Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, but she wants to be a family law attorney when she grows up and wants to help low-income families
• Please make her feel welcome. attorney when she grows up and wants to attorney when she grows up and

Committee: House Banking & Insurance

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:09 Discussion SB 157 02:43 Vote SB 157 09:04 Discussion SB 219 09:53 Vote SB 219 13:00, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I am a civil rights attorney, and I'm also the president and CEO of the Global Black Economic Forum.
• And today I'm proud to serve as one of the lead attorneys representing several plaintiffs in the lawsuit
• Schumann, who is a partner at the law firm Petrillo Klein and Boxer, and is serving as one of the lead attorneys

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we consulted as much as we could with the Attorney General's office about the amendment that
• I'm not an attorney, so I don't know. Well, I guess the question is it wasn't.
• Asset forfeiture language was ready to go to give the Attorney General the ability to do that, so we

Keywords: 964, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we will turn this over to the Attorney General's office. All right. Thank you, Chair.
• I'm a senior counsel with the Attorney General's office and serve as the section chief for our advice
• I do serve as the primary advice assistant attorney general for the commission.

Committee: Joint Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences

Summary: The Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on May 7, 2025, with quorum present. The commission approved the October 22, 2024 meeting minutes and then received its annual open government refresher from the Attorney General’s office, which reviewed key requirements under the Public Records Act and Open Public Meetings Act, including record retention, response deadlines, exemptions, and meeting notice rules. Staff then provided a 2025 legislative session update, noting that the legislature passed 23 tax-preference-related bills, with several signed by the governor and others pending. Highlights included bills that extended or repealed certain preferences, added reporting requirements for newspaper and digital content exemptions, authorized JLARC to adjust its work plan when data is unavailable, and created a new exemption for zero-emission buses. The commission approved updates to the 2026 tax preference review schedule, which includes eight preferences in seven reviews, and approved unchanged testimony questions for 2025. The commission also received the 2025 expedited preference review report covering 52 tax preferences, presented as an interactive table drawing on prior JLARC reviews and Department of Revenue studies. Staff then outlined the process for developing the next 10-year review schedule for 2027-2036, including surveying the legislature, incorporating new and repealed preferences, and considering a possible rolling 10-year schedule. No public comment was registered. The meeting ended with acknowledgments of Ron Buing’s long service on the commission and an announcement that the next meeting would be held August 6, 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• I do have a resource witness here from the Office of the Attorney General to help me answer any questions
• Members, we have a few resource witnesses, folks from the Attorney General's office.
• Members, we have a few resource witnesses, folks from the Attorney General's office.

Bills: HB322 , HB331 , HB673 , HB 1147 , HB 1154 , HB2488

Committee: House S/C on Workforce

Keywords: JET Grant Program, career education, technical education, community colleges, technology solutions, high demand jobs, first responders, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, benefits, compensation, presumption of disability, emergency services, healthcare, Medicaid, mental health, substance abuse, treatment access, cost, insurance coverage

Transcript Highlights:

• The enforcement authority remains under the purview of the Attorney General's office, but we also added
• The enforcement authority remains under the purview of the Attorney General's office, but we also added
• The enforcement authority remains under the purview of the Attorney General's office, but we also added

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:12 HB390 Discussion: 01:05 HB390 Vote: 02:35 HB233 Discussion: 04:18 HB233 Vote: 07:12 HB423 Discussion: 08:17 HB423 Vote: 10:51, 958, all

