Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? Representative Bosley. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Any further discussion? Representative Sharp. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Any discussion? Representative Sharp. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair.
• I have a copy of the bill with me to discuss.
• Any discussion on the amendment? Seeing none, although... Seeing none.

Committee: House Crime and Public Safety

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? We do have some discussion or questions.
• Is there any discussion or questions?
• Is there any discussion on that?
• Uh do we have any discussion discussion discussion or<00:20:46.400><c> question?
• Is there any discussion?

Committee: House State Government

Keywords: Consideration of SB 70 00:03:41 Consideration of SB 85 00:13:04 Consideration of SB 29 00:16:56 Consideration of SB 226 00:23:09, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Representative Jeff Ehlers, District 21, Meridian, to discuss House Bill 773.
• Is there any further discussion?
• I'm Representative Jeff Ehlers, District 21, Meridian, to discuss House Bill 787.
• Is there any further discussion?
• Any further discussion?

Committee: House Business

Summary: The House Business Committee heard several bills, beginning with House Bill 529, which would let insured Idahoans negotiate a lower cash price for covered medical services and have that amount count toward deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums. Sponsors described the bill as a patient-centered cost-saving measure and offered friendly amendments to clarify terms and make the bill operational. Testimony included support from a policy advocate and a physician who warned the bill could lead insurers to lower reimbursement rates over time. After questions about prior authorization, billing, and fraud concerns, the committee voted to send HB 529 to general orders. The committee then advanced House Bill 775, which would allow a bankruptcy debtor’s one exempt motor vehicle to qualify for the exemption regardless of whether it is operable, registered, or insured. The sponsor said the bill addresses cases where a debtor’s only transportation was denied exemption because the vehicle was not currently functional. After brief questioning, the committee voted to send HB 775 to the floor with a due pass recommendation. House Bill 773, a code cleanup measure removing obsolete provisions related to corporate credit unions and cemetery statutes, also received a due pass recommendation. House Bill 787, which merges the Board of Podiatry into the Board of Medicine and moves some podiatry rules into statute, was likewise sent to the floor with a due pass recommendation. The committee then took up House Bill 790, a contested bill creating a voluntary certification for qualified interior designers to sign and seal limited non-structural, non-seismic interior plans. Supporters said it would reduce costs and delays and help retain Idaho graduates, while opponents from the architecture profession argued the bill lacked clarity, could create unintended consequences, and should not bypass architect oversight. After extensive testimony and debate, the committee voted to send HB 790 to the floor with a due pass recommendation and adjourned at the floor deadline.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we had a robust discussion, as you can imagine.
• Is there any discussion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, say nay.
• Is there any discussion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, say nay.
• Is there any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor, say aye. I. I'll oppose. Say nay.
• There's been discussion that the cost associated with these reviews is prohibitive.

Summary: The Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee held a Friday morning hearing with several House bills and then took executive action on three measures. In executive session, the committee voted do pass on Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2242, Substitute House Bill 2152, and Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2168, sending the first two to Rules and the overdose-mapping bill to Ways and Means. The committee also waived the five-day notice rule for several bills on the agenda. Public hearings focused on hospital inspections, continuing care retirement communities, radiologic technologist supervision, music therapy licensure, nursing regulation, ambulance billing after motor vehicle accidents, and EMT recertification. Representative Macri presented HB 2577 to require hospital inspections at least every 18 months, allow limited pauses during emergencies, and clarify when CMS or accrediting-body surveys may substitute for state inspections; DOH supported the bill, citing JLARC recommendations, while many people signed in opposed. Macri also presented Second Substitute HB 2384, which would require actuarial analysis review for certain CCRCs; OIC supported the transparency goal, while CCRC representatives opposed the added cost, though residents and association witnesses argued the oversight would protect seniors and their life savings. Representative Engel’s HB 2113 drew strong support from radiology, hospital, and provider groups for allowing virtual direct supervision for IV contrast procedures and aligning state law with CMS practice. Representative Ryu’s HB 1187 would bar ambulance services from sending motor-vehicle-accident medical debt to collections for 120 days; she described a personal experience with an ambulance collection issue, and the hearing was closed after no testifiers appeared. Representative Reed’s HB 2363 would let music therapy applicants practice under supervision for up to six months while exam results are processed; music therapy witnesses said it would prevent workforce gaps. Representative Simmons’ HB 2339 would update nursing title and transcript requirements and allow the board to issue interim permits directly, with the Board of Nursing and ARNP groups calling it a technical cleanup. HB 2540 would extend EMT recertification intervals to six years for long-tenured EMTs, and firefighters supported it as an administrative simplification without changing training requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there discussion, Representative Barnard? Sure.
• Any other discussions, Representative Barnard?
• Any other discussions, Representative Barnard?
• Is there discussion? Go ahead, please. Yes, Madam Chair. Brief discussion on this.
• With a do pass recommendation, and there are discussions. Okay, we are done with that discussion.

