Transcript Highlights:

• Order. The Speaker pro tempore: The House will be in order. Mr.
• >> ORDER. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: THE HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER. MR.
• So—order, Mr. Speaker.
• So—order, Mr. Speaker. The Speaker pro tempore: The House will be in order. Mr.
• So—order, Mr. Speaker. The House will be in order.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, May 21, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So ordered.
• So ordered.
• So ordered.
• So ordered.
• So ordered. The ayes have it. So ordered.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• don't generally apply. to protect consumers here in the state to protect consumers here in the state
• protections don't don't generally apply. protections don't don't generally apply.
• Uh, the deal basically is that you protect the money from creditors by protecting it from yourself.
• will comply with the court's order. will comply with the court's order.
• protection at the issuer level.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The commission met on November 12 and first approved the September 17 and October 15 draft minutes unanimously after brief discussion. Members also identified themselves for the record, including a new member from Bumpsk Bank, a staff attorney from the Secretary of State’s Bureau of Securities Regulation, a prior crypto commission participant, and a uniform law commissioner involved in tokenization projects. The main presentation was by UNH law professor Seth Orinberg, who discussed the federal GENIUS Act and the pending Clarity Act and how they affect New Hampshire’s options in the digital asset space. He described the GENIUS Act as governing payment stablecoins/stable tokens, defining them as blockchain-based assets used primarily for payments, redeemable for a fixed amount of national currency, and required to maintain stable value. He said the law creates three possible state roles: hosting federally qualified issuers, becoming a state qualifier for issuers up to a $10 billion threshold, or exploring state-backed issuance as a sovereign. He noted that the state-qualification path would require conforming legislation, examination capacity, and coordination with Treasury, while the sovereign-issuer theory is legally uncertain and may become a test case. Orinberg also outlined the core compliance framework he said applies to covered issuers: 100% reserve backing in high-quality liquid assets, monthly public reserve reporting, no yield or interest-like rewards, segregation of reserve assets, immediate redemption at face value, and anti-money-laundering/know-your-customer obligations. He then turned to the Clarity Act, describing it as a broader market-structure bill that would create categories such as digital asset, digital commodity, digital security, and ancillary asset, with self-certification procedures for issuers. He said the two federal laws together would separate payments from investments, preempt inconsistent state standards for covered payment stablecoins, and likely reshape the boundaries of state authority over digital assets.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any student of constitutional law knows the Supreme Court precedent teaches us that, in order to protect
• And the court has repeatedly decided that states can do so in order to pursue equal protection under
• And the court has repeatedly decided that states can do so in order to pursue equal protection.
• That states can do so in order to pursue equal protection under the law.
• DeMaio, state your point of order. Yes, Mr. Speaker. What is your point of order, Mr. DeMaio?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, prayer, and pledge, then handled a long consent and procedural agenda, including suspending rules to move AJR 31 forward without reference and approving a large Appropriations Committee hearing list. The chamber also heard several guest introductions, including recognition of Shannon Lee for work tied to AB 2455 establishing a Bruce Lee Day, and district staff and visitors from other members’ offices. The main floor debate centered on AJR 31, a resolution urging Congress to restore and strengthen the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Supporters argued that recent federal court decisions and state redistricting efforts are weakening protections against racial vote dilution and disenfranchisement, while opponents said the resolution promoted race-based districting and was inconsistent with equal protection principles. After extensive debate and repeated parliamentary reminders about decorum, the Assembly added 57 coauthors and passed AJR 31 on a 58-8 roll call vote. Justin Jones of Tennessee was later introduced as a guest. The Assembly then moved through a series of bills and resolutions, most of which passed with little or no opposition. These included AB 2341 clarifying emergency language translation rules for local agencies, AB 1816 extending court supervision for sex-offender rehabilitation completion, AB 2561 protecting users’ phone and digital privacy settings, ACR 167 recognizing World Agritourism Day, ACR 190 honoring California Day of the Teacher, AB 1581 improving identification of Native American students, AB 1586 requiring opioid overdose prevention training for school resource officers and school safety plans, AB 1665 adding mental health training for coaches, and AB 1693 streamlining retail tenant-improvement permitting. The Assembly also passed AB 1768, an urgency tax measure tied to federal Medicaid reimbursement cuts for Los Angeles and Contra Costa counties, and began consideration of AB 1712 regarding Santa Fe Springs’ water system sale, with debate starting but not completed in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• e e e e e e e e The House will be in order.
• about fairness it's about protecting about fairness it's about protecting women's<00:51:25.079><
• <02:20:16.439> striking with last week's court order striking with last week's court order
• will strengthen title 99's protections will strengthen title 99's protections for<02:21:04.760><
• H.R. 28 is a women’s rights bill to protect Title IX, which was constructed to protect women’s rights

