Transcript Highlights:

• I heard that correctly, but could you talk to us about the amount of funding in this budget that depends
• ...of funding in this budget that depends on our IGTs, the intergovernmental transfers from the local
• I mean, certainly depending on modifications to whichever respective firearm is used in hunting activities

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This just clarifies that continuous glucose monitoring will be covered for anyone that is insulin-dependent
• for gestational diabetics, it only applied if they were pre-pregnancy type 1 diabetic and insulin-dependent
• accept the job into a school setting, and with no oversight or no training, it can get dangerous depending

Bills: SB237

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare

Keywords: child welfare, Department of Children and Family Services, mandatory reporting, abuse prevention, investigative teams, child ombudsman, forensic interviews, confidentiality

Summary: The Senate Committee on Health and Welfare met on May 20, 2026, with eight members present and approved the May 13 minutes. The committee quickly reported several bills favorably, including SB 1224, which requires DCFS review when a pregnancy involves a child under 17 and makes children under 12 a child in need of care; SB 1100, which repeals an old statute on unenriched bread; HB 1220, a continuation of prior work to codify certain provisions related to the Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners; HB 1231, clarifying that continuous glucose monitoring is covered through Medicaid for any insulin-dependent diabetic, including gestational diabetes; and HB 198, setting reimbursement rates for ambulatory surgery centers for certain Medicaid procedures. The committee also adopted a personal privilege welcome for physicians on White Coat Day and repeatedly noted that several bills were being advanced with the understanding that further work might continue before floor debate. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 1160, which would create a streamlined restricted license pathway for qualified international medical school graduates, especially for rural and shortage areas. Committee members pressed the Board of Medical Examiners about delays in promulgating rules under an earlier 2024 law and objected to rule language they said went beyond the statute. Board representatives acknowledged a misunderstanding about the original bill’s intent and said the program had been operating, but members warned against agencies writing rules that contradict enacted law. Despite the criticism, HB 1160 was reported favorably. The committee also reported favorably HCR 67, which creates a task force to study gaps in acute care for special-needs adults and children, following emotional testimony from the sponsor about her son’s death and the lack of appropriate care options. The committee then approved HCR 27, calling for a coordinated statewide evaluation of autism services by the Department of Health and Department of Education, with testimony emphasizing rising diagnosis rates, rural provider shortages, and the need for better data and coordination between medical and school-based services. HCR 28, which would study school nurse orientation and training, was also reported favorably after school nurses described the lack of standardized onboarding for new graduates and the risks of placing them alone in schools without adequate supervision. HB 469, which would have allowed pharmacy license renewal fees to be directed to Xavier University’s pharmacy school as well as public schools, was deferred after concerns about diverting funds from public institutions and the absence of testimony from affected schools. The committee also took up HB 223, which recreates DCFS, and adopted an amendment shortening the sunset date and requiring law enforcement reports to be accepted through a secure web-based platform; the bill was then reported favorably as amended. Another major discussion centered on HB 457 and HB 616, both tied to homelessness. HB 457, establishing minimum standards for shelters and related facilities, was reported favorably as amended after sponsor testimony and support cards. HB 616, which would allow the legislative auditor and local officials access to records and databases for audits of homelessness initiatives, drew extensive debate over privacy, federal funding, and accountability. Supporters cited a 2025 audit showing more than $216 million in federal homelessness spending in New Orleans and argued that auditors need access to performance data to detect waste and abuse; opponents warned about client privacy and the impact of funding cutoffs. The committee adopted an amendment changing permissive language to mandatory language for enforcement and then continued hearing testimony, with the discussion still centered on balancing oversight with confidentiality.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also urge the subcommittee to reject the requirement that this funding be dependent on expending half
• For instance, in our Santa Cruz County, the only youth center not dependent on state funding is heavily
• intent, especially as a result of the abandonment of FEMA and the federal government, survivors are depending