Summary: The Technology, Economic Development, and Veterans Committee first met in executive session on House Bills 2157, 2351, 2365, 2357, and 2446. Staff briefed proposed substitutes and amendments for each bill. HB 2157, concerning high-risk AI systems, was amended to exempt activities regulated by the Fair Credit Reporting Act and covered entities under HIPAA; members discussed balancing consumer protections with flexibility for developers and deployers. HB 2351, addressing protections for emergency responders and emergency operations, was described as clarifying definitions and procedures, including a mental health crisis defense and changes to emergency operation zone notifications; some members raised concerns about deconfliction and implementation details. HB 2365, on digital equity, was amended with several definitional and data-sharing proposals, though some amendments were rejected over fiscal concerns. HB 2357, creating the Washington Division of Civil Air Patrol within the Military Department, passed without amendment. HB 2446, on developing a quantum technology industry strategy, was amended to extend the strategy deadline, broaden who Commerce may contract with, and correct terminology; members noted concerns about industry involvement in the strategic plan and fiscal impacts. All five bills were reported out of committee with do pass recommendations, with recorded votes of 8-5 on HB 2157, HB 2351, and HB 2365, unanimous support for HB 2357, and 12-1 for HB 2446. The committee then held a public hearing on HB 2523, which would make the community reinvestment program ongoing, require periodic updates and reporting, and direct a study of fund distribution and use. Testifiers from workforce boards, tribal programs, reentry services, community organizations, and Commerce described successful uses of the program for job training, reentry, small business support, legal services, and economic mobility, and urged the bill’s passage. Some suggested strengthening accountability, reporting, and access for new organizations. Commerce staff said the program has served more than 190,000 people and supported over 400 organizations, and asked for technical adjustments to keep administrative costs low. The bill was then closed for hearing. The committee also heard HB 2606, which would revise the Office of Privacy and Data Protection’s duties and performance measures, remove some reporting requirements, and add review of agency AI projects. The prime sponsor described it as a “stay-in-your-lane” cleanup bill responding to JLARC recommendations, and the state chief privacy officer testified in support, saying the office could implement the changes within existing resources. After questions about local government support and public resources, the hearing on HB 2606 was closed and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? I think we have some... Okay, Senator Wright.
• to discuss this publicly in this forum before the budget is put together.
• Senator's discussion? Senator Smith. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• to discuss this publicly in this forum before the budget is put together.
• Discussion? Thank you very much. Thank you. I did have, oh, one moment.

Bills: S0054 , S0156 , S0296 , S0298

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice

Keywords: cognitive function, psychotropic drugs, violent offenders, autopsy procedures, medical records, school safety, public records, open government, sunshine law, victims of dating violence, domestic violence, address confidentiality program, confidential address, voter registration, voting records, elections, supervisor of elections, Department of State, Attorney General, privacy

