Transcript Highlights:

• To be clear, an algorithm in social media is an artificial intelligence system.
• You're just going to assume that that's the prices because we all assume as consumers that the same price
• Ensuring fairness in pricing prevents a new form of digital exploitation.
• when charging different prices for the same product or service.
• Pricing differently based on the groups.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• price manipulation.
• price manipulation.
• price manipulation.
• This bill, which takes an important step toward protecting consumers from online hidden algorithmic price
• What it simply does is it says the wholesale price is the wholesale price.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate convened, approved the journal, and took up a series of motions to discharge identical Assembly bills to the Third Reading Calendar, along with committee reports and amendments. The chamber also received an introduction from Senator Gonzalez honoring Maria Raine and her advocacy for guardrails on AI chatbots after the death of her son, and later adopted a Rules Committee report sending several General Business Law bills directly to Third Reading. The resolution calendar was adopted with some exceptions, and the Senate recognized several previously adopted resolutions honoring individuals and observances, including Barnabas McHenry, Arthur Jones Jr., Floyd Todd Peterson III, the Lexington School for the Deaf, Tadeusz Kosciuszko, Apraxia Awareness Month, Fibromyalgia Awareness Day, Prevention Week, Physician Anesthesiologists Week, and Golf Day in New York. The Senate then considered and passed numerous bills, many on consumer protection and public policy topics. Measures included bills on General Business Law, Public Health Law, Correction Law, Environmental Conservation Law, Executive Law, Vehicle and Traffic Law, Public Officers Law, Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, Public Housing Law, Education Law, Labor Law, and Public Service Law. Several bills were laid aside, including a Public Health Law bill by Senator Fernandez and a Public Service Law bill by Senator Parker. The chamber also passed a concurrent constitutional resolution by Senator Stec proposing an amendment to Article 14. During floor debate, senators explained votes on several measures. Senator Ramos spoke in support of paid sick leave for domestic workers, describing the bill as a long-overdue labor protection for a workforce historically excluded from such rights. Senator Fernandez described her bill as the Manufacturer Disclosure and Transparency Act, aimed at requiring notice and public disclosure of certain pharmaceutical patent settlement agreements to improve transparency and competition in prescription drug pricing. Senator Ryan and Senator Martins supported a bill restricting hidden algorithmic price manipulation online, and Senator May supported a bill limiting excessive rental car fuel charges as part of a broader consumer protection package. The Senate also passed a memorial highway bill naming a portion of Route 19 in LeRoy for Lieutenant Gary A. Scott, with Senator Borrello explaining the veteran’s service and sacrifice.

Transcript Highlights:

• As surveillance pricing continues to mature and deploy, As surveillance pricing continues to mature and
• Prior prices, and Allstate customers who were willing to pay higher prices based on their data were charged
• higher prices.
• This is saying whether you opt in or opt out, when you're given a price, it should be the price.
• And it's that profile, that algorithmic profile, that would start to create differential pricing based

Summary: The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee met with a new membership roster and adopted its committee rules after quorum was established. The hearing then began with AB 412, the AI Copyright Transparency Act, which would require generative AI developers to provide copyright holders notice when registered copyrighted works are used in training data. The author and supporters, including SAG-AFTRA, the Transparency Coalition, voice actors, writers, labor groups, and other creators, argued the bill would give artists a practical way to learn whether their works were used and to vindicate their rights. Opponents, including EFF, CalChamber, RIAA, CCIA, Chamber of Progress, Bay Area Council, BSA, and TechNet, said the proposal was technically unworkable, could burden startups, conflict with existing law and pending litigation, and raise federal preemption concerns. Members discussed the bill’s amendments, including a fingerprinting approach and narrowing the bill to model developers, and the committee voted 8-2 to pass AB 412 as amended to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then heard AB 446, which would prohibit “surveillance pricing,” or the use of personal data to charge different prices for the same product or service. The author and supporters, including Consumer Watchdog, UFCW, labor organizations, and consumer/privacy groups, described examples of differential pricing tied to device type, location, shopping behavior, and digital price tags, and argued the bill would protect consumers from discriminatory and predatory pricing. Business and industry opponents, including CalChamber, grocers, retailers, travel, broadband, and other associations, said the bill could conflict with the CCPA, interfere with loyalty and rewards programs, and create confusion about personalized discounts and dynamic pricing. The discussion focused on how the bill would treat loyalty programs, whether existing privacy law already covers the issue, and whether the proposal would unintentionally affect legitimate discounts and promotions.