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 390, which would complete the Department of Transportation’s transition from the old AVIS system to CAVIS for insurance verification. Rep. Michael Meredith explained that the current insurance verification process still runs on the old system, creating a 30- to 45-day reporting delay that allows people to register vehicles by showing only an insurance card. Members voted to give the bill a favorable expression, with Chair Carpenter noting it would support real-time verification and could help reduce uninsured motorists. The committee then heard House Bill 233, a consumer protection measure aimed at post-disaster repair scams. Rep. Wade Williams said the bill expands existing protections to all contractors and tree removal companies, creates a five-day cancellation period after an insurer says some services are not covered, bars mechanic’s liens in certain consumer financial disputes while preserving them for work outside the insurance claim, and adds a $5,000 civil penalty enforced by the Attorney General. After questions about how it differed from Senate Bill 24, the bill also received favorable expression. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 423, with a committee substitute adopted at the outset to allow commercial insurers and the Department for Medicaid Services to provide more specific reasons for prior-authorization denials. Rep. Kim Moore and Cory Meadows of the Kentucky Medical Association described the bill as a long-negotiated prior-authorization reform that would create a gold-carding or exemption program for qualifying providers, reduce red tape, and speed patient care. The committee approved the substitute and then gave the bill favorable expression. At the end, Senator Yates corrected the record to be marked as voting yes on House Bill 390 and House Bill 233.

Transcript Highlights:

• Craig Smith, attorney with the Arkansas Department of Health. Mr.
• Chair, Charles Thompson, attorney, Arkansas Department of Health.

Committee: All ALC-OCCUPATIONAL LICENSING REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The committee met and first welcomed a visiting group from Arkansas State University’s Medical Laboratory and Radiation Sciences program. It then suspended the rules to take up a supplemental report, which was approved and noted as reviewed without objection. Members reviewed the Arkansas Fire Protection and Licensing Board’s occupational report. Counsel for the Department of Labor and Licensing said there had been no fee increases, and the report was accepted without objection. The committee then heard from the Arkansas Department of Health’s Radiation Control Section, which described its radiologic technologist licensing program, including full and limited-scope licensure, unchanged fees since 1999, and a recent operating deficit covered through cost allocation. Members asked about the deficit, possible future fee changes, and whether apprenticeship pathways might be added; the agency said it was not currently planning fee increases and would accommodate apprenticeship if such programs are created. That report also stood as reviewed. Finally, the Arkansas State Board of Physical Therapy presented its report, outlining its licensing and disciplinary role, current licensee counts, compact participation, and recent growth in licensees. The board highlighted lower fees, a $200,000 scholarship program for 10 recipients per year, and a large fund balance that is being reduced through fee cuts and scholarships. Members asked about the scholarship details and the effect on reserves. The report was accepted without objection, and the meeting concluded with no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• follows the definition of constructive knowledge and states the contractor must cooperate with the attorney
• follows the definition of constructive knowledge and states the contractor must cooperate with the attorney

Committee: House Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment

Summary: The Commerce Committee met in executive session with a quorum present and considered three measures. House Bill 3308 was amended with a committee substitute and a further amendment changing language from “deeded” to “owned” in a provision related to approved development plans; the committee then adopted the substitute and voted the bill do pass unanimously. House Bill 3080, dealing with historic tax credits, was also amended via committee substitute to restore credits for projects already underway after a Supreme Court decision affected the prior law; the committee adopted the substitute and voted the bill do pass by an 8-0 vote with one member present. The committee then took up House Bill 2366, which was described as the “illegal immigrant employee” bill, along with House Bill 2511, which was rolled into the same substitute. The committee substitute made several changes, including replacing “should have known” language with a constructive knowledge standard, requiring cooperation with the attorney general, adding sworn affidavit/perjury provisions, allowing E-Verify as an affirmative defense, limiting suspensions to state licenses and permits after injunction, increasing monetary penalties, authorizing the AG to suspend and punish upon a guilty finding, and granting immunity to contractors who report illegal operators in good faith. After adopting the substitute, the committee voted the combined substitute for House Bills 2366 and 2511 do pass unanimously, then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• follows the definition of constructive knowledge and states the contractor must cooperate with the attorney
• follows the definition of constructive knowledge and states the contractor must cooperate with the attorney

Committee: House Commerce

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, constitutionally, I'm not an attorney, but if you have a quorum and that quorum has a majority
• I've talked to the executive director, and she did say that they mirrored, the attorney mirrored the

Committee: House Pensions

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And their senior attorney, so who is running the organization?
• Did you get and their senior attorney, so who is running the organization? Did you get any of that?

