Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for attendance. All are encouraged.
• The hearing room is open for attendance.
• Are there any primary witnesses or others in support?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition? Any other opposition?
• Any primary witnesses in support or other folks in support? Any opposition primary or otherwise?

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on May 6, 2026, with a quorum present and began by approving a large consent calendar of bills on two unanimous-support motions. The committee then heard a series of individual bills, with authors and sponsors generally describing low or absorbable state costs and asking for aye votes. Topics included AI/digital safety education for students (AB 1792), hepatitis C treatment access (AB 1843), rent-now-pay-later consumer protections (AB 2350), retirement information for community college faculty (AB 2417), cannabis regulation changes including tribal commerce, drive-through sales, and beverage labeling (AB 2506, AB 2697, AB 2532), emergency equipment training for law enforcement volunteers (AB 1913), cannery law modernization (AB 2706), child care planning in local governments (AB 1914), EV charger permitting fees (AB 1820), election-record notice requirements (AB 1664), nursing home discharge notices (AB 2135), a San Diego energization-delay pilot (AB 2518), mental health training for school coaches (AB 1665), and education governance and oversight changes (AB 2117). Several bills were described as committee or sponsor measures with technical or clarifying changes, including AB 2780, AB 2615, AB 2121, and AB 2771. Testimony was largely supportive, often from sponsor groups, industry representatives, labor, or advocacy organizations. Notable support included TechNet for AB 1792, the California State Sheriffs’ Association for AB 1913, California Dairies and food manufacturers for AB 2706, the Low Income Investment Fund for AB 1914, EV and environmental groups for AB 1820, the Attorney General’s Office for AB 1664, long-term care ombudsman advocates for AB 2135, and the California State Association of Psychiatrists for the cannabis and mental-health-related bills. Some bills drew limited opposition or “opposed unless amended” positions, including AB 2350, AB 1820, and AB 2506, while AB 2697 and AB 2532 were presented as efforts to support the legal cannabis market and consumer safety. The committee also heard a presentation-only item, AB 2541, creating a lowrider specialty license plate, which drew enthusiastic bipartisan comments and co-author requests from members. Most bills were reported out with due pass recommendations, many on roll call and several with specific members not voting or voting no. AB 1664 was reported out as due pass as amended and placed on call before later being moved out on a B roll call. AB 2350 and AB 1914 were also later reported out from call on B roll calls, with AB 1914 noted as passing despite some Republican no votes. The suspense calendar was then deemed approved without individual action, and the meeting concluded after a brief public comment period in which members of the public voiced positions on unrelated bills, including support for AB 2497, AB 1729, AB 2189, AB 1575, AB 2170, and opposition to AB 1603, AB 2447, AB 2411, AB 2492, and AB 1952.

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, we'll move on to primary witnesses in opposition. Any primary witnesses in opposition?
• We keep it open for absent members.
• We keep it open for absent members.
• We keep it open for absent members.
• We'll keep the roll open for our absent members.

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met as a subcommittee until quorum was established, then heard a series of election- and public-trust-related bills. Early items included AB 2592, which would move lobbyist training from legislative ethics committees to the FPPC starting in 2029 and make it available online on demand; it drew support from the FPPC and an oppose-unless-amended request to make the training public and ensure lobbyists pay fees. AB 2573 would refine California’s confidential voter registration protections for candidates and elected officials, with support from the Secretary of State and county election officials after amendments narrowed some family-member coverage. AB 2753 would bar registered sex offenders from running for or holding local or state office; it prompted extended debate about public trust, second chances, and where to draw the line, but was ultimately advanced on a 5-0 vote with one member not voting. AB 2691 similarly would expand disqualifying felony convictions to include sexual assault and human trafficking, and it also passed 5-0 after testimony from victim advocates and discussion about survivors, restorative justice, and the power dynamics involved in public office. The committee also advanced AB 2413, which would prohibit public funds from being used for large-format ads featuring elected officials, and AB 2281, which would direct the Office of Election Cybersecurity to assess replacement resources after federal cybersecurity support cuts and allow consultation with academic researchers. AB 1664 would require local election officials to notify the Secretary of State and Attorney General within one business day of warrants, subpoenas, or investigations involving election records or voting systems; supporters said it would help the state respond quickly to improper seizure of election materials, and it passed 5-0. AB 2484, concerning San Diego MTS, would let voters authorize a local sales tax initiative for transit funding and exempt it from an existing cap; it drew support from transit leaders and labor, opposition from the Realtors, and a lengthy exchange over Prop. 13, Prop. 218, and whether the measure created a special deal, before passing 6-1. The committee then heard AB 2230, which would create buffer zones around voting centers and child care facilities to keep immigration enforcement away from those locations. The author said the bill was meant to reduce fear and intimidation for voters and families, while the opposition argued it was unenforceable, lacked evidence of a problem, and would interfere with federal officers doing their jobs. Members supporting the bill cited reported ICE profiling and intimidation in California communities, while others raised jurisdictional and practical concerns. The transcript ends during this debate, with no final vote shown for AB 2230.