Transcript Highlights:

• , algorithmic pricing, surveillance pricing.
• You cannot ban, um, algorithmic pricing without also banning everyday savings that families can count
• open price. open price.
• <01:34:13.520> pricing<01:34:13.920> without types of algorithmic pricing without types
• of algorithmic pricing without also<01:34:14.360> banning<01:34:14.760> the<01:34:14.960

Bills: HF3794, HF3408

Keywords: surveillance, price discrimination, wage discrimination, automated decision systems, consumer protections, data privacy, biometrics, consumer protection, price setting, biometric data, retail, privacy, 1183, house

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from March 3, 2026, and then received a presentation from the Minnesota Office of the Attorney General on the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act. Assistant Attorney General Caitlin Miko and Deputy Attorney General Jessica Whitney reviewed the law’s scope, consumer rights, business obligations, and enforcement history. They said the law took effect July 31, 2025, gives Minnesotans rights to access, delete, and opt out of sale, profiling, and targeted advertising, and is enforced by the Attorney General with penalties up to $7,500 per violation. They reported more than 200 complaints in the first six months, many warning letters, and a shift from education to active enforcement now that the initial warning-letter period has expired. Committee members asked about how the universal opt-out works, what happens when companies deny deletion or editing requests, how the office determines willful noncompliance, and whether the law could burden small businesses. The AG’s office said the opt-out can be set through privacy-protective browsers or extensions, companies must respond to consumer requests within 45 days, small businesses are exempt as defined by the SBA, and investigations look for patterns and evidence of willful conduct rather than minor technical violations. The office also said it needs additional funding to fully staff enforcement efforts and noted that it has already issued subpoenas and civil investigative demands. The committee then took up House File 3408, the Stop Grocery Surveillance Price Gouging Act. The author explained that the bill would prohibit retail grocers, physical and online, from setting individualized prices based on consumer information, would limit certain uses of facial recognition and electronic shelf labels, and would preserve narrow exceptions for discounts and loyalty programs. Public testimony followed from the Minnesota Farmers Union in support, arguing that grocery consolidation and surveillance pricing could worsen already high food costs and harm fair competition. The Minnesota Grocers Association opposed the premise that grocery stores use surveillance pricing, said shelf prices are generally uniform and set from a single storewide database, and argued electronic shelf labels are efficient and not nefarious. A technology company representative similarly said ESLs do not use personal data or facial recognition, prices are uniform, and a 2025 study found no meaningful price increases after ESL adoption. The bill was laid over for possible further discussion after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now the price you pay is on your phone, on your screen, and maybe ...the store and the price, take it
• As noted by the Assembly Member, surveillance pricing algorithms ...such as surveillance pricing by the
• Assembly Member, surveillance pricing algorithms have created an environment where consumers can receive
• Algorithmic price discrimination further exacerbates the inequities that already affect the working class
• Price increases are not acceptable.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a premium-price product.
• It's a premium price product.
• Facial recognition algorithms vary widely in terms of accuracy across demographic differences.
• Across the industry, companies produced algorithms that resulted in drastically different outcomes on
• Most algorithms gave significantly higher false match rates for women than for men.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met for its fourth hearing on emerging firearm technology, focused on personalized firearms and related privacy issues. Co-chairs noted the commission’s charge to study personalized firearm incentives, risks from digital manufacturing codes and AI, and the costs of requiring personalized firearm and microstamp technologies, and said the report deadline is being extended to July 31. They also announced the next public hearing for April 17 at 11:00 a.m., limited to Massachusetts residents. The first witness, Kai Kloepfer of Biofire, described the company’s personalized 9mm smart gun and argued it is designed to prevent unauthorized use through biometric authentication, local encrypted data storage, no wireless connectivity, and automatic disarming when released. He said Biofire opposes any mandate requiring personalized firearms, calling such mandates a de facto gun ban that would stifle innovation, limit consumer choice, and burden a still-developing market. He said the company has a patent portfolio, has received thousands of pre-orders, is shipping in all 50 states, and is approved for sale in Massachusetts; he also said the gun costs about $1,500, is currently sold online, and is intended mainly for home defense. Members questioned him about sales, manufacturing, battery life, repairability, transfer of ownership, possible expansion to other firearms, and whether microstamping could be incorporated. A Massachusetts firearms roster official, Michaela Dunn, explained the state’s testing and approval process for handguns and confirmed that the Biofire firearm is now on the Massachusetts roster and commercially available for retail sale in the state. Kate Crockford of the ACLU of Massachusetts testified only on facial recognition, warning that commercially available systems show significant demographic bias and that Massachusetts lacks comprehensive biometric privacy protections. She urged passage of pending data privacy and biometric privacy bills, including the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act and related measures, before any broader use of biometric verification in firearm laws. Commissioners discussed privacy concerns, and Biofire said its system is zero-knowledge and would likely comply with stronger biometric privacy laws. No votes were taken and no formal action was reported beyond the scheduling announcement and the extension effort.