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We also urge the subcommittee to reject the requirement that this funding be dependent on expending half
• For instance, in Santa Cruz County, the only youth center not dependent on state funding is heavily criticized
• intent, especially as a result of the abandonment of FEMA and the federal government, survivors are depending

Summary: The subcommittee heard several May Revision proposals related to the state’s housing and homelessness reorganization. On the first item, administration and Finance staff described technical adjustments to move administrative positions and resources between the California Housing and Homelessness Agency, HCD, and Cal ICH, plus authority for a chief deputy director at the new Housing Development Finance Committee. The LAO recommended approval but asked for clarification on funding for the chief deputy position. Several senators questioned whether the staffing shifts would reduce Cal ICH’s capacity and whether adding communications support and a new executive position was appropriate absent new housing funding; the item was held open. The second item proposed a new $100 million CalHFA Disaster Rebuilding Fund, with $56 million General Fund and $44 million in existing National Mortgage Settlement funds, to help disaster-impacted homeowners access construction financing through tools such as a loan loss guarantee and interest rate buy-downs. CalHFA said the fund would help close the gap between insurance proceeds and rebuilding costs and would work through approved lenders. The LAO raised concerns about the lack of alternatives analysis, the broad delegation in the trailer bill, and the General Fund cost. Senators pressed for more detail on the estimated number of homeowners served, lender and homeowner eligibility, equity safeguards, and the role of the Legislature in program design; the item was held open. The third item was trailer bill language for HAP Round 7, including accountability metrics, pro-housing designation requirements for certain large cities and counties, local match requirements, and a mechanism to recapture unspent funds. HCD said the proposal would streamline reporting by using one consistent set of system performance measures and would phase in the new requirements. The LAO questioned the timing, the burden of pro-housing designation, the size and source of the local match, and whether the proposal conflicted with the Legislature’s prior goal of getting funds out quickly. Several senators criticized the added requirements and the lack of new funding, while others said the proposal could improve accountability and reduce administrative burden by reusing existing plans. The item was also held open. The fourth item began a proposal to reduce local development impact fees on state-funded affordable housing projects, framed as a condition on competitive multifamily funding rather than a statewide mandate. The presentation started but the transcript cuts off before questions or action on that item.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if I buy grading, I may buy grading from 10 different companies, all depending on the pricing and
• So if I buy grading, I may buy grading from 10 different companies, all depending on the pricing and
• And it just depends on what store you go to that they're just charging various fees.

Committee: House Commerce, Consumer Protection, and International Affairs

Summary: The House Committee on Commerce met on May 18, 2026, with a quorum present and the chair noting it was the committee’s last meeting of the session. The committee first considered Senate Bill 254, which would prohibit certain excess debit card surcharges and authorize enforcement by the Attorney General. After adopting technical amendments and a committee amendment requiring written notice before a private right of action, the bill was reported favorably as amended. The committee then took up Senate Bill 80 on broadband administration fees and GUMBO program closeout. Members questioned the proposed increase in administrative and contractor fees, the timing of project completion, and how withheld reimbursements would work for utility damage. After adopting several amendments, including cleanup language and a provision to restore the reimbursement process, the bill was reported favorably as amended, though the Louisiana Telecommunications Association voiced concerns about the withholding language and lack of a clearer fault-determination process. The committee next considered Senate Bill 469, updating the Louisiana Underground Utilities and Facilities Damage Prevention Law. Technical amendments were adopted, along with amendments clarifying that the bill’s 30-day notice to utility owner-operators is separate from existing GUMBO notice requirements and creating a rapid dispute-resolution process involving the Office of Broadband, the utility operator, and the local governing authority. Testimony from broadband and municipal stakeholders emphasized the need for quicker responses to excavation damage and better enforcement, while some witnesses raised concerns about the late amendment and the need for clearer recourse and standards. The bill was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 468, dealing with fuel rewards programs and fuel discount limits, was also amended to allow such discounts while capping them at $1 below the advertised price; it was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 131, concerning attorney’s fees and costs in professional licensing disciplinary proceedings, drew testimony from a cosmetology board representative and the Pelican Institute. Supporters argued the bill would curb incentives for boards to generate revenue through enforcement and give licensees a fairer opportunity to resolve cases; board testimony noted that some boards already have fee caps and that enforcement actions are relatively limited. After adopting an amendment clarifying when a licensee is the prevailing party, the bill was reported favorably as amended. Senate Bill 251 on critical infrastructure protection also received technical amendments and several substantive changes, including adding ports and airports to the definition of critical infrastructure, clarifying “significant access,” adding a knowledge requirement, and adjusting exemptions and enforcement timing; it was reported favorably as amended after testimony from State Armor representatives about foreign adversary threats. Finally, House Resolution 253 was introduced to create a task force to study how post-2005 building code additions and inspection requirements affect residential construction costs, with the sponsor explaining the goal was to gather industry input and return recommendations next session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Depending on how you look at it, some people might prefer to just live longer regardless of what their
• over $3.5 billion in shovel- and crane-ready development in rural and urban districts and the state dependent
• The fiscal note here is about $50 to $60 million, depending on the year.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Families across our state are depending on you. Thank you so much for having me. Thank you.
• Their exposure to non-economic losses that are not property-based would, I think, depend on prudency
• So if prejudgment interest is allowed, maybe that element goes up depending upon whether or not, as you