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Subcommittee met with a quorum and heard House Bill 1313, an agency bill by Representative Mooney. The bill extends the Resilient Florida Trust Fund within the Department of Environmental Protection and updates the state accounting reference from FLARE to the new POM system. A technical amendment removing the obsolete FLARE account code was adopted without objection, and the bill then passed favorably on a recorded vote with no public testimony or debate. After the bill, the chair reviewed budget process materials for the committee, including agency vacancy reports and three-year reversion reports. She noted that several agencies have relatively low vacancy rates, highlighting the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services as especially efficient, while DEP’s vacancy rate was higher and a member asked about long-term vacancies there. On reversions, she said DACS had only about a 2% reversion rate over three years, while Citrus averaged about 40%, DEP about 12%, and Fish and Wildlife about 10%. The chair also discussed upcoming budget recommendations and asked members to review the materials and raise questions. She flagged trust fund concerns, especially for Fish and Wildlife, saying recent license fee waivers may reduce revenue supporting its trust fund and could affect funding decisions in the next budget. The meeting ended after brief clarification on the vacancy report and a motion to re-recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• c><01:04:17.240><c> you</c> And I think the analogy I gave you, Scott, when you said you were an attorney
• , I said imagine you've got 2,000 hours or whatever the standard billable rates are for attorneys, and
• I believe it's with Aon attorneys and with the AG's office.
• and with uh the AG's office I attorneys and with uh the AG's office I believe<01:06:32.319><c> but</
• I can't imagine that is taking that has a lot of attorney input and a lot of new provisions that need

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And in this role, I'm not practicing as an attorney. I happen to be trained as one.
• And in this role, I'm not practicing as an attorney. I happen to be trained as one.
• But our attorney, Bill Myers, with Holland and Hart, said, 'Oh, it'll take them a week to 10 days to
• Our attorney, Alan Schroeder, truly believed we could win. We had never done anything wrong.
• She's an attorney to speak to us in August about the 4D rule. Go ahead.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from University of Idaho representatives on the university’s land-grant mission and its role in federalism, followed by detailed overviews of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and the College of Natural Resources. Speakers described the Morrill, Hatch, and Smith-Lever Acts, the university’s history, and examples of research, extension, and workforce training in agriculture, engineering, law, forestry, fire science, and youth programs such as 4-H. They highlighted facilities and programs including research stations, the Idaho Center for Agriculture, Food and the Environment, the deep soil ecotron, the Wildland Fire Center, the experimental forest, and the policy analysis group, while also noting the impact of federal and state funding delays and cuts on staffing and research capacity. Committee members asked about several current issues, including quagga mussels, screw worm, chronic wasting disease, and the effects of funding cuts. University officials said they were not actively researching some of those wildlife and livestock disease issues but were willing to help if capacity and funding allowed. They also said budget reductions had caused real losses, including layoffs and reduced programs, and that federal grant delays had disrupted research timelines. The committee also raised questions about conflicts of interest and university employees’ outside work; the university said it has annual conflict-of-interest and conflict-of-commitment training and review procedures. The committee then heard from Bonneville County Sheriff Sam Hulse and the Idaho Sheriffs Association on the federal 287(g) immigration partnership program. Hulse argued that participation should remain voluntary and locally controlled, describing the different 287(g) models, the training and liability concerns, and the distinction between local law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement. He said Idaho agencies already cooperate with ICE in other ways and that mandatory participation could create staffing, legal, and community-trust problems. Members asked about costs, liability, detention standards, and whether deputies lose local control under task force arrangements; Hulse said the answer depends on the specific model and operation, and he emphasized the need for local discretion. Later, the committee took testimony on the long-running bighorn sheep and domestic sheep conflict affecting western Idaho grazing allotments. Idaho Wool Growers representatives and affected ranchers described the history of state legislation, federal litigation, and the closure of grazing areas after bighorn sheep transplants, which they said cut livestock operations in half and caused major financial and personal hardship. They argued that the state and federal agencies had not lived up to assurances that permittees would be held harmless, and they urged continued attention to the issue. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Kim Stone, on behalf of the California District Attorneys Association, in support.
• This bill is supported by both public safety and health groups, and the District Attorneys Association
• Tiffany Broke, Deputy Attorney General, here on behalf of Attorney General Rob Bonta, who's proud to
• An important step to protecting patients is to empower the Attorney General to bring oversight.
• My name is Jacqueline McCann, and I'm an attorney with Legal Services of Northern California.