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice heard a presentation on the Governor’s fiscal year 2026-2027 public safety budget, which totals $117.4 billion overall and includes $8.2 billion for the public safety silo. Caitlin Dawkins of the Governor’s Office outlined proposed funding and reductions across FDLE, DJJ, DOC, and related justice agencies. Agency heads then presented major budget requests: FDLE sought funding for fentanyl enforcement, a career offender registry unit, a missing persons alert system upgrade, alcohol testing modernization, officer wellness, criminal intelligence, and illegal immigration-related intelligence work; DJJ requested funds for the Florida Scholars Academy, uniforms, residential services, a new Broward detention center, and facility repairs; and DOC requested major increases for officer pay, 500 additional FTE, facility construction and maintenance, communications technology, inmate health care, pharmaceuticals, and food service. Members questioned FDLE about the scope of immigration-related enforcement and public records burdens, and DOC about staffing, inmate health care, substance use treatment, prison capacity, and whether prison beds were being used for immigration detainees. A public commenter also urged attention to basic conditions in prisons, including clothing, food, medical care, and facility maintenance. The committee then considered several bills. CS/SB 156, the Jason Rayner Act, was presented as a response to the killing of Daytona Beach Officer Jason Rayner and would clarify that a person may not use violence against an officer performing official duties, while also increasing penalties related to manslaughter involving law enforcement. An amendment conforming the bill’s language was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably after debate and a roll call vote. CS/SB 54, dealing with substances affecting cognitive function and law enforcement access to certain medical records, also received an amendment clarifying that only records relevant to an investigation of a violent offender may be furnished; the amended bill was then reported favorably. The committee next heard CS/SB 296, the Haven Act, which would direct a study of a secure web-based alert system for domestic violence victims so they can contact 911 without alerting an abuser, and would expand the Address Confidentiality Program to include dating violence victims. Testimony from advocates and survivors strongly supported the measure, and the bill was reported favorably. Its companion, CS/SB 298, a public records exemption for victims of domestic and dating violence in the Address Confidentiality Program, was also reported favorably. The meeting concluded after the committee approved all four bills and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're not—the block of text you're discussing, lines 42 to 49, is not new statutory language in its
• Again, the block of text you're discussing, as currently written, has been interpreted by the Florida
• Representative, thank you for giving me a call last night so we could potentially have a discussion."
• "Thank you for giving me a call last night so we could potentially have a discussion.
• And given what we just discussed, how would your bill prevent something like that from happening here

Summary: The Civil Justice and Claims Subcommittee met to consider one measure, PCS for HB 289, which would amend Florida’s wrongful death statute to allow parents of an unborn child to recover damages for the child’s wrongful death and to include parents in the definition of survivors. The sponsor said the bill is intended to give parents a remedy when a wrongful act, negligence, breach of contract, or breach of warranty causes the loss of an unborn child, while also preserving existing protections for lawful medical care and the mother. Members questioned the bill extensively about the meaning of “survivors,” whether it could reach surrogacy situations, friends or family who assist someone in obtaining abortion care, paternity issues, and whether abusive or unqualified fathers could bring claims. The sponsor repeatedly said the bill is limited to parents, does not authorize suits against the mother or lawful medical providers, and would still require the normal wrongful death procedures, including appointment of a personal representative. He cited Duncan v. Flynn as the case holding that current law does not allow recovery for the death of an unborn child. Representative Gottlieb offered an amendment modeled on criminal-law protections, aimed at expanding explicit immunity for a pregnant woman and for persons providing medical care or abortion-related conduct with consent. Supporters of the amendment said it would better align civil law with criminal protections; opponents argued it was overly broad and could shield unlicensed conduct. The amendment failed on a voice vote. Public testimony was divided, with supporters from pro-life and Catholic organizations backing the bill and some asking to remove the health care exemption, while opponents from ACLU, Equality Florida, Planned Parenthood affiliates, Florida Voice for the Unborn, Voices of Florida, and others warned the bill could chill reproductive health care, increase liability for doctors and hospitals, and invite lawsuits involving surrogates, family members, and abortion-related care. In debate, supporters said the bill simply recognizes the value of unborn children and gives parents a remedy for wrongful loss, while opponents argued it could create unintended consequences in family law, surrogacy, IVF, and medical practice, and could empower abusive partners or rapists. After closing remarks, the committee voted 13 yeas and 3 nays to report PCS for HB 289 favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you want to discuss HB498? Yes, sir. You don't mind? I'll sit right here.
• But if what could happen is something could come up that would be discussed.
• It's a great discussion. I appreciate it, but how is this different than DHR?
• I know we discussed an amendment. ...an amendment.
• I know we discussed this earlier and I discussed it when we had the other infrastructure bill.