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy held a hearing on the California Earthquake Authority’s SB 254 report and broader options for reforming California’s utility wildfire recovery system. The chair framed the discussion around the Palisades and Eaton fires, the scale of wildfire-related costs on utility bills, and the need to weigh trade-offs among survivors, ratepayers, utilities, insurers, and taxpayers. The first panel featured wildfire survivors William Abrams and Joy Chen, who described long delays in compensation, housing insecurity, and what they viewed as a system that protects utility shareholders more than victims. They urged greater transparency, clearer accountability for utility spending and safety performance, faster and fuller compensation for survivors, and reforms such as independent audits and better alignment of utility incentives with wildfire prevention and restitution. The second panel began with Tom Welsh of the California Earthquake Authority, who explained that the SB 254 report was intended as a broad inventory of policy pathways rather than recommendations. He described the report’s process, including stakeholder submissions, workstreams, and a convergence process, and outlined the current wildfire fund structure: utilities remain liable, the fund reimburses eligible claims after a covered wildfire, and the CPUC later determines prudency and possible reimbursement back to the fund. RAND’s Lloyd Dixon summarized compensation data, saying utilities paid about $38 billion between 2017 and 2024, with major shares going to injured parties, insurers, and public entities, while litigation costs and survivors’ own losses remain substantial. He noted that legal fees and delays reduce the amount survivors ultimately receive. Utility and public-interest witnesses offered differing views on the report’s pathways. PG&E’s Tyson Smith said the report shows inaction is the worst outcome and argued for community wildfire risk reduction, equitable allocation of catastrophe costs, and state-led resilience tools. LADWP’s Fernando Valero emphasized the vulnerability of municipal utilities and cities, and supported inverse condemnation reform, a state-sponsored liability insurance framework, damages and subrogation limits, and stronger insurance access. Consumer Attorneys of California’s John Fisk argued that IOU-caused fires are not natural disasters but the result of negligence and sometimes criminal conduct, and opposed reducing utility liability while supporting stronger oversight and audits. The Public Advocates Office’s Nathaniel Skinner focused on affordability, saying ratepayers already bear large and growing wildfire costs and warning against shifting more costs onto bills without measurable risk reduction and tighter accountability. Committee members then began questioning witnesses about what counts as measurable mitigation, how to define full and fair compensation, and how any fast-pay process should work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Depends how long you talk. I'll tell you what.
• Depends how long you talk. I'll tell you what.
• And I always depended on you to be able to bring sense to the committee and to this floor with the explanations