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 2480 would change Hawaii's primary election from a straight party line ballot to an open election.
• </c><01:02:33.040><c> Presidential</c> presidential primary. Presidential presidential primary.
• . primary. primary.
• </c> have to deal with an early primary too. have to deal with an early primary too.
• </c> the primary process is the primary the primary process is the primary process<01:09:32.719><c> was

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 2246, which would expand public financial disclosure requirements. The State Ethics Commission strongly supported the bill, saying broader disclosure could help restore public trust and potentially deter corruption, and it offered a clarifying amendment to make clear the requirement applies to board and commission members rather than all employees of listed agencies. Several organizations and individuals also testified in support. A committee member asked about the amendment, and the commission explained it was intended as a clarification rather than a substantive change. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2250, which would add homeless facilities to the locations covered by the drug-free-zone offense for promoting controlled substances. The Public Defender opposed the measure, arguing that many homeless facilities are unmarked and not easily identifiable, creating notice, fairness, and due process concerns and risking arbitrary enforcement. The Honolulu Prosecutor’s Office and Honolulu Police Department supported the bill, saying it targets distributors rather than users, that notice can be proven through evidence, and that the law is aimed at protecting vulnerable people in shelters and similar facilities. In questioning, senators asked how homeless facilities would be identified and whether the bill would cover all shelter models; the prosecutor said the definition is cross-referenced in statute and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii and other groups testified in opposition, while several service and advocacy groups testified in support. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 2325, which would allow courts to review and potentially reduce sentences for certain juvenile offenders after 15 years if the person is not a danger to the community. Judiciary staff said the court supports the bill’s intent but noted Hawaii’s indeterminate sentencing structure leaves no alternative sentence for a court to reduce to, suggesting the measure may need structural sentencing changes or could instead be directed to the Hawaii Paroling Authority. Public defender representatives and youth-justice advocates supported the bill, emphasizing rehabilitation, adolescent brain development, trauma, and the need for a meaningful opportunity for release. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for attendance.
• And do you have any primary witnesses in support? No, ma'am.
• Do you have any primary witnesses in support? No. Any primary witnesses in opposition?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition?
• Any primary witnesses in support? Any primary witnesses in opposition?

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on May 14, 2025, for a regular order hearing with a large consent calendar and many individual bill presentations. The committee first approved numerous bills on consent, then heard a series of measures spanning reproductive health, child care eligibility, transportation, mental health diversion, county recorder fees, groundwater management, election deadlines, parking enforcement, consumer protections, housing, immigrant and student protections, and utility/CPUC oversight. Several bills were taken up only for presentation because they were on suspense, including ACA 4 on long-term housing funding, and the committee later approved a very large suspense calendar as a whole. Among the bills discussed, AB 260 would protect medication abortion access and providers; AB 904 would clarify child care subsidy eligibility during family leave or job search; AB 1014 would give Caltrans more flexibility on speed limits in rural highway segments; AB 46 would clarify judicial discretion in mental health diversion; AB 1413 and AB 929 addressed groundwater adjudication and SGMA-related protections for small community water systems and wetlands; AB 930 would count vote-by-mail ballots postmarked by Election Day and received within seven days; AB 1022 would end towing solely for unpaid parking tickets; AB 290 and AB 302 dealt with automatic payments for the California Fair Plan and medical data protections; AB 1303 would remove the need for a Social Security number for California Lifeline eligibility; and several housing bills, including AB 920, AB 956, AB 1470, AB 893, and AB 1021, sought to streamline approvals or expand housing options. AB 1318 and AB 49 focused on immigrant-serving nonprofits and keeping immigration enforcement out of schools, while AB 1532 extended telecommunications and transportation access programs and added CPUC accountability measures. Testimony was generally supportive for the bills heard, with authors and sponsors emphasizing low or absorbable fiscal impacts, consumer protection, housing production, public safety, and protections for vulnerable communities. Opposition appeared on a few measures, including concerns about ADUs, towing authority, charter school-related issues, and the scale of proposed housing funding in ACA 4. Several members also commented in support of the housing and immigrant-protection measures, and some bills were voted out with recorded no votes or not-voting members noted. After the suspense calendar was deemed approved, the committee opened public comment on bills not presented that day, heard a long list of supporters and opponents on various measures, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for attendance.
• And any primary witnesses in support? Anyone else in the room? Great.
• Any, uh, folks in opposition, primary witnesses in opposition?
• Any folks in opposition, primary witnesses in opposition?
• In fact, he would call me, ...an open space. So he championed this.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill? Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill?
• We'll leave it open for absent members.
• He said, "I'll keep it open for five more minutes." Keep it open for five more minutes. Hello?