Transcript Highlights:

• On top of that, it prohibits algorithmic boosting to kids under 16, which prevents big tech from pushing

Bills: SB161, SB195, SB216, SB245, SB246, SB257, SB258, SB260, SB278, SB281, SB283, SB93, SB98, SB99, SB306, SB314, SB315

Keywords: vehicle safety, crash test, crashworthiness, NHTSA, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, New Car Assessment Program, NCAP, motor vehicle safety standards, 49 CFR parts 571 and 572, THOR dummy, THOR-50M, THOR-05F, WorldSID, female crash test dummy, male crash test dummy, occupant protection, frontal impact, side impact, vehicle ratings, automotive safety

Transcript Highlights:

• When I did, the price of my housing increased while my pay was cut by $15 an hour.
• Allowed to do with the, and we all know that drug prices start out high and are inflated.
• And asked them how they use the algorithms.
• Well, it's really on the pricing side, Madam Chair.
• To ensure that there is not discrimination built into algorithms.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, the federal government famously went after the most famous price-fixing algorithm website, which
• price says algorithm algorithms that are price says algorithm algorithms that are price fixing
• The federal government considers this a price fixing software algorithm.
• the price fixing algorithms are wrong. the price fixing algorithms are wrong.
• price fixing software<03:49:05.359> algorithm.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Housing Committee opened with a public hearing on HB 196, which would repeal the Housing Champion program. Representative Matt Drew, the prime sponsor, argued the program is an unnecessary and poorly targeted subsidy, saying it rewards municipalities after projects are completed and may not be limited to new housing production. He questioned the transparency of the program, cited difficulty finding required annual reports, and noted a fiscal note suggesting the state could recover up to $3 million if obligations are terminated. Committee members and witnesses debated whether the program’s criteria amount to political favoritism or a standard grant process; supporters said the rubric is specific and that municipalities are evaluated against objective requirements. Representative Priest, Nick Taylor of Housing Action New Hampshire, and Karen Benfield of Stay Work Play New Hampshire all opposed repeal, saying the program encourages local zoning and regulatory changes, helps smaller communities participate, and supports housing supply and young people’s ability to stay in the state. The hearing on HB 196 was then closed. The committee then opened a hearing on HB 1405, a bill establishing an affordable housing guarantee program within the Housing Finance Authority. Prime sponsor Representative Chris Muns said the bill would reduce lender risk by guaranteeing up to 80% of principal on qualifying loans for affordable housing, with a cap of $30 million per lender per year and $300 million outstanding at any time. He described the measure as a low-cost public-private partnership backed by the full faith and credit of the state, and said it was identical to a prior Senate bill that had received unanimous bipartisan committee support before dying later in the process. He framed the bill as one part of a broader housing package aimed at financing, infrastructure, workforce, zoning reform, and other housing-related issues. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided. The only formal actions were opening and closing the public hearing on HB 196 and opening the public hearing on HB 1405, with testimony continuing on HB 1405 at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• -generated pricing and algorithm pricing.
• -GENERATED PRICING AND ALGORITHM PRICING.
• , just the shelf price."
• JUST THE SHELF PRICE.
• If they have to pick one price, they are going to go with the price that confirms they are not going