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and approval of the prior day’s journal by a 129-0 vote. Members then used points of personal privilege to recognize Law Enforcement Week, discuss personal health and family matters, and honor colleagues, spouses, interns, and guests in the gallery, including students, community members, and a visiting governor from Uzbekistan. The chamber also received Senate messages on House Bill 1871 and House Bill 2818, and fiscal review committee reports recommending passage of several deferred bills, including Senate Bills 953, 1470, and 1871, and House Bill 1940. The House agreed to conference requests on Senate Bills 835 and 1111 and on Senate Bill 1020, the latter a Department of Revenue bill focused on customer service and inspection language. Senate Bill 977 and 1011, dealing with limits on international organizations and foreign law, drew extended debate. Supporters argued the bill would protect Missouri from foreign or international mandates and foreign laws that conflict with constitutional rights, while opponents said such bodies already lack authority in Missouri and warned the bill was unnecessary, politically motivated, and could create problems for forum non conveniens and private arbitration. The bill ultimately passed 99-45. House Bill 1470, revising legislative research and statutory publication procedures, was amended on the floor to remove privacy-sensitive provisions and change a state auditor duty from mandatory to permissive; a later amendment to alter committee composition was defeated 50-94. The bill then passed 148-1. House Bill 1940, the newspaper/public notice bill, was adopted and finally passed 142-1 with two present. House Bill 1871, an elections administration bill, was also taken up with debate over added Senate language, including campaign finance and election testing provisions; discussion continued near the end of the transcript, with no final vote shown before the excerpt ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it just really depends.
• It's currently $300 and $500, depending on the situation.
• It also requires... ...thousand dollars is currently 300 and 500 depending on the situation.

Bills: SR44 , HCR1027 , SJR50 , SJR52 , SJR53 , HB1185 , HB1937 , HB2035 , HB2137 , HB2166 , HB3148 , HB3323 , HB3466 , HB3498 , HB3661 , HB3678 , HB3710 , HB3977 , HB3986 , HB4104 , HB4108 , HB4142 , HB4191 , HB4274 , HB4275 , HB4322 , HB4336 , HB4484 , HB3880 , HB1687 , HB3673 , HB1170 , HB2959 , HB3718 , HB3021 , HB3443 , HB3501 , HB4143 , HB4326 , HB2992 , HB3660 , SB171 , SB1325 , SB1980 , SB2045 , HB4422 , HB4423

Keywords: SR44, Senate Resolution 44, Teacher Appreciation Week, teachers, educators, Oklahoma educators, public schools, K-12 education, pre-K, school recognition, education resolution, appreciation week, National PTA, Eleanor Roosevelt, teacher recognition, school staff, classroom, Oklahoma Legislature, concurrent resolution, sine die adjournment