Summary: The Assembly Business and Professions Committee heard a lengthy agenda of Senate bills, with most measures ultimately advancing on party-line or broad bipartisan votes after substantial testimony and several amendments. Early in the hearing, SB 418 by Sen. Menjivar was presented as a health access bill to codify ACA nondiscrimination protections in state law and require coverage for up to a 12-month supply of medically approved hormone therapy; supporters framed it as protecting continuity of care amid federal threats, while there was no opposition testimony. The committee later also took up SB 456, which would exempt muralists from contractor licensing requirements for commissioned fine art murals; supporters said recent enforcement had chilled mural projects and harmed artists and communities, and the bill passed unanimously to Appropriations. SB 641, part of the wildfire response package, and SB 774, a sunset review bill for the Department of Real Estate and Bureau of Real Estate Appraisers, also advanced with support and no opposition. SB 775 and SB 776, sunset extensions for the behavioral sciences, psychology, and optometry boards, passed after witnesses described technical changes and the need to keep the boards operating. SB 777, dealing with abandoned cemeteries, drew testimony from local governments, industry, and counties; after amendments removed a local takeover mandate and shifted the bill toward a stakeholder working group and study process, opposition softened or was withdrawn and the bill moved forward to Local Government. SB 790, on interstate reciprocity for online higher education, generated the most debate, with supporters arguing California students and institutions need stronger consumer protections and access to the national reciprocity framework, while opponents said the bill’s terms conflicted with the existing compact; it passed as amended to Appropriations after committee members emphasized continued work on student protections. The consent calendar, including SB 389 and SB 861, was also approved, and the committee adjourned after additional vote changes were recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, um, I'm open to the possibility of just setting an implementation date that is after the primary
• However, um, I'm open to the possibility of just setting an implementation date that is after the primary
• However, um, I'm open to the possibility of just setting an implementation date that is after the primary
• However, um, I'm open to the possibility of just setting an implementation date that is after the primary
• after the primary.