Bills: SB324 , HB395 , HB222 , HB310 , HB285 , HB144 , HB251 , HB380

Committee: House Judiciary

Keywords: Morgan County, judge of probate, legal qualifications, equity jurisdiction, constitutional amendment, campaign finance, electronic notifications, civil penalties, Fair Campaign Practices Act, Secretary of State, sex offenders, treatment programs, electronic media, post office box restrictions, Class C felony, parole, probation, human cloning, criminal penalties, embryo

Transcript Highlights:

• Today's agenda is part 2 of our discussion of performance measurement in criminal in the criminal justice
• First, we have the state courts here to discuss how they use data to manage court workload and measure
• And I thank you for the opportunity to come and talk today and continue your discussion about how we
• The been discussion discussion debate well. >> I think that we might need to look at the demographics
• Data has received and passed on to the previously discussed ID.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• President, we have a big discussion.
• Any other discussion?
• </c> thoughtful discussion. It's a long one. thoughtful discussion. It's a long one.
• Any other discussion on adoption?
• Any other discussion on adoption? Seeing Any other discussion on adoption?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? Seeing none, I shall call for the vote, Chair. I vote yes. Senator Fukunaga, I.
• So any discussion on that?
• Any discussion? Not a question for the committee on Transportation and Culture and the Arts.
• Any discussion? Same recommendation for AEN. Any discussion? Chair: Votes.
• I can appreciate the discussion, I can appreciate the reasons why we're doing what we're doing.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing covered three measures on the 1 p.m. agenda. SB 817, relating to out-of-state offices, drew support from DBEDT and several community groups, with questions focused on the requested funding, staffing level, whether the office would expand broadly, and whether the Philippines was being singled out. SB 1578, relating to international affairs, received support from DBEDT and the Attorney General, with the chair noting the bill was intended to help DBEDT analyze Hawaii’s international partnerships and plan next steps. SB 1639, establishing Hawaii Beach Day, had limited testimony and was moved along without substantive debate. SB 582, relating to DBEDT, was also heard with support from state agencies and a few individuals, and was described as a vehicle for organizational and funding changes affecting the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, including moving some positions and programming to general funds and narrowing the works-of-art special fund's uses. The committees then took up recommendations. All three measures were advanced with amendments: SB 817 was amended to include technical changes and a defective effective date of July 1, 2025; SB 1578 was amended to address the Attorney General’s concerns, make the commission subject to Senate confirmation, and add technical changes and a defective date; and SB 582 was amended to incorporate provisions from SB 1577, clarify SFCA authority over performing arts, shift SFCA positions and programming to general funds, restrict the works-of-art special fund, and add a defective date. Each committee voted to adopt the chair’s recommendations, with no reservations or no votes noted in the Transportation and Culture and the Arts committee and only Senator Dela Cruz voting no on SB 817 there; in the Economic Development and Tourism committee, SB 817 passed with Senator Kim in reservation and Senator Awa voting no, while SB 1578 and SB 582 passed with Senator Awa voting no. The later 10:00 a.m. agenda hearing focused on SB 1589, relating to the stadium development special fund, and SB 1629, relating to taxation. On SB 1589, the Attorney General asked for clarification of section 3, particularly the proviso about remaining monies lapsing to the general fund if the New Aloha Stadium Entertainment District is terminated before completion; the interim stadium manager explained the bill would allow spending of $49.5 million already in the special fund for consultant, construction management, quality assurance, and contingency costs. On SB 1629, testimony was sharply divided: supporters, including film industry and business representatives, said the measure would support local film production, restore prior GET treatment, and help attract studio development; opponents argued the bill was vague, overly favorable to a specific project, and lacked oversight and accountability. The hearing ended with extensive questioning about whether the bill was effectively tailored to a particular studio project and how it related to other film tax credit measures, but no final committee action on SB 1589 or SB 1629 was included in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> days a tremendous amount of discussion days a tremendous amount of discussion about<00:07:22.880
• I wasn't in part of any of the discussion. discussion. discussion.
• Further discussion.
• </c> discussion. All those in favor say I. discussion. All those in favor say I.
• </c> discussed. Thank you chair friends. discussed. Thank you chair friends.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I just think it's time to have this discussion and find out. Let's trade the land.
• </c><00:20:40.039><c> that</c> federal Parcels which was discussed that federal Parcels which was discussed
• Joe Henderson replied that, in discussion with Director Velin, 2020 was the original appraisal.
• </c><00:31:26.960><c> who</c> date uh looks like we're discussing who date uh looks like we're discussing
• So I don't think we need a long, drawn-out discussion.