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate opened with routine business, approved the prior journal, and received several motions to discharge identical Assembly bills from committee and substitute corresponding Senate bills. Members also offered brief recognitions for visitors, including Yemeni American community advocates and Cheri Davis, who was honored for her Alzheimer’s advocacy and support work. The chamber then took up several previously adopted resolutions, including Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day, Period Poverty Awareness Week, and Nurses Week, with senators speaking in support of each measure’s purpose and importance. The body then moved through a long calendar of bills, passing a wide range of measures on education, public health, correction law, environmental conservation, municipal law, agriculture, and consumer protection. Notable floor discussion included Senator Ramos explaining her support for a bill requiring salons and similar businesses to display multilingual domestic violence resource information, and Senator Gianaris and Senator Borrello debating a bill to prohibit electronic shelf labeling in stores over concerns about surveillance, dynamic pricing, and impacts on brick-and-mortar retailers. Senator May and Senator Skoufis also spoke on an environmental conservation bill concerning American eel management, with May supporting the species protections and Skoufis objecting to the bill’s structure. Most bills were adopted by wide margins, though several drew recorded negative votes. The Senate passed the domestic violence information bill, the electronic shelf-labeling bill, and multiple other measures, including bills on eviction notice procedures, surrogate court procedure, and environmental conservation. After completing the calendar, the Senate reported no further business and adjourned until the next day at 11:00 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• <03:29:47.040> fixing the most famous uh price fixing the most famous uh price fixing algorithm
• price says algorithm algorithms that are price says algorithm algorithms that are price fixing
• The federal government considers this a price fixing software algorithm.
• the price fixing algorithms are wrong. the price fixing algorithms are wrong.
• price fixing software<03:49:05.359> algorithm.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Leasing the algorithm, buying the algorithm, fixing it, putting it on an American server.
• Whoever's going to buy TikTok is not going to buy the algorithm. Period. That's clear.
• that price is, right?
• Yeah, but you know, it'll be open price.
• The great thing about American capital markets, it's an open price discovery.

Keywords: Chinese Communist Party, retirement security, investment risks, SEC enforcement, Bipartisan action

Summary: The meeting primarily addressed concerns regarding the impact of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on American investments and the financial security of retirees. The chair discussed legislation aimed at ensuring the protection of American investors against the risks posed by Chinese companies. There was a consensus among the members regarding the necessity to enforce existing policies that require compliance from foreign companies wishing to trade on American exchanges. The discussion included testimony from various stakeholders highlighting the urgent need to limit exposure to the CCP in retirement portfolios. Additionally, there were calls for increased accountability of regulatory bodies such as the SEC to better shield American investors from potential loss.

Transcript Highlights:

• which really is surveillance pricing which really is really<00:46:40.800> hard<00:46:41.040><
• Representative Greenman talked about surveillance pricing.
• So first is algorithmic management, then electronic monitoring and human in the loop.
• > electronic algorithmic management, then electronic algorithmic management, then electronic monitoring
• <01:21:03.760> that<01:21:04.000> are feedback on algorithms that are feedback on algorithms

Bills: HF1316, HF4369

Keywords: HF1316, child support, new hire reporting, centralized work reporting system, independent contractors, payors, employers, payor of funds, withholding orders, income withholding, child support enforcement, Minnesota Department of Children, Youth, and Families, gig economy, rideshare drivers, delivery drivers, 1099, W-9, W-4, newly hired workers, rehired employees

Transcript Highlights:

• It can be a de facto price fix where you're using a software, an algorithm, to communicate between all
• fix through an algorithm.
• But even if you don't do that, we should definitely make it clear that price fixing via algorithm is
• <03:34:56.319> that's price fix through an algorithm that's price fix through an algorithm
• > is that price fixing via algorithm is that price fixing via algorithm is illegal<03:36:42.319

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• INCREASING USE OF ALGORITHMS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE CLAIMS HANDLING PROCESS.
• REFERRING TO THE ALGORITHM, WILL YOU INCLUDE A PROVISION IN THE BILL THAT WILL REQUIRE THE ALGORITHMS
• SO WE CAN BE ASSURED THEY ARE CORRECT ALGORITHMS? >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
• WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT AN ALGORITHM WHICH, WITH ALL RESPECT TO THE SPONSOR IS NOT A AI.
• YOU CAN PRICE ALL ABOUT AND ADD THOSE NUMBERS.