Keywords: HB 534 (only one on the agenda) – 00:02:08, 958, all

Summary: The House Elections, Constitutional Amendments, and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee met to consider House Bill 534, sponsored by Rep. DJ Johnson, with a committee substitute. Johnson said the bill was the product of interim work with the Secretary of State’s office, the State Board of Elections, county clerks, KREF, and other stakeholders, and that the committee substitute folded in several election-administration changes. He highlighted provisions clarifying the timeline for felony voter-roll removals, allowing the Board of Elections to work with federal agencies to identify non-citizens on the voter rolls, creating a process for those individuals to prove citizenship and vote provisionally, and changing some KREF board appointments. He also described technical campaign-finance changes and said some provisions might still be adjusted through floor amendments. Members raised concerns about fiscal impact, timing, and voter privacy. Rep. Bivens questioned the cost and whether the bill could affect voter records; Johnson responded that the bill itself did not require new equipment or broad new spending, though a special election in a local government failure scenario could create costs. Rep. Hancock and Rep. Marzian argued the bill could create unnecessary burdens on county clerks and questioned whether there was a demonstrated problem to justify the changes. The county clerks’ association, through Rockcastle County Clerk Danetta Ford Allen, opposed the bill as introduced, warning that citizenship checks could wrongly remove eligible voters, that online ballot images or cast vote records could threaten voter privacy and facilitate vote buying, and that the emergency clause would force major changes too close to the May primary. Johnson defended the bill as a targeted response to a real local election failure and said the citizenship data sharing would be limited to name, date of birth, and Social Security number. He also explained that the ballot-image language was permissive and intended to let counties explore emerging technology, but he was open to removing that section or changing the effective date in a floor amendment. He further said he would consider preserving gubernatorial appointments to KREF with Senate oversight instead of shifting appointments to legislative leaders. After discussion, the committee voted 9-2 with one pass to report the bill out, with several members explaining yes votes as support for moving the bill forward while expecting further cleanup, and no votes citing cost, timing, and voter-access concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are primary care provider.
• We have connected to primary care.
• </c> primary care of physician practice. primary care of physician practice.
• and primary care shortage areas.
• But these primary care providers.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first handled roll call and approved the prior meeting minutes. Members discussed attendance and substitutions, then moved to the DHS commissioner’s update, which focused on New Hampshire’s Medicaid 1115 waiver and the new community re-entry initiative for people leaving correctional facilities. The presenter explained that the waiver lets the state cover certain services not normally covered under Medicaid, including substance use disorder treatment, serious mental illness services, adult dental benefits, and the new community re-entry component. She also noted that a separate youth re-entry component is federally required, with youth defined up to age 21 and foster-care-related coverage extending to age 26. The update described how the adult re-entry program works for incarcerated individuals with behavioral health needs, providing up to 45 days of pre-release services, care coordination with managed care organizations and DOC staff, telemedicine assessments, discharge prescriptions, insurance cards, and connections to community mental health, primary care, and substance use providers. For youth, the program includes more intensive case management, 30 days of pre-release services, and 30 days of post-release care coordination, with a stronger emphasis on screening, diagnosis, and holistic assessment. The presenter said New Hampshire received the adult waiver in July 2024, has implemented the program in state correctional facilities, and is beginning work at the youth center. Members and the presenter discussed why the program is structured as a waiver rather than a standard Medicaid benefit, with the explanation that CMS is allowing this as a newer policy area and that states generally pursue waivers for certain services. The chair and others emphasized the need for real cost and outcome data, and the presenter said an independent evaluator and evaluation plan are required under the 1115 waiver. Early results cited included 30 adults enrolled so far, 10 released, five youth enrolled with one released, and anecdotal early successes such as housing, employment, and better continuity of medication and treatment. The committee did not take any additional votes or formal actions beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Montes, you opened the door to the 15th and redistricting.
• Our turnout rates are quite high in both primary and general elections.
• The orange lines are primary elections. The blue lines are general elections.
• The orange lines are primary elections. The blue lines are general elections.
• General elections are higher than primary elections.

Summary: The committee held a work session on voting rights in the United States and Washington, beginning with testimony from Marissa Wright of Campaign Legal Center and David Montes of the ACLU of Washington. They described the federal Voting Rights Act’s main protections—preclearance, vote suppression, and vote dilution—and argued that Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich have weakened those tools. They said Washington should consider stronger state-level protections, including a preclearance program and broader safeguards against discriminatory voting practices. Members asked about Washington’s history of discrimination, voter roll purges, noncitizen registration, and remedies under the Washington Voting Rights Act, including ranked-choice voting and district-based systems. The committee then heard from the Office of Equity and several commissions, which described their roles in advising state government and working with communities. They focused on the immigration sub-cabinet created under Executive Order 2509, saying it is intended to improve coordination across agencies, the legislature, the courts, and community organizations on issues such as data privacy, language access, health care, education, and accountability under the Keep Washington Working Act. Members asked about the use of NGOs, accountability for KWW violations, and the sub-cabinet’s goals, and the panel said the effort is meant to help government respond more quickly and collaboratively while centering immigrant, disability, LGBTQ, and other communities. The final panel was from the University of Washington Elections Database Project, which presented data on vote-by-mail ballot challenges, cures, and rejections from 2020 to 2024. They reported that about 1.5% of ballots are signature-challenged in most elections, roughly 60% of challenged ballots are cured, and overall rejection rates are about 1% in general elections and 1.5% in primaries. The researchers said voters of color, younger voters, and some tribal-area voters experience higher rejection rates, and that differences appear tied to signature mismatch, language access, ballot timing, and familiarity with the system. In the last panel, Maria Fernandez and Vicki Frausto of EIA described voter education and civic engagement work in Yakima County and Sunnyside, including concerns about intimidation, language barriers, signature mismatch, and at-large election systems; they said stronger Washington Voting Rights Act protections would help communities elect candidates of choice. No votes were taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill?
• I'll keep my opening brief.
• Any primary witnesses in opposition to the bill?
• Please open it for absent members.

