Transcript Highlights:

• <01:27:39.280> We computer screens. It's not right. We computer screens. It's not right.
• Now, let's do some math.
• Evidence-based practices for math core, which includes an evidence-based definition.
• We provide money for math core bianiums.
• <04:05:08.880> the math and we d they dug a hole. the math and we d they dug a hole. the districts

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• done this before this particular way, so we'll see how this goes, but it's our intention for the screen
• For this particular way, so we'll see how this goes, but it's our intention for the screen to have the
• So you may see me call forward a legislator whose name isn't on the screen when they come in.
• Images of Nazi propaganda flashed before my eyes on the screen. Was I in 1944 or 2025?
• I first saw it at a screening on campus, sponsored by BU's L.E.B.U.S.L.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission held a public comment hearing as it continued work toward a November 30 statutory deadline for its final report. The co-chairs reviewed logistics for the hybrid format, two-minute testimony limit, respectful conduct, and the plan to alternate between in-person and virtual speakers. The commission approved the minutes from its previous September 8 meeting by motion and vote, with no nays. Much of the testimony focused on how the commission should define antisemitism, especially whether to adopt the IHRA definition and whether it improperly conflates antisemitism with criticism of Israel or Zionism. Many speakers, including Jewish educators, rabbis, academics, students, and legislators, described personal experiences with antisemitism and urged the commission to address hate while protecting free speech, academic freedom, and the ability to criticize Israeli government policy. Several called for the commission to reject or narrow the IHRA definition and instead consider the Jerusalem Declaration or other frameworks that distinguish antisemitism from anti-Zionism. Others emphasized that antisemitism should be addressed alongside racism, Islamophobia, white nationalism, and other forms of bias, and some urged broader anti-bias training in schools. A smaller number of speakers supported stronger action against antisemitism in schools and public institutions, including concerns about antisemitic materials in education and about organizations or events they viewed as promoting hate. A recurring theme was the conflict in Gaza and its impact on the debate: some speakers condemned Israel’s military actions as genocide, apartheid, or colonialism and said criticism of those actions should not be treated as antisemitic, while others defended Israel, rejected genocide claims, and argued that anti-Israel activism can fuel antisemitism. Several speakers also raised concerns about campus discipline, union materials, and state facility rentals, and one speaker asked that state resources not be used by groups they viewed as inciting hate. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the prior minutes and hearing public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the second maybe that's easier for you, is your math.
• And states have a lot of tools. at their disposal, as you all know well, screenings on the front end,
• I know you're having to do back-of-the-envelope math to get the number of beneficiaries per month, but
• Do we have even back-of-the-envelope math on the cost of that, those increase?
• If I'm reading this right, it says... 1977 it's a total of I guess it'd be if I can do basic math 95

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Teaching virtually, I would have no idea if somebody was playing Call of Duty on a screen behind the
• Teaching virtually, I would have no idea if somebody was playing call of duty on a screen behind the
• They don't want to be behind the screen for six hours a day during their school breaks, fiddling with
• They're not hiding behind a screen.
• Could you just unclick the microphone button on your screen, please, Renata? I'm sorry.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a public hearing on several bills related to driver’s license suspensions, junior operator training, online driver education, and regulation of e-bikes/scooters. A major focus was the Road to Opportunity Act (H. 3662/S. 2368), which would end license suspensions and registration holds for unpaid fines and fees unrelated to road safety, create hardship waivers and payment options, and replace suspension with nonrenewal in some cases. Supporters included the Attorney General’s office, ACLU, CPCS, Greater Boston Legal Services, transportation and anti-poverty advocates, and several affected residents who described job loss, housing instability, and difficulty paying toll and fee debts. They argued the current system punishes poverty, disproportionately affects Black and Latino residents, and is costly to enforce. Some testimony also noted that the bill would preserve suspensions for dangerous driving offenses. District Attorney Marion Ryan testified in favor of two bills: one allowing partial payment plans for certain RMV penalties and another closing a loophole that makes the penalty for violating a hardship license less severe than driving after a full suspension. Senator Sear and Representative Reed also spoke for the Road to Opportunity Act, while the AAG said the Attorney General supports it. Committee members asked about RMV implementation and whether the agency supports payment plans; Ryan said the RMV has been cooperative but believes legislation is needed. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee also heard testimony on bills affecting young drivers. Senator Lovely and Representative Cruz supported a bill to create a junior operator license training fund, expand access for low- and moderate-income families, require refunds in some cases, and allow earlier passenger privileges. Another bill would make virtual instructor-led driver education permanent; AAA and several driving school owners supported it as an access and convenience measure, while other instructors opposed it, arguing in-person instruction is safer and more effective. Finally, Senator Collins and others testified for a transportation safety bill regulating motorized bicycles, scooters, e-bikes, and mopeds, increasing fines, requiring insurance for commercial use, and requiring public hearings and accessibility review for new bike lanes. Advocates for blind and disabled pedestrians supported that bill, while some transportation and business voices backed it as a safety and planning measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• The math has to work with the numbers we have.
• The math has to work.
• The math has to work.
• ,<01:49:09.760> reviewing, involved in screening, reviewing, involved in screening, reviewing
• And it's interesting that actually it turns out that something like, I didn't do the math, two-thirds