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, January 14, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Bill 1889 by Assembly Member Ramos, relating to protective orders.
• Assembly Bill 1889 by Assembly Member Ramos, relating to protective orders.
• If the original order has expired or is about to expire, a judge can issue a protective order at any
• If a criminal protective order is active, no petition can be granted.
• Assembly Bill 1753 by Assembly Member Stephanie and others, an act relating to protective orders.

Summary: The Assembly convened, established a quorum, and proceeded through a large House of Origin floor file, with the Speaker repeatedly urging members to be at their desks and keep support bills brief. Early actions included dispensing with the journal, re-referring AB 2285 to the Banking and Finance Committee, and then taking up dozens of third-reading items, with many bills passed by voice or recorded vote and others passed temporarily or retained on file. The floor debated and passed a wide range of measures on land use, housing, labor, public safety, health care, utilities, taxation, and consumer protection. Among the bills approved were measures on land surveyor review (AB 1933), nurse midwife access for pregnant and postpartum patients (AB 1696), historic-district transit zoning flexibility (AB 2415), EV charging infrastructure fees and timelines (AB 1820), foreclosure bidding protections (AB 1957), tribal cannabis commerce (AB 2506), outdoor advertising permitting (AB 2024), commercial building permit timelines and third-party plan checkers (AB 2418), DUI penalties (AB 1685 and AB 1687), utility rate transparency (AB 1715), CalWORKs work-penalty changes (AB 1755), dynamic electricity rates (AB 1787), interior designer licensure (AB 1796), compost labeling and contamination rules (AB 1812), modular housing standardization (AB 1815), small claims limits for businesses (AB 1827), Native American Day as a paid state holiday (AB 1841), hospital staffing and maternity access bills (AB 1868 and AB 1882), protective orders tied to release dates (AB 1889), and a series of public health, missing persons, and teacher credentialing measures later in the file. Several high-profile bills drew extended debate. AB 2624, expanding Safe at Home privacy protections to immigrant service providers, prompted sharp disagreement over free speech and alleged limits on online posting, but supporters said it protected workers facing threats and doxing; it ultimately passed 49-19. AB 2023, creating a framework for regulating AI chatbots used by children, was framed as a child-safety measure after testimony about chatbot-related harms and suicide risks, and passed 58-8. Other notable votes included AB 2208 on Medi-Cal protections against federal cuts, AB 2299 on CalFresh/SNAP losses, AB 2115 apologizing to California Native peoples for historic state harms, and AB 2311 on public hospital physician employment; the transcript ends as the Assembly continues working through the remaining file.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:01:09.840> but were're concerned about protecting but were're concerned about protecting
• that misinterpretation. scope of what is protected because that scope of what is protected because that
• but we do have to clarify that in order but we do have to clarify that in order to<00:04:29.039>
• <00:07:33.599> Prosecutor's have this protection Prosecutor's have this protection Prosecutor's
• offices don't have this uh protection offices don't have this uh protection every<00:07:37.039><

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House Majority Leader Harry Niska discussed House File 20, a bill he said would amend Minnesota’s Data Practices Act by adding the words “on individuals” to clarify that the private-data exemption applies only to information actually tied to an individual person. He argued the bill would overturn a 2022 Minnesota Supreme Court decision in Energy Policy Advocates v. Allison that, in his view, allowed the Attorney General’s office to withhold policymaking and closed investigative data even when no individual privacy interest was involved. Niska framed the measure as a transparency and democracy issue, saying the Attorney General’s office should not have a special secrecy privilege that other state agencies and prosecutors do not have. In response to questions, Niska said the Attorney General opposed the bill, citing concerns about the cost and burden of data practices requests and raising a broader question about whether some businesses might have privacy interests similar to individuals. Niska said the bill is not meant to eliminate legitimate privacy protections for actual individuals, including sensitive investigative information, but to prevent the office from using the private-data category to shield non-personal information. He also said the issue arose in part from information about outside influence on the Attorney General’s office, including funding for positions through NYU and the Bloomberg Foundation. Niska said the bill had been introduced by Republicans two years earlier but did not receive a hearing, and he expected it to come to the House floor because Republicans now control committees. He said Democrats were expected to vote as a bloc against it, and he suggested the vote would show where members stand on transparency. He also said other GOP priorities may move through committees and to the floor as they are ready, mentioning permitting reform, repeal of the nuclear moratorium, and an OIG-related bill, but he did not provide a detailed schedule. No vote on the bill was taken during the exchange.