Summary: The Assembly Business and Professions Committee heard a full agenda of bills focused on reproductive health, professional licensing and sunset reviews, consumer protection, and business regulation. Early testimony centered on AB 260, which would protect access to medication abortion, mifepristone, and telehealth reproductive care in California; supporters emphasized state protections against federal restrictions, while an opponent argued the bill removed safety safeguards. The committee also heard AB 714 on closing a loophole in regulation of low-cost commercial driving schools, AB 968 on allowing pharmacists to prescribe non-hormonal contraception, AB 671 on streamlining restaurant permitting, AB 1027 on strengthening cannabis product testing oversight, AB 1271 on broadband pricing and speed transparency, and AB 1332 on narrowly allowing medicinal cannabis shipments for seriously ill patients. Several sunset bills were also taken up, including AB 1482 on animal shelter and breeder transparency, AB 1501 on the Podiatric Medical Board and Physician Assistant Board, AB 1502 on the Veterinary Medical Board, AB 1503 on the Board of Pharmacy, and AB 1504 on the Massage Therapy Council. Testimony was largely in support of the measures, with many bills drawing co-sponsors or support from industry, consumer, or professional groups. AB 1503 generated the most sustained opposition, with nurses, physicians, and drug industry representatives objecting to expanded pharmacy technician ratios, standard-of-care language, and therapeutic interchange authority; supporters argued the bill would modernize pharmacy practice and expand access. AB 1504 also drew mixed testimony, with massage therapy groups supporting continuation of the council but raising concerns about proposed public records and governance provisions. AB 1271 drew a policy dispute over whether broadband reporting requirements duplicated federal FCC processes, while supporters argued California needed its own consumer-facing data and complaint system. After quorum was established later in the hearing, the committee began taking roll-call votes. AB 1271, AB 1332, AB 1482, AB 1501, and AB 1502 were all reported out on due-pass motions, with AB 1271 amended and the others generally amended or as introduced as noted. Earlier bills including AB 260, AB 671, AB 714, AB 968, and AB 1027 also received motions and were approved once the quorum was present. The chair repeatedly noted the lack of quorum during the hearing, but once one was secured, the committee completed votes on the agenda items and advanced the measures to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Denise helped me get to various locations to find a primary care doctor for me, but no primary care doctor
• finding a primary care provider.
• a primary care provider.
• I think all of us have experience with how difficult it is to find a primary care provider, get an open
• And what would an investment in primary care... What would an investment in primary care look like?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health held a hybrid hearing on a wide range of bills focused on patient safety, workforce development, health equity, and access to care. A major portion of the hearing centered on H. 2362/S. 1491, which would require health care providers to offer trained chaperones for sensitive exams. Sponsors and supporters said the bill is a common-sense safeguard prompted by cases of physician sexual abuse, and survivors gave emotional testimony describing grooming, isolation, and abuse during exams when no chaperone was present. Support also came from a health services researcher, a physician, and a RAINN representative, all arguing that trained chaperones and clearer documentation would improve transparency and protect patients. Committee members asked about clarifying who may serve as a chaperone and whether the bill would apply to other clinicians such as PTs and OTs. The committee also heard testimony on H. 2401/S. 1485, which would require explicit informed consent for certain educational exams performed on unconscious patients. The bill’s supporters said patients should know in advance if students or physicians will conduct non-medically necessary exams while they are under anesthesia, and that the measure would protect survivors from retraumatization. The hearing then moved to H. 2537, a primary care access bill. Health Care for All, the Massachusetts Medical Society, pediatric and internal medicine physicians, and a patient advocate described long waits, provider shortages, and difficulty finding primary care, especially for low-income people and people of color. They supported the bill’s proposed primary care spending target, payment reforms, Medicaid graduate medical education funding, and a commercial payment floor for health centers. Another set of bills addressed workforce and safety issues. H. 2397/S. 1593 would establish a nursing workforce center; nursing leaders said Massachusetts should make the current workforce council permanent to support data collection, apprenticeships, and long-term planning for the state’s largest health care workforce. H. 2396/S. 1535 would require safe patient handling and mobility programs in health facilities; nurses described serious injuries from lifting patients and said better equipment and programs would reduce staff injuries and improve patient outcomes. H. 2501/S. 1505 on LGBTQ+ health disparities drew support from a medical student and Doctors for America, who urged collection of sexual orientation and gender identity data to improve care and school outcomes. Finally, H. 2448/S. 1522 on patient safety and equitable access to care drew strong support from nursing organizations and individual nurses who described unsafe staffing, burnout, and patient harm, while the Massachusetts Association of Behavioral Health Systems opposed the bill as redundant for psychiatric facilities already regulated by the Department of Mental Health.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for attendance.
• Are there any primary witnesses or others in support?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition? Any other opposition?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition? Any other opposition?
• Any primary witnesses in support or other folks in support? Any opposition, primary or otherwise?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for attendance.
• And any primary witnesses in support? Anyone else in the room? Great.
• Any, uh, folks in opposition, primary witnesses in opposition?
• Any folks in opposition, primary witnesses in opposition?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition? ...Any additional folks in opposition?