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So I want to have a discussion.
• </c> replicate yeah so it uh just discussions replicate yeah so it uh just discussions like<01:00:21.799
• </c> get an equin veterinarian in to discuss get an equin veterinarian in to discuss animal<01:04:40.599
• Okay, um, I will discuss that with folks to see which way they'd prefer to go.
• Okay, um, I will discuss that with folks to see which way they'd prefer to go.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee work session focused on HB 153, a bill intended to improve law enforcement response to animal cruelty cases. The bill’s sponsor explained that the proposal would require one sheriff or deputy and one state trooper in each county to receive specific training in animal cruelty laws so they could serve as knowledgeable resources. The sponsor described real-world examples where agencies were unclear about jurisdiction, veterinary involvement, and response protocols, arguing that better training was needed because animal cruelty cases can require quick action and many towns do not have animal control officers. Jerry Sorenson, a retired UNH professor and longtime animal cruelty instructor, described the existing training structure at Police Standards and Training. He said recruits receive a required two-hour introductory block at the academy, while additional animal cruelty materials and a more comprehensive online resource library are available through the Benchmark system for certified officers. He noted that the older two-day in-service course he taught was more detailed and guided, but the current online materials are more of a self-study resource and are not mandated for in-service officers. He also said the committee could track usage through Benchmark analytics. Kurt Arenberg of the Humane Society of the United States and Rob Johnson of the Farm Bureau both supported the goal of ensuring a trained law enforcement contact is available statewide, but they questioned whether assigning one trained officer per county would be the best way to achieve it. They emphasized the need for a real-time response and for officers to know where to find help and guidance, rather than expecting one person per county to handle all cases. Vincent Greco of State Police said the agency is willing to help and has handled animal cruelty matters, but he said one trooper per county would not realistically meet the goal given coverage demands and vacancy rates; he suggested broader access to resources and training may be more effective. Representative Freeman asked how cases are handled now and was told State Police responses generally follow standard criminal investigation steps, with assistance from animal control, veterinarians, and other resources when available. No vote or final action was taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> in-depth, really involved discussion. in-depth, really involved discussion.
• That is the only thing you discuss.
• So I you know what was being discussed.
• </c> is invoked and they want to discuss is invoked and they want to discuss personnel<00:15:38.959><
• </c><00:15:49.360><c> B</c> say we want to discuss Ms. A or Mr. B say we want to discuss Ms.