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Finance Division 3 work session opened with routine announcements, including new and absent members, a tribute to former chair Rep. Jess Edwards, and an explanation that Division 3 is advisory and will make recommendations to full Finance. Chair Mooney also distributed a self-created index to the budget binder and reviewed the committee’s options under House Rule 45. Members discussed scheduling a future visit to the Veterans Home in Tilton, with several October dates unavailable, and the chair said she would circulate possible dates. The committee also reviewed the second-year budget context and sources of funding, including surplus monies, existing and new revenue streams, grants, reappropriations, and the rainy day fund. The committee then took up several retained bills and repeatedly heard that their substance had already been addressed in the budget. House Bill 519, funding the Waypoint Youth and Young Adult Shelter, was moved ITL and passed 10-0. House Bill 547, county reimbursement funds, was also moved ITL and passed 10-0 after members noted the reimbursement had been included in HB 2. House Bill 570, repealing the prescription drug affordability board, was moved ITL and passed 10-0, with minority members saying they still believed the board had value but acknowledging the repeal had already occurred in HB 2. House Bill 704, concerning caregiver respite and senior volunteer programs, received the most discussion. Mr. Ripple explained that most items were already funded or suspended in the budget, leaving only the senior volunteer grant program unfunded. Chair Mooney offered amendment 2963H to fund the RSVP program at $180,000 for one year, contingent on surplus funds, and DHHS witnesses explained that RSVP is a federally funded AmeriCorps program that would be added to existing state licensing structures. The amendment was adopted unanimously, and the bill was reported ought to pass as amended on a 10-0 vote. The committee then heard House Bill 751, which would require licensure of outpatient substance use disorder treatment facilities and create an ombudsman-related complaint process. DHHS witnesses said the bill had been narrowed substantially from an earlier certification model with multiple positions and IT costs to a licensing model using existing department infrastructure, reducing the fiscal note to $211,000 for one position. They also said the ombudsman section was no longer needed because licensed facilities would fall under existing oversight. Members questioned how many facilities exist and whether licensing fees would cover costs; DHHS said it did not know the full provider landscape and that licensing revenue across the board does not cover the department’s costs. Rep. Daniels then proposed amendment 2964H to form a study committee because of the remaining questions and lack of a clear revenue stream, and the committee was still discussing that amendment when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• applicant screening is not optional. applicant screening is not optional.
• Um, and so if you do the math finite. Um, and so if you do the math then<02:39:32.800> yes.
• screening only benefits landlords. screening only benefits landlords.
• value from admission screening. value from admission screening.
• screen out. People say tire care. screen out. People say tire care.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You said, "I try not to do math in my head, representative; it gets me in trouble."
• Continuing to invest in literacy, math, and science is crucial, as well as summer and after-school programs
• You can see the breakdown on the screen, with $100 million of that going to the State Department of Education