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee met on January 22, 2026, for its regular order hearing and suspense-file hearing. In regular order, the committee approved consent-calendar bills AB 683, AB 763, AB 1126, and AB 1278 on unanimous due-pass motions, and AB 34 and AB 442 on a second unanimous due-pass motion. The committee then heard and advanced several bills, including AB 35, which would create an APA exemption for Proposition 4-funded programs to speed implementation of water, wildfire, energy-storage, and grid-support projects; AB 748, establishing pre-approved housing programs for local agencies; AB 939, allowing immediate transfer of certain affordable homeownership units to qualified nonprofit housing organizations; AB 643, adding a narrow organic-waste-derived agricultural fertilizer product to SB 1383 procurement options; and AB 96, removing the high school diploma requirement for certified Medi-Cal peer support specialists. Testimony on these bills was largely supportive, with sponsors and coalition representatives emphasizing reduced delays, lower costs, and improved housing, environmental, or behavioral-health outcomes. The Department of Finance offered general budget comments but no bill-specific positions. The committee voted the bills out, with AB 643 and AB 96 receiving no recorded opposition in the transcript and AB 939 passing with some members noting support and interest in coauthoring. The committee also received a presentation-only discussion of AB 1091, a proposal to authorize eight-letter specialty license plates, which the author said could generate revenue for rural programs such as the Williamson Act; the bill was not acted on at that time. After public comment, the committee moved to the suspense-file hearing on 53 bills. Using a substituted motion for due-pass and due-pass-with-amendments items, the committee held some bills and advanced many others, often with amendments that narrowed scope, deleted provisions, or required reports or studies. Bills held in committee included AB 405, AB 298, AB 333, AB 296, AB 1091, AB 1241, and AB 577, among others. The committee reported moving 43 bills to the Assembly floor, with several on A roll calls and others on B roll calls or with amendments, and noted that amendment language would be posted later online.

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing no other witnesses, primary opposition? Anyone in the room, primary opposition?
• We will keep the roll open for absent members. Thank you very much.
• So it's open for anyone? No, but we'd be open to working with you on that. Okay.
• Any primary opposition to this measure, please come forward.
• Primary opposition to this measure, would you please step forward?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He will be filling the law enforcement opening appointment.
• I am a primary care doctor, trained in internal medicine.
• I am a primary care doctor, trained in internal medicine.
• I diagnose and manage substance use disorder in my primary care practice.
• So if people are open to AA or NA, I think it's a great resource.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm open to that. Again, I didn't pick the number.
• If it could be lower, I'm open to that.
• But it's certainly open to it being lower if possible.
• But it certainly open to it being lower if possible.
• primary.