Summary: The Senate convened, established a quorum, offered prayer, and recognized a doctor, a nurse, and a student hero who rescued a driver from a burning vehicle. The chamber also welcomed a new group of pages and adopted a motion to reject House amendments to Senate Bill 1546 and request conference. Senators then adopted Senate Resolution 44 recognizing Teacher Appreciation Week, and heard remarks honoring educators in the gallery. Senator Goodwin also announced the death of former Representative Don Ross and offered condolences to his family. The Senate then took up House Concurrent Resolution 1027, setting a target sine die date of May 14 at 5 p.m. The resolution drew opposition from Minority Leader Kurt and Senator Jett, who argued the chamber still had unfinished business, but it passed 28-17. The Senate also passed SJR 50, SJR 52, and SJR 53, all related to agency rules, including expanded provider types, removal of a physician-visit cap, and medical marijuana packaging requirements. Additional measures passed included HB 1185 on preserving military and historic firearms for honor guards and museums, HB 1937 on student-employee communications and due process, HB 2035 on funeral transportation protection agreements, HB 2137 on involuntary medication procedures for competency restoration, and HB 2166 on legal newspaper distribution without a USPS permit. Later, the Senate approved a series of bills on business, licensing, public safety, and state operations. These included HB 3148 on VIN inspections by dealers, HB 3323 on removing notarization for certain electronic Service Oklahoma documents, HB 3466 eliminating petty cash at the Corporation Commission, HB 3498 updating corporation and LLC statutes, HB 3661 extending a forestry equipment sales tax exemption, HB 3678 expanding the definition of public official for electronic harassment protections, HB 3710 revising the Rising Scholars Award Program, HB 3977 updating state veterinarian qualifications, HB 3986 expanding a tax exemption, HB 4104 strengthening penalties for repeat voyeurism-related offenses, HB 4108 adding airport operational areas to critical infrastructure, HB 4142 covering conspiracies to use bombs or explosive devices, HB 4274 allowing military children to attend non-zoned schools, HB 4275 allowing case managers and peer support specialists to work for local public agencies, HB 4322 removing dual certification for funeral directors in charge, HB 4336 updating interventional pain management rules, HB 4484 allowing certain state vehicles to be used between home and work, HB 3880 on Tourism Department compensation and Oklahoma Today publication discretion, and HB 1687 creating the Uniform Health Care Decisions Act with an amended effective date. The chamber also passed HB 2959 requiring school administrators to report abuse allegations to law enforcement within 24 hours and before school questioning, with emergency passage approved. HB 3718 was then taken up with an amendment clarifying timelines for special education evaluations tied to the Lindsay Nicole Henry Scholarship; discussion centered on the new 15-school-day meeting timeline and the 45-day evaluation period. The transcript ends during questions on that amendment, before final action on HB 3718 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Doug Stauffer of Faith and Dependent Baptist Church in Niceville. Dr.
• Voters, you need to vote like your life depends on it because it does.
• The governor's lawyer agreed that his case supporting the map depended on these two ifs.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituted with House Bill 1D, both establishing Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Senator Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a proposed redistricting plan on short notice and argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional. He repeatedly said the Legislature was not being asked to prove the Governor’s legal theory, only to consider the proposal, and noted that no amendments were offered. A lengthy question-and-answer period followed, with senators raising concerns about the rushed process, lack of statewide public hearings, and the map’s effects on minority communities, compactness, communities of interest, and partisan fairness. Senators questioned whether the map cracked Latino and Black communities, whether partisan data was used, whether the Governor’s office had outside consultants, and whether the plan complied with the Florida Constitution, the Fair Districts Amendment, and the Voting Rights Act. Gates generally deferred on legal conclusions, said the Governor’s representatives had testified the map was race-neutral and used political data only as one factor, and emphasized that any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. After a motion to temporarily postpone failed by a recorded vote of 12 yeas to 23 nays, the Senate continued debate. Senators Rouson, Bernard, and others spoke in opposition, arguing the proposal was rushed, partisan, and harmful to communities of interest and minority voting power. Gates maintained that the Governor had a constitutional prerogative to propose the map and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The House companion bill was then substituted for the Senate bill, read a third time, and the chamber moved into final debate on the congressional redistricting plan.

Transcript Highlights:

• Doug Stauffer of Faith and Dependable Baptist Church in Niceville. Dr.
• Voters, you need to vote like your life depends on it because it does.
• The governor's lawyer agreed that his case supporting the map depended on these two ifs.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D / House Bill 1D, which would establish Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Sen. Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a redistricting plan two days earlier and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based districting is unconstitutional. Much of the floor time was spent in extended questioning about the process, the lack of public hearings compared with prior redistricting cycles, the use of population estimates from the Census/EDR/ACS, compactness scores, and whether the Governor’s office used partisan data or outside consultants. Gates repeatedly said he was relaying the Governor’s proposal and legal theory rather than offering his own legal opinion, and he said any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. A major portion of the debate focused on the U.S. Supreme Court’s newly issued Calais decision and its implications for the Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators questioned whether the decision struck down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, whether it affected Florida’s constitutional ban on partisan gerrymandering, and whether the Legislature should postpone action to review the ruling. A motion to temporarily postpone the bill failed by voice vote and then by recorded vote, 12 yeas to 23 nays. Senators also raised concerns that the proposed map cracked minority communities, including Latino and Black populations in Central Florida and Tampa Bay, and that it would produce a heavily Republican-leaning map despite the state’s voter registration mix. After debate on the Senate bill, the chamber substituted the identical House companion bill, read it a third time, and proceeded to final debate. Opponents argued the map was an illegal partisan gerrymander, was based on assumptions rather than verified data, and would likely lead to litigation. Supporters maintained that the Governor had authority to propose a congressional map, that the plan was race-neutral, and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The transcript ends during continued debate on House Bill 1D, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Doug Stauffer of Faith and Dependent Baptist Church in Niceville. Dr.
• Voters, you need to vote like your life depends on it because it does.
• The governor's lawyer agreed that his case supporting the map depended on these two ifs.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.