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Students take a reading and math NAEP test in 4th and 8th grade.
• Math rates are on the right, and they don't show a similar closing of the gap.
• Math proficiency largely remained unchanged over the past two years.
• We're not seeing it in math, as Rachel indicated.
• coaches would be a best practice for increasing math scores.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've done the math times the current law base adequacy.
• I've done the math times the current law base adequacy.
• I've done the math times the current law base adequacy.
• I've done the math times the current law base adequacy.
• I've done the math times the current law base adequacy.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee Subcommittee on Adequacy and Funding Sources opened its second meeting by reviewing four retained bills assigned to it: HB 651, HB 772, HB 491, and HB 734. The chair said the goal was to compare the bills across the board, consider whether any one of them should be the committee’s recommended vehicle, and then vote on a recommendation to the full committee. He noted the bills would move out before November 21 and be taken up on the House floor in January, while related LSRs were also being developed for the coming session. Representative Ames argued that HB 651 should be the main vehicle because it would substantially raise the adequacy base and adjust differential aid categories to better reflect real school costs, including poverty, special education, and English learner needs. He described the bill as building on court guidance and said the current funding formula is far below actual district needs. He also supported HB 491 as a study vehicle to examine revenue options, saying the legislature needs informed choices about how to pay for the changes. Representative Damon strongly backed HB 651 and HB 491, citing constitutional obligations, the Conval and Rand rulings, and large projected funding increases for districts such as Claremont, Windham, and communities in the chair’s district if HB 651 had passed earlier. Representative Fellows said he has an LSR similar to HB 491 that would study existing and new revenue options using criteria such as revenue potential, administrative cost, affected groups, implementation timeline, and implementation cost, with input from revenue administration and outside agencies. Representative Papich Muller emphasized constitutional separation-of-powers concerns, reading Article 83 and saying he was not comfortable with the broad claim that “cherish” clearly mandates a specific spending level, though he said he intends to follow Supreme Court guidance. Representative Ricky read testimony from a local school board member arguing that the state already imposes many mandates on schools while providing the least funding in the country, and that HB 651 would help restore meaningful local control. No final vote or action was taken in the portion provided, though the chair had indicated the subcommittee would vote before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's difficult for you to see on screen. It's also in your materials. It's a spreadsheet.
• And they had different matching, so we're going to have to do some math to see where we get.
• Do you have the math on what that represents?
• And I had them work the math with the Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 of UND and NDSU, where some's two-to-one
• Well, it's keeping the, under this, what you're seeing on the screen is the current formula.

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review how North Dakota might identify and address low-producing academic programs and to discuss draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the NDUS explained that the State Board of Higher Education is already developing a system-wide policy, using models from other states such as Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Connecticut. She described how low-producing programs are typically flagged by multi-year enrollment or completion thresholds, then reviewed for workforce demand, mission fit, cost, accreditation, and regional need before any action is taken. Committee members asked about what counts as a program, how costs are analyzed, whether certificates are included, how exemptions work for mission-critical or high-demand fields, and whether the board or legislature should set the rules. Johnson said the board is the appropriate body to lead the process, but legislators could use funding leverage if they wanted to encourage action; the chair asked the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal uses fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder undergraduate rate of $7,000 per FTE and a graduate/professional rate of $10,500, plus incentives for completions in in-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council walked through the projected funding effects, noting that the model would increase funding for NDSU and reduce it for UND in the current biennium, with different results in the next biennium as enrollment changes are recognized. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the definition of in-demand programs, the treatment of research funding, and the exclusion of state-appropriated dollars from the external grants calculation. The chair emphasized that the numbers were illustrative and that appropriators would set the actual dollar amounts later. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. That model uses fall census FTE without a weighted economic factor, applies a higher undergraduate rate, and adds completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other completions. Members noted that the formula would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and discussed whether the nine institutions should be treated more uniformly or split into smaller groups because of their different missions and sizes. Committee members and staff repeatedly stressed that the formulas are still being refined and that some institutions would likely need hold-harmless adjustments or other transition measures. The meeting ended with the chair directing the committee to continue the discussion later and to expect further work on both the low-producing program policy and the funding formulas.