Summary: The committee heard AB 1887, which would speed prior authorization for FDA-approved rare disease treatments prescribed by specialists and, if a plan does not act within 30 days, deem the request approved. The author and supporters, including patients and clinicians, said delays can cause irreversible harm, hospitalizations, and death, especially for children and people with progressive rare diseases. Health plans and insurers opposed the bill’s automatic-approval provision and said the measure lacked safeguards for incomplete requests and shared responsibility for timely information. The chair encouraged continued work with opponents, and the author said the bill was narrowed from an earlier version that would have waived prior authorization entirely. The committee also heard AB 1979 on artificial intelligence in health care, AB 2161 on Medi-Cal work requirements, AB 539 on extending approved prior authorizations, AB 2311 on physician employment at public hospital districts, AB 1148 on banning phthalates and bisphenols in food packaging, AB 1825 on mental health offender reentry coordination, and AB 2282 on a temporary emergency stabilization unit in Patterson. AB 1979 would preserve licensed clinicians’ professional judgment, bar AI from directing unlicensed clinical functions, and protect medical records used by consumer chatbots; after amendments, several hospital, medical, and industry groups moved from opposition to neutral. AB 2161 would limit the harm of federal Medi-Cal work-reporting rules by using existing data, improving notices, and protecting due process; it drew broad support from patient, provider, and advocacy groups. AB 539 would keep prior authorization approvals valid for up to one year or the course of treatment, with supporters citing continuity of care and opponents warning about utilization, fraud, and cost concerns. AB 2311, as amended, would let certain high-payer-mix or distressed public health care districts directly employ physicians; CMA withdrew opposition after the bill was narrowed, while some hospital interests still objected to the carve-out. AB 1148 would prohibit two chemicals commonly used in food packaging, with supporters citing cancer and endocrine-disruption risks and opponents arguing DTSC should handle the issue through its existing regulatory process. AB 1825 would improve transition planning and Medi-Cal enrollment for offenders with mental health disorders leaving state hospitals, and AB 2282 would authorize a temporary rural emergency stabilization care unit in Patterson until a permanent hospital is built. Several bills were held for later action because the committee lacked a quorum, and the chair repeatedly noted that motions would be taken once enough members returned.

Transcript Highlights:

• when someone files notice to a company, they would simultaneously also have to file notice to the Attorney
• General so that the Attorney General would be aware and could potentially intervene if there was a case
• Similarly, if many individuals are bringing cases against the same company, then the Attorney General
• So we are asking also for notice to the Attorney General. Okay. Thank you. I think, Mr.
• attorney would only do this where we've got egregious circumstances and someone sort of violating in

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1159, which would update California student data privacy law for educational technology and college-level platforms. The author and supporters argued that students’ personal information is being collected and used far beyond educational purposes, including sensitive health and demographic data, and said the bill would limit misuse and add stronger privacy protections. Support came from privacy, labor, education, and civil rights groups, while opposition from college store and industry representatives focused on narrowing the definition of “operator,” preserving institution-related communications, and concerns about the bill’s private right of action. Members raised questions about how the bill would affect scholarships, financial aid, adult students, consent, and litigation; the author said the bill includes a right to cure and notice to the Attorney General. The committee voted 4-0 to pass the bill to Appropriations, with the measure placed on call. The committee then took up AB 1709, which would set a minimum age of 16 for social media accounts on platforms with specified addictive design features and create a youth safety commission. The author, pediatric and safety advocates, and several public supporters argued that social media companies intentionally design compulsive features that harm youth mental health, sleep, and development, and that the bill is a necessary product-safety response. Opponents argued the bill is overbroad, may be ineffective, raises First Amendment concerns, and could cut off vulnerable youth from important online support networks. Members focused heavily on possible amendments, especially a non-addictive feed option for younger users and strengthening the commission; the author said he was open to those changes and to further work with the committees. The bill was moved to Judiciary on a 5-0 vote and placed on call. At the end of the excerpt, the author began presenting a third measure, AB 2076, which would strengthen California’s Parents’ Accountability and Child Protection Act by adding nitrous oxide to the list of age-verified dangerous products, banning purchase with gift cards or store credit, and increasing penalties for large sellers. The author described nitrous oxide as increasingly accessible to minors online and cited enforcement gaps in the current law, but the transcript cuts off before testimony or action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• We underwrite and close these loans in-house with our own underwriters, architects, and attorneys.
• We underwrite and close these loans in-house with our own underwriters, architects, and attorneys.
• I'm an attorney. I'm a lobbyist. My firm is Lynch and Fierro here in Boston.
• I come at this issue not just as an attorney and as an advocate, but as someone who's worked on these
• A team from our office, an attorney and a paralegal, immediately took on the case.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Housing