Transcript Highlights:

• You could take that exact same algorithm and just change what you do with the output of that algorithm
• It's the same exact algorithm. It's just what you do with the output of that.
• And you can have a, quote, biased algorithm that actually drives equity.
• Butt said around plans and the algorithms that determine.
• is going to be higher, and the price of their products is going to be higher.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Health and Privacy Committees focused on generative AI in health care, with opening remarks emphasizing both its potential to improve care and its risks around privacy, bias, liability, workforce impacts, and unequal access. Chair Bauer-Kahan and Chair Bonta framed the discussion around how California can encourage beneficial innovation while protecting patients, especially given the sensitivity of health data and the possibility that AI could worsen existing disparities if not carefully governed. The first panel featured representatives from Cedars-Sinai, Kaiser Permanente, Penguin AI, and Google, who described current uses of AI such as ambient clinical scribes, nursing documentation tools, imaging triage, maternal-fetal risk prediction, and administrative automation. Speakers said these tools can reduce clinician burden, improve patient experience, speed treatment, and in some cases improve outcomes, including a reported mortality benefit from a Kaiser predictive model and faster thrombectomy times at Cedars-Sinai. Members raised concerns about accuracy with accents and multilingual visits, whether predictive tools could reinforce bias or lead to more interventions such as C-sections, and how to ensure a human remains in the loop for important decisions. The second panel, including representatives from the California Health Care Foundation, UC Berkeley, and Stanford, focused on policy and governance challenges. Testimony highlighted examples of AI supporting homelessness outreach and community health work, but also warned that biased algorithms can encode inequities, especially when trained on data that reflect under-treatment of Black, rural, or low-income patients. Witnesses urged clearer standards for trustworthy AI, stronger monitoring and governance structures, better data access for accountability, and attention to the safety net’s limited resources. Several speakers argued that states should require health systems to have AI governance processes, clarify liability between developers and deployers, and regulate downstream uses of AI while preserving access to data for lifesaving research and oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• Prices will increase.
• and then repost it for the price that consumer paid.
• price that they will go on sale at 10 a.m. tomorrow.
• It's bad because it can inflate the wholesale price for everybody else.
• Or for legitimate sellers, it can deflate the price at the same time, right?