Transcript Highlights:

• We ordered 10 pizzas, and lo and behold, we got one.
• Berman, state your point of order, please.
• While California leads in many consumer protections, there is a glaring gap in protections against unreasonable
• While California leads in many consumer protections, there is a glaring gap in protections against unreasonable
• Without objection, such shall be the order.

Summary: The Assembly met after a quorum call, prayer, and Pledge of Allegiance, then moved through a long Daily File with several guest introductions and floor speeches. Members recognized visiting student leaders, championship football teams from Tuolumne County, Alpha Kappa Alpha members at their Capitol day, and later a descendant of Wong Kim Ark. The chamber also adopted a procedural motion allowing certain members to host guests in the rear of the chamber. Among the major policy items, AB 578 on food delivery platform refund practices passed 47-2, AB 344 on successor beer manufacturer definitions passed 61-0, AB 454 to make California’s migratory bird protections permanent passed 55-12 on the urgency clause, AB 482 updating the Table Grape Commission passed 64-1, AB 1237 to support transit access for 2026 FIFA World Cup ticket holders passed 56-15 on the urgency clause, AB 738 on wildfire rebuild solar exemptions passed 42-2, AB 1460 on 340B pharmacy access for clinics passed 41-5, AB 750 on homeless shelter oversight passed 49-1, AB 1061 on housing in historic districts passed 41-13, AB 1523 on expanding mandatory mediation thresholds passed 65-0, and AB 316 on AI-related civil liability passed 56-0. AB 761 authorizing the Monterey-Salinas Transit District to seek a sales tax ballot measure passed 47-12. The chamber also adopted several resolutions. AJR 3 urging protection of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid passed 53-2 after extensive debate that included criticism of federal cuts and counterarguments focused on state Medi-Cal policy and budget decisions. ACR 65 proclaiming California Tourism Month was adopted by voice vote after coauthors were added, and ACR 62 recognizing California Nonprofits Day was also adopted by voice vote with 65 coauthors. AJR 5 affirming birthright citizenship and opposing efforts to end it passed 58-1 after a lengthy, highly partisan debate centered on the 14th Amendment and the Wong Kim Ark precedent. The session also included passage of AB 571, a CEQA exemption for the Southern California Veterans Cemetery at Gypsum Canyon, which was presented as a long-running bipartisan effort to create a final resting place for Orange County veterans.

Transcript Highlights:

• our workers, our businesses, and protect our state.
• all of our ratepayers and protect New York State.
• So that's— Utility violates an order. So that could be an order regarding customer service.
• So is this going to Consumer Protection because we know ratepayers need protection from New York State
• So bills will end up in the Consumer Protection Committee in order to protect our constituents from businesses

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Energy and Telecommunications considered a large agenda focused mainly on energy affordability, the CLCPA, utility rates, and renewable energy siting. Senator Mattera and other Republican members argued that the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act has driven up utility bills, harmed reliability, and imposed costs on ratepayers, while Democratic members pushed back that rising costs are also driven by natural gas markets, infrastructure costs, and broader economic factors. Several bills sought to repeal or pause CLCPA-related policies, create a CLCPA task force, impose studies or moratoriums on new energy taxes and fees, and increase transparency around utility surcharges and state energy spending. Supporters framed these measures as ratepayer relief and accountability; opponents said some proposals would undermine clean-energy policy and existing consumer-benefit programs. The committee defeated S.1167, which would have repealed the All Electric Building Act, and S.1173, which would have created a CLCPA task force. It also failed S.5250, a bill to study CLCPA costs and impose a moratorium on new energy taxes, fees, or regulations, and S.7075, which would have prohibited the system benefits charge on utility bills. Several other bills advanced, including S.1236A on virtual access and electronic filing for Public Service Commission proceedings, S.1552 establishing reduced residential rates for low-income electric and natural gas customers, S.2484 directing a study of replacement timeframes for battery storage and renewable facilities, S.2638 on carbon allowance auction proceeds, S.3247 on electric vehicle charging stations, S.3553 requiring utilities to post promotional and educational materials on their websites, S.4571A creating a floating solar incentive education program, S.5518 shifting Public Service Commission funding to legislative appropriation, and S.6412A requiring itemized ratepayer disclosure of surcharges. S.9251, on labor-related legal costs, was referred to the Labor Committee. S.7710, which would have restricted energy storage systems near schools and homes in New York City, failed after concerns and support were debated. The committee adjourned after completing the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a new order.
• And those are the folks that don’t have anything or their money... is protected, and so the bank protects
• protected?
• One, we talk about the protections laid out for the consumer. There are many protections out there.
• The hands of your employer are protected.