Transcript Highlights:

• on the screen on iLegislate and in today's folder on your box account.
• Math CMAS test, and in fourth grade also the social studies CMAS test.
• Um, and they probably learn better without screens in front of their faces.
• They came into sixth grade at a second or third grade reading level, writing level, math level.
• But math does teach us But math does teach us something important. >> Representative Wilfford, can you

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Fingers crossed, we're working, although we won't be able to project on the screens today.
• on it, and then if you go to the next slide, we actually only have 280 shelter beds in our city, so math
• You have to be screened to get in.
• One, it requires expert or universal screening for substance exposure.
• maps, it'll be more powerful, but this data also has predictive validity up to 5th and 6th grade in math

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the Oklahoma State Department of Education that you see on the screen.
• The monitoring people, that pops up on their screen.
• It pops up on their screen, and they make the determination at that point whether it's a real gun or
• It highlights the weapon in the screen and the screen picture, and the schools can react accordingly.
• and the screen picture and the schools can react accordingly the key point I want to make on this is

Summary: The meeting focused on school safety funding and security practices in Oklahoma schools, especially how districts have used school resource officer (SRO) allocation money and related security grants. Kevin Rey of the Oklahoma State Department of Education’s Office of School Safety and Security explained that the program, created under HB 2903, allows districts to use funds for SROs and physical security improvements such as cameras, access control, fencing, window film, bollards, metal detectors, and vape detectors. He said more than 170 districts used the money to hire SROs in 2024-25, and that the 2024 change allowing retired officers and armed security guards to qualify was a major help. Members questioned whether the money should also support prevention and mental health services, and Rey said the current program is mainly for security hardware and related measures. Mark Stout, chief of police for Putnam City Schools, described the district’s layered security approach, including weapon detection at middle and high schools and the ZeroEyes AI camera system, which monitors existing cameras for visible guns and sends alerts to trained monitoring staff and then to district police. He said the system is used as one layer among others, alongside officers, weapon detection, and school procedures, and noted the district is expanding coverage at athletic facilities. He also explained that the system is more economical than full weapon-detection setups, with annual costs based on the number of cameras. Tecumseh Superintendent Kinsey, Chief Kennedy, and Pottawatomie County law enforcement described the October threat investigation involving a student who posted a photo with a handgun and knife and discussed violence online. They said the FBI tip, rapid coordination among agencies, and an SRO already embedded in the district helped lead to a search warrant and arrest within hours, preventing a possible attack. Kinsey also described the district’s safety measures, including secure entrances, cameras, ALICE training, crisis communication planning, mental health support, clear backpacks, and a new staff alert system. He said community feedback after the incident favored more law enforcement partnership, limited entry points, handheld metal detectors, more SROs, stronger training, and more mental health support. Matt Riggs, former superintendent of McComb, said smaller districts face different security challenges because of limited local law enforcement and long response times. He explained that McComb used its funding for facility upgrades rather than hiring a full-time SRO because the district wanted improvements that would last beyond the three-year funding window. Throughout the discussion, several members emphasized the tension between visible security measures and prevention, with repeated calls for more counselors, mental health supports, and threat-assessment efforts alongside hardening measures. No formal votes or actions were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'll have the math and science and then, excuse me, math and reading.
• So you're looking here at math. So we have one side for math, one slide for ELA. This one's math.
• It's not like 3 through 8 where you're just doing 5th grade math, 6th grade math, 7th grade math, right
• For math, it's just three credits of math.
• For math, it's just three credits of math.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then received a lengthy DPI presentation from Stanley Schauer on statewide reading and math assessment data for students with and without disabilities. He explained the assessment systems used over time, the absence of 2019-20 data, and how North Dakota’s standards are set by educators. Members asked about alternate assessments, cohort trends, the apparent drop in proficiency in higher grades, and the new NDA+ assessment. Schauer emphasized that the biggest pattern in the data was the relative stability of students with disabilities, the post-pandemic drop and partial recovery, and the need to focus on reducing the novice category. He also said the state plans to revisit high school standard setting and that future data could be broken out by program, disability category, and schools using science-of-math or other initiatives. Public testimony from special education staff suggested that the flat performance of students with disabilities during COVID likely reflected continued services and intensive supports, and committee members discussed whether the current disparity goal is realistic and whether growth measures would be more useful than simple proficiency buckets. After the presentation, the committee took a short break and then moved into discussion of special education funding models. Chair Richter said members should contact Schauer directly with ideas for additional data views and noted that the committee would continue its work on funding and possible model changes. Brandon Bomback of Grand Forks Public Schools began a presentation arguing that the special education funding formula, especially the weighting factor, should be reconsidered if the committee wants a system that better reflects accountability and student needs. He said his comments were based on the perspective of a larger district and focused on the special education weighting factor rather than other parts of the formula. The remainder of his presentation was not included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• First thing up on the agenda is a presentation by DPI on math and science, math and reading scores.
• So we'll have the math and science, and then, excuse me, math and reading.
• So you're looking here at math. So we have one side for math, one slide for ELA. This one's math.
• It's not like 3 through 8 where you're just doing 5th-grade math, 6th-grade math, 7th-grade math, right
• For math, it's just three credits of math.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:27:28.159> time limits, parental controls, screen time limits, parental controls, screen
• So having screenings where firefighters can get a more advanced screening more often, more in depth,
• We getting cancer screenings right now.
• So having screenings where society.
• <02:44:03.439> and calculated as we've done the math and calculated as we've done the math