Transcript Highlights:

• Doug Stauffer of Faith and Dependable Baptist Church in Niceville. Dr.
• Voters, you need to vote like your life depends on it because it does.
• The governor's lawyer agreed that his case supporting the map depended on these two ifs.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Doug Stauffer of Faith and Dependent Baptist Church in Niceville. Dr.
• Voters, you need to vote like your life depends on it because it does.
• The governor's lawyer agreed that his case supporting the map depended on these two ifs.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Doug Stauffer of Faith and Dependable Baptist Church in Niceville. Dr.
• Voters, you need to vote like your life depends on it because it does.
• The governor's lawyer agreed that his case supporting the map depended on these two ifs.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session with an opening prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved to the special order calendar to consider congressional redistricting legislation, beginning with Senate Bill 8D and then substituting the identical House Bill 1D. The bill would establish Florida’s congressional districts. Senator Gaetz, presenting the measure, said the Governor had proposed the map to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts, and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible and has occurred before in Florida and other states. He repeatedly said the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal, but that the Governor had the prerogative to propose it. The floor debate focused heavily on the legality and timing of the map, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Louisiana redistricting decision was announced during the session. Several senators, including Rouson, Sharief, Smith, Polsky, Arrington, Bracy Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and Berman, questioned whether the map complied with the Florida Constitution’s Fair Districts Amendment, the Voting Rights Act, and equal protection principles. They raised concerns about the short notice, lack of statewide public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony from the Governor’s representatives, the claimed severability of the Fair Districts Amendment, and the impact on minority communities and communities of interest. Gaetz generally declined to offer legal opinions, saying those issues would ultimately be for the courts, but he relayed the Governor’s position that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional and that the proposed map is race-neutral and compact. Members also debated whether the map’s population data and compactness scores justified the district lines, with critics arguing that the plan cracked and split communities in places such as Central Florida, Tampa Bay, and South Florida. Gaetz said the Governor’s office relied on 2020 census data plus updated population estimates from the Office of Economic and Demographic Research and the American Community Survey, and that the mapmaker said he drew the map himself without outside consultants. After questions concluded, the Senate adopted a motion to substitute HB 1D for SB 8D, read the bill a third time, and proceeded to debate the House bill. The transcript ends during debate, with no final vote on passage shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't have a problem if y'all just stand up there and you could go back and forth depending on who's
• Our democracy depends on people in positions like yours choosing to follow the law, even when it's inconvenient
• Our democracy depends on people in positions like yours, choosing to follow the law, even when it's inconvenient