Bills: HB2242, HB2446, HB2799, HB4502, HB2920, HB2790, HB5620, HB5060, HB5076, HB5080, HB5081, HB5128, HB5130, HB3847, HB5116, HB2969, HB4546, HB4202, HB5624, HB3964, HB4803, HB872, HB4775, HB4777, HB4961, HB5570, HB2988, HB4260, HB1375, HB5009, HB5411, HB5134, HB4388, HB3095, HB1387

Keywords: constables, civil rights, local government, law enforcement, policy-making authority, affidavit, medical bills, civil actions, reasonable charges, healthcare services, judicial statistics, court performance, family law, civil cases, efficiency reporting, court security, emergency management, harassment penalties, judicial safety, court committee

Transcript Highlights:

• The House will be in order.
• First order, protect us from criminals. Save America.
• <02:23:53.120> First<02:23:53.600> order,<02:23:54.160> protect<02:23:54.560
• First order, protect us and criminals. First order, protect us from<02:23:55.040> criminals.
• [Music] The House come to order. The House come to order.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, July 15, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Without objection, such shall be the order.
• on Congress to protect the rights of states... ...the record in opposing the executive order and calls
• There's a point of order, if you wouldn't mind. Ms. Pellerin, what is your point of order?
• Oh, sorry, there's a point of order. Ms. Bonta, your point of order.
• Jeff Gonzalez, what is your point of order?

Summary: The Assembly met in session after a quorum call and opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a ceremonial observance for Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. Members from multiple caucuses spoke in support of House Resolution 107, which designates May as AAPI Heritage Month, emphasizing the community’s contributions, resilience, and the need to confront discrimination and hate. The resolution was adopted, and the chamber then recognized 13 honorees for the 2026 AAPI Heritage Month celebration, highlighting leaders in education, business, labor, media, cultural preservation, and public service. After guest introductions, the Assembly took up a series of bills. Measures discussed included HOA reserve funding for common interest developments (AB 2050), professional review requirements for lawsuits against design professionals (AB 2106), direct home delivery of enteral formula (AB 1794), expanded CalWORKs-related support for student parents (AB 1829), longer insurance moratoriums for wildfire survivors (AB 2038), election cybersecurity (AB 2281), medical privacy protections for reproductive and gender-affirming care (AB 2448), water district board compensation (AB 2568), county public contract change-order authority (AB 1658), and several other education, health, and licensing bills. Most measures passed with broad support; AB 2050 passed 44-6, AB 2038 passed 45-8, AB 2448 passed 49-13, and AB 1658 passed 61-2, while several others passed unanimously or near-unanimously. The Assembly also adopted AJR 29, a resolution opposing a federal executive order affecting vote-by-mail and affirming California’s mail voting system. The resolution prompted extended debate over election integrity, voter access, and federal versus state authority, with supporters arguing mail voting is secure and accessible and opponents calling for stronger voter list maintenance and verification. The resolution passed 47-13. In addition, ACR 141 and ACR 123 were adopted by voice vote after co-author roll calls, and the chamber continued or passed on numerous other file items as it worked through the daily file.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:43:42.800> order petition for the protection order petition for the protection order because
• , one party could ask for a protective order.
• > to<01:27:04.400> a the protective order is entitled to a the protective order is entitled
• <01:28:25.560> protective deep dive into court orders protective deep dive into court orders
• Twelve years, protective order, no evidence.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Children and Family Law Committee opened with a brief prayer for Representative Grossman’s son, Oscar, who was reported to be in critical condition after a traumatic fall. The committee then took up House Bill 430, which would reduce DHHS retention of unfounded abuse and neglect reports from 10 years to 3 years. Prime sponsor Chairman James Spain argued that 10 years is excessive and burdens families with a long-lasting stigma, while emphasizing that founded reports and reports with reasonable concern would still be retained indefinitely. Committee members questioned whether longer retention helps identify malicious reporting or patterns of abuse, and whether parents understand the distinction between unfounded and unfounded with reasonable concern. The Office of the Child Advocate and DCF opposed the bill. Child Advocate Cassandra Sanchez said historical reports are important for identifying patterns, reviewing critical incidents, and understanding family dynamics, and that screened-out and unfounded reports can be essential context when later reports arise. She also noted that the records are highly confidential and not publicly accessible. DCF General Counsel Susan Larabe added that the bill could create inconsistencies by retaining screened-out reports longer than unfounded reports, and explained that unfounded reports can be used in court and in administrative reviews when there are multiple prior reports. The committee discussed how other states handle retention, with testimony that some keep records indefinitely and others for long periods. The hearing on HB 430 concluded, and the chair said the bill would not be executed until early March, leaving time for amendments. The committee then opened House Bill 187, concerning restraining orders sought by a parent on behalf of a minor child. Prime sponsor Representative Mike Belcher said the bill is intended to correct a gap in the law so children can access the same restraining-order protections adults can, through a parent or guardian, and framed it as an equal-protection issue. Members questioned why the proposal was placed in the child abuse and neglect statute rather than the civil restraining-order statutes, and whether it should instead be handled as a broader civil-law fix. Alanda Peterson, who said she created Jade’s Law, testified that the original wording was meant to protect all children, not just those harmed by family members, and supported expanding the language. The hearing continued with additional discussion of the bill’s scope and purpose.