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up House File 4138, a bill aimed at limiting harmful social media features for children and requiring parental involvement for minors using platforms in Minnesota. Early on, members reconsidered and then adopted the Smith amendment (A13) after first rejecting a narrower amendment to the amendment (A18) on a 67-67 tie. Representative Bonner then offered a technical amendment (A14) to address liability and drafting concerns, but withdrew it after saying it contained an unintended drafting error and could create legal problems, including issues around data collection and rulemaking. During third reading debate, supporters described the bill as a first step to protect children from addictive social media design, online exploitation, and harmful data practices. Representative Scott said the bill would require parental consent and limit addictive features for child accounts, while emphasizing that the consent language must be prominent and that the bill’s effective date would not begin until next July. Representative Enen, Representative Feist, Representative Greenman, and others backed the measure as a bipartisan effort to hold big tech accountable and protect kids, though Greenman also noted that the legislature had not shown the same willingness to confront gun violence. Opponents and skeptics raised concerns that the bill relies on parents understanding complex legal and technical terms, that it may not fully protect children, and that it could still leave gaps around liability and privacy. Representative Leeing questioned why the bill does not simply restrict addictive features for all children and asked about parental waivers and location tracking; Scott responded that the bill uses IP address information and does not specifically address liability waivers, but said the measure is a policy choice intended to empower parents. The debate ended with broad support from several members, and the bill was presented as likely to pass, though no final vote on the bill itself was included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• First thing up on the agenda is a presentation by DPI on math and science, math and reading scores.
• So we'll have the math and science and then, excuse me, math and reading.
• So you're looking here at math. So we have one side for math, one slide for ELA. This one's math.
• It's not like 3 through 8 where you're just doing 5th grade math, 6th grade math, 7th grade math, right
• For math, it's just three credits of math.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the March 4, 2026 minutes, and received a lengthy Department of Public Instruction presentation from Stanley Schauer Jr. on North Dakota student performance data in math and ELA, with comparisons between students with disabilities and students without disabilities. Schauer explained the assessment systems used, the 1% alternate assessment cap for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, the absence of 2019-20 data due to the pandemic, and how state standards are set by North Dakota educators. Members asked about cohort trends, the role of alternate assessments, grade-level patterns, and whether the state should focus more on reducing the novice category than on moving students from approaching to proficient. Schauer also discussed the new NDA Plus assessment, the state’s planned growth model, and the possibility of future breakdowns by disability category or by schools using science-of-math approaches. Special education educators testified that students with disabilities continued to receive services during COVID because of FAPE obligations, which likely helped limit learning loss, and emphasized that IEP teams focus on individual growth rather than only proficiency buckets. Committee members then shifted to special education funding and possible funding models. Brandon Bombach of Grand Forks Public Schools presented on the state aid formula, focusing on the special education weighting factor and arguing that the current formula does not adequately respond to growing student needs because it counts enrollment but does not adjust when the number of students with IEPs rises. He used examples to show that a district can have the same enrollment and receive the same weighting even if the number of students needing services increases. Members discussed whether the formula should be tied more closely to actual need and accountability, and the chair indicated that the committee would continue gathering data and ideas for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because that's about 20,000 children, if I do the math correctly.
• Have you done the math on it?
• Only 26% of students were on grade level, and just nine were proficient in math.
• So I have a very specific math problem for you, primarily for Senator Creighton.
