We had to promulgate regulations.
We had to update data systems to be able to collect that data, but we've now done that.
month in order to have that data matched with EDD data and really finally get some of the verified..
regulations we had to update data systems to be able to collect that data but we've now done that we've
that we will be transferring that data over to the cradle to career data system later this month in

Keywords: 987, senate, all

CA

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee Mar 3rd, 2026

Transcript Highlights:

Second, legislators must approach the regulation of personal data with the full range of human rights
And so you can think about the general data protection regulation.
If we're serious about reform, I think we do have to both regulate how police access data, but actually
It wouldn't just regulate access, which is insufficient when police can just get data from apps or data
commercial data.

Summary: The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational hearing on California privacy in the age of mass surveillance, with members framing the issue as urgent in light of AI, data brokers, workplace monitoring, and government access to commercially collected data. Opening remarks emphasized California’s long-standing privacy tradition and concern for impacts on Latino, immigrant, LGBTQ+, and other vulnerable communities. The committee heard from experts from UC Law San Francisco, UC Berkeley, UC Irvine, UC Davis, and a worker-organizer from Amazon, followed by a journalist from 404 Media. Nicole Ozer reviewed the history of California’s constitutional right to privacy, tracing it to the 1972 ballot measure and arguing that lawmakers should use that right more fully to operationalize stronger protections against surveillance. Deirdre Mulligan described how surveillance capitalism has expanded through physical-world instrumentation, biometrics, connected devices, and AI, and argued that notice-and-consent models are inadequate because people cannot meaningfully understand or control how data is collected, inferred, shared, and used. Ari Waldman focused on disparate harms to marginalized communities, including queer people, survivors of domestic violence, and people seeking reproductive care, and called for stronger regulation, limits on data collection and sharing, and greater accountability for companies and government access to data. Josh Black testified about Amazon’s workplace surveillance, including handheld devices, time-off-task monitoring, hidden cameras, and driver-facing AI cameras, saying the system pressures workers to skip breaks, rush safety training, and discourages organizing. He said the surveillance is used to increase productivity and suppress union activity. Committee members asked about data retention, injury reporting, cash as a privacy-protective payment option, and whether workers truly consent to surveillance as a condition of employment. Jason Kebler described how police departments adopt commercial surveillance tools through pilot programs and vendor relationships, often without public debate, citing license plate readers and networked camera systems that can spread data across jurisdictions. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with discussion of the need for clearer definitions, stronger enforcement, and continued legislative action.

MA

Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session

Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions Jun 21st, 2026 at 02:00 pm

Transcript Highlights:

I went through the data quickly because data is a funny thing in this debate.
Are you... do you have data?
We don't even have the data. There's a huge data gap. This is not a conclusion.
The CCC has a lot of data around the regulated... ...market problems.
The CCC has a lot of data around the regulated market problems and concerns, and none of those are any

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-10, House Bill 5002, titled “An Act to Restore a Sensible Marijuana Policy,” which would repeal Massachusetts’ adult-use cannabis legalization framework. Chairs Brendan Crighton and Kate Hogan outlined the Article 48 initiative process and explained that the committee is gathering testimony for a report to the legislature. The hearing was organized into expert, proponent, opponent, and public testimony, with written testimony accepted through March 27. The first witness, Jessica Trow of MassBudget, testified in opposition to repeal and focused on cannabis-related revenue and social equity. She said legalization has generated nearly $2 billion statewide since adult-use sales began, with revenue flowing through the Marijuana Regulation Fund, the state sales tax, and local taxes and fees. She emphasized that funds support public health, the Cannabis Control Commission’s social equity work, the Cannabis Social Equity Fund, and municipal budgets, and argued that legalization has created pathways for communities harmed by prohibition. The petition’s spokesperson, Wendy Wakeman, argued in favor of repeal, saying legalization has worsened public health, safety, and quality of life, citing higher potency, addiction, youth use, impaired driving, workplace positives, and black-market concerns. Committee members questioned her about the data sources, the will of the voters, the role of paid signature gatherers, and the petition’s funding, including out-of-state and dark-money concerns. Opponents of the initiative then testified that repeal would harm a regulated industry that has created jobs, tax revenue, and social equity opportunities. Caroline Pino of STEM, Kristen Rogers of Levia, Judith Ledbetter of Project De-Stigmatized Healthcare, and Armani White of Firehouse Dispensary/EON described their businesses, community investments, and personal reliance on cannabis, and warned that repeal would push consumers back to the illicit market and undermine equity programs. In public testimony, Lucas Thayer of the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition and Jeff Rawson, a chemist and consumer protection advocate, also opposed the measure, arguing that regulated cannabis is safer than unregulated products and that repeal would damage investments and public safety. The hearing ended after the public testimony, and the committee voted to close the hearing.

FL

Florida 2025 Regular Session

October 7, 2025 - 12:30 PM

Transcript Highlights:

ALL MODELS CAN ANALYZE AI MODELS CAN ANALYZE DATA QUICKLY LARGE VOLUMES OF DATA QUICKLY.
OF INSURANCE REGULATION?
IT ON A REGULATION BASIS.
YOUR AI SYSTEM WOULD INCLUDE ENSURING THAT YOU HAVE COMPLIANCE WITH THAT DATA PRIVACY OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS
THE OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION RECEIVES THAT DATA FROM INSURERS IN TERMS OF THE DENIALS AND IN TERMS

Video & Transcript : 'data regulation' :

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Kentucky 2026 Regular Session

Kentucky 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Kentucky 2026 Regular Session

Kentucky 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Hawaii Senate Floor Meeting

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session

Florida 2025 Regular Session