Committee: Senate Rules

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum and heard a Governor’s Office presentation on a proposed congressional reapportionment map. The governor’s counsel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be considered at all in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection law and should be treated as non-severable. The presentation also discussed the pending U.S. Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais and the Florida Supreme Court’s Black Voters Matter decision as part of the legal rationale for the map. Jason Parada, who said he drew the map alone, described the map as based on 2020 census block data, with county-level population estimates used only as a guide to identify faster-growing areas. He said the plan keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores similar to the current benchmark map, and uses traditional geographic and political boundaries such as roads, railways, county lines, and municipal lines. He walked through regional changes, emphasizing a race-neutral redesign that significantly altered South Florida, including changes to districts in Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and the Everglades, while leaving several northern districts largely unchanged. Members questioned the witnesses extensively about the legal theory, the use of partisan data, the role of race, population growth, and the timing and review of the map. The witnesses said partisan data was considered along with other traditional redistricting criteria, but race was not used. They also said they could not speak to who else reviewed the map beyond EOG staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns about the map’s compactness, county and city splits, the apparent partisan effects, and the fact that the map was released shortly before the special session. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't have a problem if y'all just stand up there and you could go back and forward depending on who's
• Our democracy depends on people in positions like yours choosing to follow the law, even when it's inconvenient
• Our democracy depends on people in positions like yours, choosing to follow the law, even when it's inconvenient

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum present and took up a presentation from the Governor’s office on proposed congressional reapportionment. Executive Office of the Governor counsel Mo Jazeel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be used in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection principles and, in the executive branch’s view, are inseverable. Jason Parada then presented the proposed map, explaining that it was drawn using 2020 census block data, with county growth estimates used only as a guide, and that the plan was designed to be race-neutral while also considering compactness, county and municipal boundaries, and other traditional redistricting criteria. He said the map keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores comparable to the current map, and makes the largest changes in South Florida, with some districts remaining unchanged and others reconfigured around population shifts and geographic boundaries. Members questioned both presenters extensively about the legal basis for disregarding the Fair Districts Amendment, the use of partisan data, the absence of racial analysis, and whether the map truly reflects population growth. Jazeel said the executive branch’s position is that race-based provisions in the state constitution cannot be used if they conflict with the U.S. Constitution, and that the forthcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision in Louisiana v. Calais could further clarify the law. Parada said he did not use race in drawing the map, did use partisan information as one of several traditional criteria, and relied on 2020 census data for population equality. Senators also pressed him on who reviewed the map, why the public and legislators had limited time to review it, and whether the plan was intended to favor Republicans; Parada denied partisan intent and said he was the only person who moved lines on the map, though he consulted with other Executive Office of the Governor staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns that the map did not clearly reflect Florida’s recent population growth, that some districts remained highly irregular, and that the plan appeared to be based on a legal theory contingent on future court rulings. The presenters responded that congressional districts must be equal to the person, that growth estimates can only guide orientation rather than replace census data, and that the map was designed to preserve as much of the existing structure as possible while making the largest adjustments in South Florida. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the excerpted portion of the meeting, and the committee continued with questions and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't have a problem if y'all just stand up there and you could go back and forth depending on who's
• I don't have a problem if y'all just stand up there and you could go back and forth depending on who's
• Our democracy depends on people in positions like yours choosing to follow the law, even when it's inconvenient

Committee: Senate Rules

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it depends on the circumstances, yeah. But what my point was, Rep.
• I think it depends on the circumstances, yeah.
• So, like, if they decide to no bill you, the defendant is still paying $10 to $20 to $50 depending on

Committee: House Administration of Criminal Justice

Summary: The committee first handled housekeeping items, voluntarily deferring HB 63 and HB 622 at the authors’ requests. It then heard HB 131 on post-conviction relief, which would remove the word “inexcusably” from the PCR statute and delay bail eligibility after relief until the state’s appeals are exhausted through the Louisiana Supreme Court. The bill drew support from the Attorney General’s office and district attorneys, with opposition cards from the Southern Poverty Law Center, and it was reported favorably. HB 789, concerning seizure of off-road vehicles used unlawfully on roadways, was amended to direct forfeiture proceeds to the Attorney General when acting as district attorney ad hoc; it was then reported as amended with support from law enforcement and no opposition testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• newspaper notice requirement prior to the sale of a vehicle at public auction, two or three weeks depending
• Weeks depending on code section.
• Maybe it involves people losing their right to vote for a period of time depending on their crime.

Keywords: MS Senate Floor - 1 April, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all