• We can't teach math. We need to get our class sizes down.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education K-16 convened with a quorum, adopted its committee rules, and heard opening remarks from members introducing staff and outlining priorities for the session. Members from both parties emphasized education as a major issue, while several Republicans framed the committee’s work around school choice and parent empowerment. Senator West and other Democrats stressed protecting public schools, listening to Texans, and considering the effects of vouchers or education savings accounts on school districts and communities. Chairman Creighton laid out Senate Bill 2, the Texas Education Freedom Act, describing it as a universal education savings account program modeled on similar programs in other states. He said the bill would provide about $200 million for a universal eligibility pool and additional funding for students with disabilities and lower-income families, with priority weighting for former public school students. He also highlighted anti-fraud measures, vendor pre-approval, criminal background checks, cybersecurity protections, annual testing requirements for participating students, and the use of the Comptroller rather than TEA to administer the program. Creighton repeatedly said the bill is not a voucher and argued it would not take money from public schools, which he said would receive separate historic funding increases. Members questioned Creighton about the 500% of federal poverty line definition, the adequacy of the $10,000 ESA amount, whether the program would favor students already in private school, how microschools and homeschool pods would fit, and whether the bill protects religious liberty and private-school autonomy. Democrats raised concerns about disability protections, 504 students, foster children, public-school funding, open records, and the historical context of vouchers. Republicans generally supported the bill as a way to expand options for parents and students, while also asking about administration, fraud prevention, and data security. After member questions, the committee began invited testimony, with EdChoice President Robert Inlow presenting in support of SB 2 and citing the growth and reported success of school choice programs nationwide.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are also making tremendous progress in screening more quickly.
• <00:13:52.000> more tremendous progress and screening more tremendous progress and screening
• We see were responsible for screening.
• <00:34:42.800> the period of time where we screen the period of time where we screen the applications
• It's about 800 can kind of do the math.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• good, but when it potentially means walking away from decades of power, privilege, and perks, the math
• These groups are also trying a new math out where they're trying to count to the 34-state threshold.
• body, this very committee, has the means to make sure that if there's any effort to screw with the math
• to try to call a convention, it won't be in the name of Massachusetts and that that math will be stopped
• That math will be stopped short at 33 states.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing of the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs was opened by Chair Joe McGonagle and Vice Chair Senator Mike Rush, who noted that Chair John Velis was deployed with the Massachusetts National Guard. The chairs explained the hybrid format, three-minute testimony limit, live streaming, and filing deadlines, and said the committee would hear 11 House bills and eight Senate bills dealing with federal and overseas issues. Much of the hearing centered on competing resolutions about Article 5 constitutional conventions, along with related resolutions on D.C. statehood, child labor, Citizens United, and Cambodia. Supporters of H. 4692 and S. 284, a joint resolution to rescind all prior Massachusetts Article 5 convention applications, argued that old resolutions from the 1930s and 1970s could be used to count Massachusetts toward the 34-state threshold for calling a federal constitutional convention. Testifiers from Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, the ACLU, Reproductive Equity Now, labor groups, and others warned that a convention would have no clear rules, could not be reliably limited to specific topics, and could put civil rights, reproductive rights, labor protections, and other constitutional protections at risk. Several speakers also cited a recent federal lawsuit and said the safest course was to remove outdated applications from the books. A large opposing panel testified in support of H. 3888, a resolution calling for a Convention of States to propose amendments limiting federal power, imposing fiscal restraints, and establishing term limits. Supporters argued that Article 5 provides a lawful way to address federal overreach, debt, and congressional stagnation, and said the process would be limited by state applications and ratification by 38 states. Some committee members and witnesses raised concerns about a runaway convention, broad language in the resolution, and whether Congress could or should set rules for such a convention. Representative Gentile also testified in support of several related resolutions on overturning Citizens United, D.C. statehood, and the child labor amendment, while Representative Howard and Representative Tongue supported a Cambodia resolution condemning political oppression and urging free and fair elections. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.