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing opened its second hearing of the session with remarks from Chairs Haggerty and Cyr emphasizing that the hearing was a broad look at Massachusetts’ housing crisis rather than a single bill. They highlighted topics including zoning, permitting, rental assistance, public housing, homelessness prevention, and housing production. The first witness, Housing and Livable Communities Secretary Augustus, reviewed implementation of the Affordable Homes Act and the state’s new housing plan, citing a 1.6% vacancy rate, a projected need for 222,000 new homes over 10 years, and ongoing efforts such as ADUs by right, fair housing enforcement, eviction record sealing, seasonal communities planning, and new funding for affordable housing, public housing, and the Momentum Fund. He also discussed infrastructure support for municipalities, technical assistance for ADUs, and concerns about possible federal funding cuts. Committee members questioned the secretary about ADU financing and technical assistance, the likely unit yield from the Affordable Homes Act, infrastructure barriers in suburban and rural communities, public housing waitlist management, supportive housing, and federal budget risks. MassNAHRO then testified that public housing authorities are facing rising operating and capital costs, a statewide waitlist nearing 300,000, and uncertainty over federal Section 8 and HUD funding. Witnesses described recent state support for operating subsidies, capital improvements, vacancy turnover teams, and resident service coordinators, while warning that proposed federal cuts could sharply affect voucher issuance and agency operations. CDAC’s executive director Roger Herzog described the agency’s role as a quasi-public source of early-stage financing and technical assistance for nonprofit housing developers, noting its loan capital, supportive housing bond programs, home modification loans, and preservation work under Chapter 40T. He said CDAC has helped produce or preserve more than 55,000 units and stressed the importance of patient capital and preservation tools. CHAPA CEO Rachel Heller urged the committee to focus on production, preservation, planning, and political will, supporting goals for affordability, supportive housing, and homeownership, and endorsing policy changes such as YIGBY, clearer site plan review rules, stronger fair housing funding, and more support for vouchers and public housing. MassHousing then outlined its financing role, including mortgage lending, down payment assistance, the Community Climate Bank, and the Momentum Fund, while noting that permitting delays, capital gaps, and possible federal changes could affect production. Members also asked about transparency, prevailing wage compliance, and a recent internal restructuring related to diversity and business engagement.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we took the Attorney General's job and transferred all of it... ...and transferred all of its duties
• and said, hey, this is, the job of the Attorney General is to be a champion for justice and to speak
• Our attorneys and their attorneys have worked very closely together, along... ...their credit.
• Our attorneys and their attorneys have worked very closely together, along with the Attorney General's
• office and the attorneys in the governor's office, to have a unified front.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Secretary, but kept the Attorney General's position in the Constitution and said, hey, this is, the
• job of the Attorney General is to be a champion for justice and to speak up and to maybe sponsor some
• Our attorneys and their attorneys have worked very closely together, along Their credit.
• Our attorneys and their attorneys have worked very closely together, along with the Attorney General's
• office and the attorneys in the governor's office, to have a unified front.