Committee: House Judiciary

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> they can't postpone that discussion they they can't postpone that discussion they have<04:23:33.199
• </c> figure out in advance of the discussion figure out in advance of the discussion in<04:24:12.199>
• is being discussed in a non-public session, and the fact that their reputation may be discussed or come
• is being discussed in a non-public session, and the fact that their reputation may be discussed or come
• is being discussed in a non-public session, and the fact that their reputation may be discussed or come

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee opened its hearing with a procedural discussion about a forthcoming Monday hearing, and the chair confirmed that any amendment deemed non-germane would be made public in advance and included in the calendar. The committee then took up House Bill 6, which would replace the word “citizen” in the Right-to-Know law with “any person,” allow requesters to specify the format of records, and expressly reference preliminary drafts circulated to a quorum or majority of a public body as disclosable material. The sponsor said the bill was intended to clarify existing law, remove uncertainty after a Rochester-related dispute over requester eligibility, and make records easier to obtain electronically unless doing so would be impossible, unusual, unduly burdensome, or harmful to recordkeeping integrity. Testimony was mixed. Cordell Johnston, speaking for himself as a municipal attorney, opposed most of the bill, especially the requirement that records be delivered electronically or by mail, arguing that out-of-state or out-of-country requests can be fishing expeditions that impose significant burdens on towns and clerks. He said local residents already can obtain records at town hall and that many municipalities voluntarily email records as a courtesy, but should not be required to mail large volumes of material. He also said the preliminary-draft language was unnecessary because such drafts are already covered when circulated to a quorum or majority. Representative Alexander raised concerns about the breadth of “any person,” potential abuse by bad actors, and the cost to municipalities, while Representative Peternell asked about whether the bill should account for nonresident property owners and business owners. The sponsor responded that limiting requesters by residency would not meaningfully stop abuse and said he did not know the bill’s fiscal impact, though he suggested it might improve efficiency. Yil Biset of the ACLU of New Hampshire testified in support of HB 6, calling it a modest and reasonable transparency measure. He said the preliminary-draft language was acceptable and consistent with existing exemption language in the public-meeting and documents statutes, and he said he was not aware of foreign-bot document requests occurring in New Hampshire. He also noted that current law already requires electronic disclosure when records exist electronically and can reasonably be provided that way. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><00:10:13.279><c> to</c><00:10:13.440><c> the</c> discussion to the amendment to the discussion to the
• >> Any further discussion of the amendment?
• </c> Um and uh I think there was discussions Um and uh I think there was discussions around<00:25:12.000
• </c><00:28:44.320><c> take</c><00:28:44.480><c> the</c> discussion, the clerk will take the discussion
• Any further discussion?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm hearing no further discussion. discussion. discussion.
• Um it's there for discussion.
• </c> Um it's there for discussion. Um it's there for discussion.
• Any<01:19:45.680><c> further</c><01:19:45.920><c> discussion?</c> Any further discussion?
• Any further<01:38:00.760><c> discussion?</c> further discussion? further discussion?

Bills: HF4712 , HF4801 , HF3756 , HF4860 , HF4931 , HF4289 , HF4460

Committee: House Health Finance and Policy

Keywords: residential pools, swimming classes, certification, private business, health safety, health care, prior authorization, managed care, medical assistance, mental health, substance use treatment, chronic conditions, health insurance, insulin, healthcare access, pharmacy regulations, patient assistance, affordable medication, healthcare, pharmacy

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> for the discussion today. for the discussion today.
• </c> we talked we discussed I do believe Mr. we talked we discussed I do believe Mr.
• And so, I hope that'll be a discussion when you're discussing board stuff.
• And so, I hope that'll be a discussion when you're discussing board stuff.
• Uh is that part of the discussion? bill? Uh is that part of the discussion?

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Is there any discussion? Is there any discussion? Representative<00:03:24.440><c> Long.
• </c> so we have time for member discussion. so we have time for member discussion.
• Chair, we are not discussing House Resolution 6 or 7. We're discussing House Resolution 13A.
• And more specifically, discussing today?
• We're discussing Resolution 6 or 7.

Bills: HF3900 , HF1849

Committee: House Rules and Legislative Administration

Keywords: permanent school fund, school endowment fund, Minnesota constitutional amendment, school aid, public school funding, State Board of Investment, investment income, distributable amount, school districts, property taxes, income taxes, voter approval, ballot question, constitutional amendment 2026, education finance, fund perpetuity, purchasing power, trust lands, swamp lands, internal improvement land fund