Summary: The House Insurance Committee met on April 15 and first considered HB 909, which would require commercial health insurance coverage for behavioral health crisis services. Representative Spell and Office of Behavioral Health interim assistant secretary Dr. Holly Howitt described the Louisiana crisis response system, the goal of reducing emergency room and 911 use, and the need to expand provider participation beyond Medicaid. A technical amendment and a stakeholder-driven amendment allowing insurers to require documentation of crisis, medical necessity, and follow-up plan were adopted, and the bill was reported as amended with support cards from several health care and local government entities. The committee then advanced HB 1151, which changes investment limits for domestic insurers, especially life insurers, by capping equity holdings and aligning the rules with solvency concerns. After questions about whether the bill would increase profits at consumers’ expense, the author and Department of Insurance staff explained it was intended to provide guardrails and keep insurers solvent; the bill was reported favorably. HB 1154, dealing with prior authorization for certain generic medications, also received technical and substantive amendments. The bill would generally eliminate prior authorization for non-opioid generics, with a $250 wholesale acquisition cost cap and physician-specialty exceptions; it was reported as amended after support testimony from the Louisiana Dermatological Society and other health groups. HB 869, which sought coverage for injectable drugs used for glucose control or weight loss, prompted extended debate over cost, obesity, and long-term savings. Several members raised concerns about premium increases and the large fiscal note, while the author argued the bill was preventive and could save money over time. Representative Jordan proposed a 25% coverage amendment, but the committee declined to take up the substantive amendment that day, and the bill was voluntarily deferred to the next meeting. Later, the committee reported HB 1196 favorably, clarifying that screening colonoscopies remain screening even if polyps are found, and HB 1176 favorably, restoring Medicare Advantage coverage for certain integrative cancer care services. The committee also heard HB 771, which would have changed Medicare coordination rules for retirees who return to state employment, but staff explained the issue is governed by federal CMS rules and preemption concerns; the bill was voluntarily deferred so the author could review the governing law. HB 751, dealing with term life insurance disclosures, was likewise voluntarily deferred after the author said more work was needed and noted concerns about existing law and consumer understanding. At the end of the meeting, the committee also deferred HB 920 and HB 1199 to the following week and briefly stood at ease before moving on to other business.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was on the primary ballot as it passed the House. Single subject as it passed the Senate.
• It was on the primary ballot as it passed the House. It was moved to the general ballot.
• We changed it from primary to general because of the percentage of voters.
• But I'm certainly open to discuss. To the primary election. But I'm certainly open to discussing.
• Change the primary to the general deal? I remember there being conversation about it.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The conference committee on House Concurrent Resolution 4007 met to discuss whether the proposed constitutional amendment on single-subject ballot measures should appear on the primary or general election ballot. House members explained the change to the general ballot as a way to reach more voters and improve turnout, while others noted the prime sponsor preferred the primary ballot to avoid placing too many measures on one ballot and creating voter fatigue or a blanket “no” response. Members expressed mixed views. Some favored the general election because constitutional amendments should be decided by the largest possible electorate; others worried that multiple ballot measures could affect how voters evaluate each proposal, especially with other measures such as the 60% amendment and term-limit-related changes also pending. The committee also discussed prior sessions’ experience with combining multiple resolutions and the decision this year to separate them so each could stand on its own merits. No vote was taken. Representative Steiner asked for more time to consider the issue, and the committee agreed to continue the discussion at a later meeting. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we've had, you know, a primary election, we've had a May election, we're about to do a primary runoff
• The door is supposed to be open. That is what the law says. Gaps. The door is supposed to be open.
• By making it partisan, it will force you to have a primary and a primary runoff, correct?
• The state funds our primary election, and the biggest cost we have in our primary election is around
• As the primary person responsible for the Republican primary elections, my most consequential role is