Summary: The joint Senate Education and Budget Committee hearing focused on the Governor’s proposed education governance overhaul, which would shift day-to-day management of the California Department of Education from the elected Superintendent of Public Instruction to a new appointed education commissioner, while giving the Superintendent new voting roles on the State Board of Education and the Community College Board of Governors. Chair Perez opened by stressing that the proposal raises major policy questions beyond the budget process and should be evaluated for its effect on students, local control, and accountability. Brooks Allen of the State Board of Education argued the change would unify policymaking and implementation, reduce fragmented authority, and create clearer accountability, citing decades of reports criticizing California’s “crazy quilt” governance structure and noting the proposal is timed for the 2026 transition. Amber Alexander of the Department of Finance outlined the fiscal and staffing transfers, describing the plan as largely cost-neutral and explaining how positions would shift between the State Board, the Department, and the new Superintendent’s office over 2026-27 and 2027-28. Sarah Cortez of the Legislative Analyst’s Office said the LAO supports shifting management to an appointed commissioner but recommended several refinements: preserving legislative oversight, requiring Senate confirmation of the commissioner, clearly defining the Superintendent’s duties as a public representative/advisor/evaluator, and refining the State Board’s role to focus on major policies requiring public input. She also said the fiscal plan should be cost-neutral and more fully specified. Senators raised concerns about the timing during an election year, the constitutional status of the Superintendent, whether the proposal should instead be a constitutional amendment, and whether governance changes actually improve student outcomes or simply rearrange the org chart. Some members questioned whether the proposal would confuse voters and undermine democratic accountability, while others said the current structure is already confusing and that the reform could improve clarity for districts and local boards. The discussion also covered how curriculum is set, with LAO explaining that the Legislature has broad authority but has delegated much curriculum work to the State Board and the Instructional Quality Commission. Members asked how the new structure would affect local districts, who they would call for guidance, and whether the commissioner would have authority over policy; the presenters said policy authority would remain with the State Board, while the commissioner would handle administration and implementation. No votes were taken during the panel discussion, and the hearing was organized to continue with additional panels and public comment later in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I took it as an attorney for 42 years of practice and as a judge and as a magistrate.
• I'm an attorney that's been involved in several constitutional claims through my career, and this is
• You're an attorney. You're a practicing attorney and lawyer.
• And you're an attorney. I'm not saying that's not correct.
• The only recourse I keep hearing is, well, you get to go to court and you get to hire an attorney.

Summary: The House Natural Resources Committee met on House Bill 7 by Speaker Pro Tem Johnson, the Louisiana Landowners Protection Act, which would remove eminent domain authority for carbon capture and geological sequestration projects. After housekeeping and roll call, the committee adopted a set of technical amendments that cleaned up definitions, removed a stray statutory reference, and changed “commissioner” to “secretary.” The author then gave an extended presentation arguing the bill was needed to align Louisiana law with the state constitution’s property-rights protections and recent court rulings, and to ensure carbon capture projects proceed only through voluntary agreements rather than forced takings. Several members questioned the author and supportive witnesses about whether the bill would stop carbon capture, affect oil and gas pipelines, or disrupt investment. The author and supporters said it would not stop projects, only prevent taking land without consent, and argued that landowners—especially small and rural owners—should not face the threat of expropriation. Supportive testimony also emphasized family land, inheritance, and constitutional limits on takings. Some members raised concerns about changing the rules after prior legislative action and about the economic importance of carbon capture, but the author responded that the legislature had made a mistake in 2020 and should correct it now. Opposition testimony came from representatives of the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, the Louisiana Chemistry Association, and attorneys who handle right-of-way matters. They argued that eminent domain is a rare last resort, that existing law and the Landowner Bill of Rights already protect owners, and that the Constitution’s provisions for private-entity expropriation are different from the provisions discussed by the bill’s supporters. They warned that removing the tool for carbon capture would chill investment, threaten jobs and revenue, and could spill over into other energy infrastructure. The committee did not reach a final vote on the bill in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I took it as an attorney for 42 years of practice and as a judge and as a magistrate.
• I'm an attorney that's been involved in several constitutional claims through my career, and this is
• You're an attorney. You're a practicing attorney and lawyer.
• And you're an attorney. I'm not saying that's not correct.
• The only recourse I keep hearing is, well, you get to go to court and you get to hire an attorney.

Committee: House Natural Resources & Environment

Keywords: 965, house, all