute was adopted.