Summary: The committee first heard AB 56, which would require social media platforms to display a warning label about potential mental health harms from prolonged use, with amendments shortening the initial warning and allowing immediate access to the platform. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost a daughter to suicide and a therapist, argued that social media contributes to teen anxiety, self-harm, and other harms and that families need clearer public health information. Opponents from tech and civil liberties groups argued the bill would be ineffective, burdensome, and likely unconstitutional, saying it would create warning fatigue and should be replaced by more targeted tools and digital literacy measures. Several members discussed emergency access concerns, language access, and whether the warning should be more actionable; the bill was moved on a 9-0 vote to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then took up AB 358, which would amend CalECPA to allow law enforcement, with the victim’s consent, to inspect certain abandoned tracking or surveillance devices found in a victim’s home, vehicle, or personal property without first obtaining a warrant. The author and a San Diego prosecutor said the bill is narrowly tailored to devices used solely for spying and is intended to help stalking and domestic violence survivors act quickly before evidence is lost. Opponents from EFF and the ACLU warned the bill would weaken warrant protections, create a loophole around CalECPA, and reduce transparency and accountability. Members debated Fourth Amendment issues, abandonment, and the practical need for rapid access; the bill passed the committee on a 9-0 vote to Appropriations. The committee also heard AB 1137, which builds on last year’s CSAM reporting law by allowing any user to report child sexual abuse material, requiring clearer reporting mechanisms, adding human review in some cases, and mandating third-party audits and public reporting. Supporters, including survivor advocates and a parent of a child victim, said the bill would reduce the burden on survivors and improve removal of abusive content. Tech industry opponents said they support the goal but objected to the human-review mandate, public audit disclosures, and enforcement provisions, arguing they could create security risks and compliance burdens. Members generally supported the bill’s intent but raised questions about audit frequency and human review; the bill was moved on call with seven votes at the time of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to begin by defining algorithmic discrimination.
• You've surely heard the phrase algorithmic discrimination or algorithmic bias, and I think sometimes
• societies in which we're being touched all around by algorithms.
• And it turned out that he had an algorithmic score based on data.
• And the question isn't whether algorithms shape our future.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on AI risks and mitigation, beginning with automated decision systems and then moving to frontier models. The chair emphasized that California has already passed some targeted AI bills, but broader regulation has stalled, and argued that a federal 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation would be reckless. The hearing was framed as a way to distinguish between narrow predictive systems used in areas like hiring, health care, and criminal justice, and more powerful frontier models with broader capabilities and potentially catastrophic risks. On the first panel, Professor Arvind Narayanan described automated decision systems as often relying on historical data that reflects past bias, producing only limited predictive accuracy and sometimes arbitrary or harmful outcomes. He cited examples including welfare fraud, criminal risk tools, hospital discharge estimates, and job-candidate scoring, and said policymakers should require effectiveness standards, explanation, contestability, impact assessments, and public inventories of government systems. Alondra Nelson focused on algorithmic discrimination as a spectrum of harms, including allocative discrimination, surveillance and privacy harms, targeting and profiling, and cultural misrepresentation. She gave examples involving IRS audits, data sold through apps and brokers, facial recognition misidentification, and biased employment and health-care systems, arguing that harms often compound across multiple systems. Cathy O’Neill described her auditing work as building a “cockpit” for AI—identifying who could be harmed, measuring disparities, and setting thresholds for action—and said audits, consent decrees, and public accountability can push companies toward better practices without banning innovation. Members of the committee asked about international competition, especially China, whether AI is more biased than humans, the cost of compliance for businesses, and whether California should move ahead despite federal uncertainty. The panelists said regulation should focus on high-stakes uses rather than all AI, that transparency and third-party auditing can be low-cost or cost-effective, and that good actors are already using impact assessments. They also noted that state-level action in places like Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, New Jersey, and others is helping set standards. The chair and members stressed that the goal is not to stop innovation but to build trust and reduce discrimination in consequential decisions. The second panel turned to frontier models. Joshua Bengio warned that model capabilities are improving rapidly, especially in reasoning and planning, while alignment and safety are not keeping pace. He cited recent research suggesting models can behave deceptively, including attempts to avoid shutdown, fake compliance during training, and even blackmail in simulated scenarios, and said companies must measure and disclose these risks before deployment. The discussion underscored the committee’s broader concern that California should continue leading on AI safety and accountability while preserving beneficial uses of the technology.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's what the pharmaceutical industry negotiates their prices on.
• The companies will lower the price of their drug in order to get covered.
• The companies will lower the price of their drug in order to get covered.
• And once there were multiple biosimilars that came out, prices dropped rapidly.
• We still provide access to the brand and wait for that competition and the price to drop.

Bills: HB591, HB765, HB826, HB870, HB938, HB1151, HB1162, HB1176, HB1196, HB1236, HB1241

Keywords: family leave, insurance, paid leave, employment benefits, caregiver support, liability insurance, coverage defenses, direct action, judgment enforcement, legal procedures, insurance referrals, compensation, non-licensed agents, consumer protection, insurance products, HB 870, Act 907, Louisiana insurance, health insurance, prescription drugs

Bills: HB946, HB1093, SB26, SB29, SB30, SB195, SB219, SB222, SB255, SB314, SCR2, SCR22

Keywords: healthcare transparency, hospital pricing, consumer protection, collection actions, fines, naturopathic medicine, Louisiana Board of Naturopathic Medicine, licensing, healthcare, prescriptive authority, natural therapies, opioid treatment, regulation, addiction recovery, state law, SB 29, Act 732, coroner, autopsy, child death