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Are there any primary witnesses in opposition?
• Any primary witnesses in opposition?
• Open.
• It requires an open bidding process.
• It requires an open bidding process.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard a long agenda of health bills focused on access to preventive care, behavioral health, hospital services, and patient safety. Early items included AB 554, which would expand and protect access to HIV prevention drugs like PrEP, including injectable forms and coverage protections; supporters said it would shore up access amid federal threats, while insurers opposed it as a costly benefit mandate. AB 577 would limit insurer and PBM practices that steer medications away from physician offices and require more transparency and patient consent; doctors and patient advocates supported it, while health plans and insurers warned it could raise drug costs and disrupt specialty pharmacy networks. AB 546 would require coverage for portable HEPA purifiers for vulnerable enrollees during declared emergencies, especially wildfire smoke events, with support from air quality and public health groups and opposition from insurers concerned about benefit expansion and cost. The committee also heard AB 224, which would codify California’s updated essential health benefits benchmark plan after a public review process, adding infertility treatment, hearing aids, and durable medical equipment if approved by CMS for the 2027 plan year. DMHC said the state had completed the review and needed legislation to meet federal timing, and the measure drew broad support. AB 1032 would require plans and insurers to reimburse up to 12 additional behavioral health visits for enrollees in wildfire-affected counties for a limited period after an emergency; supporters argued it would fill gaps in trauma care after disasters, while insurers said existing parity and continuity-of-care rules already address the issue and that the bill could create inequities. AB 849 would require trained chaperones for sensitive ultrasound exams and training on how to observe and intervene; it was backed by a survivor and patient advocates, with hospitals and health districts raising staffing concerns. Later, AB 1196 would direct the Department of Public Health to update outdated rules requiring three surgeons for certain heart surgeries using cardiopulmonary bypass; supporters said the rule no longer reflects modern practice and strains staffing, while cardiology representatives had no formal opposition but wanted to review amendments. AB 1113 would codify a right to wear a mask for health reasons in public spaces, with support from disability and public health groups. AB 1386 sought to add perinatal care to the list of basic hospital services, prompting testimony about maternity ward closures, workforce shortages, and rural access; the author said the bill would be amended further and that the committee would need to revisit timelines and implementation details. The committee also heard AB 1429, which would address Kaiser’s repeated mental health parity violations and improve access to behavioral health care, though the transcript cuts off before any action on that bill is shown. Several bills were moved with motions and seconds, but many were held for quorum; AB 1196, AB 1113, and AB 1386 were among the measures advanced to a roll call or held on call, and the committee repeatedly noted that final votes would occur when quorum was available.

Transcript Highlights:

• Long mentioned primary prevention.
• Because the one FTE for primary prevention is not getting it done.
• Long mentioned primary prevention, our primary prevention, right now, it used to be through FCDB, we
• Because the one FTE for primary prevention is not getting it done.
• We opened a four-bedroom center, and that's nothing for them, right?

Summary: The committee held a panel discussion on Florida’s domestic violence system, focusing on how state and federally funded services are coordinated, the role of the Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence (FPEDV), the Florida Domestic Violence Collaborative, DCF, and certified domestic violence centers. Members reviewed the post-2020 restructuring after the dissolution of FCADV, the current hotline, legal services, training, and technical assistance contracts, and the Legislature’s recent work on lethality assessments under SB 1224. Panelists also described prevention, shelter, counseling, child advocacy, and legal support services, along with the statewide network of 41 certified centers serving all 67 counties. Testimony highlighted both collaboration and tension. FPEDV and Women in Distress described overlapping training and technical assistance roles, but FPEDV said its relationship with DCF has been difficult and at times obstructive, while DCF said communication and coordination are ongoing. Women in Distress and other providers emphasized the importance of direct services, the statewide hotline, injunction assistance, child welfare co-located advocates, and prevention programs. Several members asked about funding flows, certification, and whether the current structure is sufficient for rural counties; witnesses said federal FVPSA funds are formula-based, DCF contracts directly with centers, and rural programs face staffing and fundraising challenges that limit beds and services. A major portion of the discussion centered on the lethality assessment work group and implementation of the new statewide tool. FDLE explained that the work group concluded the Maryland model was copyrighted and costly to replicate exactly, so Florida adopted a statutory assessment that is not evidence-based in the same way, with training available online and 46 of about 400 law enforcement agencies having completed it so far. Senators raised concerns about multiple assessments, redacted police reports, and whether the tool will be useful without better coordination and data collection. Witnesses also discussed rising domestic violence, teen dating violence, and strangulation cases, with providers reporting increased demand, full shelters, and greater use of hotels and mobile crisis responses. No formal votes or actions were taken.