Transcript Highlights:

• The ayes have it, so ordered.
• The ayes have it, so ordered. The ayes have it, so ordered, Mr. Majority Leader. Mr.
• The ayes have it, so ordered.
• The ayes have it, so ordered. The ayes have it, so ordered. Thank you. All right.
• Do you have it so ordered?

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate will come to order. The Secretary will call the roll.
• So that's one protection that already exists.
• This protects families, Senator. It's protecting families.
• We protect women and children in this body.
• We all have to live by those rules and they protect us. They protect our children.

Bills: SJR85, SCR29, SCR38, SCR42, SB23, SB39, SB209, SB227, SB240, SB330, SB527, SB584, SB618, SB619, SB636, SB663, SB715, SB732, SB758, SB801, SB825, SB826, SB843, SB844, SB847, SB870, SB884, SB912, SB957, SB1013, SB1020, SB1065, SB1143, SB1152, SB1164, SB1183, SB1257, SB1299, SB1325, SB1349, SB1413, SB1455, SB1539, SB1558, SB1574, SB1583, SB1624, SB1642, SB1643, SB1667, SB1717, SB1718, SB1727, SB1734, SB1756, SB1757, SB1784, SB1789, SB1832, SB1868, SB1870, SB1883, SB1896, SB1920, SB1924, SB1963, SB2010, SB2018, SB2024, SB2037, SB2052, SB2073, SB2111, SB2161, SB2196, SB2207, SB2253, SB2268, SB2322, SB2323, SB2332, SB2349, SB2371, SB2533, SB2570, SB2601, SB2626, SB2692, SB2705, SB2717, SB2774, SB2788, SB2877, SB2920, SB2, SB260, SB1786, SB1, HJR4, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR85, SJR84, SCR12, SCR39, SCR38, SCR42, SCR29, SCR4, SCR18, SCR43, SCR46, SB2023, SB825, SB2010, SB1870, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB1505, SB583, SB957, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1349, SB1433, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB618, SB393, SB1791, SB826, SB1257, SB870, SB529, SB209, SB1883, SB2024, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1860, SB2037, SB1924, SB2253, SB2018, SB2206, SB1963, SB1643, SB1299, SB841, SB668, SB584, SB1085, SB2431, SB1490, SB1868, SB2314, SB434, SB2046, SB1667, SB1727, SB2127, SB1975, SB1760, SB1734, SB1335, SB2246, SB2439, SB1624, SB1244, SB1468, SB2717, SB1612, SB1262, SB604, SB2395, SB1832, SB1745, SB1746, SB2207, SB1784, SB1524, SB528, SB437, SB269, SB1137, SB968, SB636, SB747, SB1325, SB1789, SB1455, SB2056, SB1940, SB2052, SB1579, SB2068, SB3034, SB844, SB1920, SB1558, SB1236, SB1044, SB884, SB463, SB227, SB240, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1626, SB1845, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB1717, SB2141, SB2323, SB2200, SB2332, SB2199, SB1642, SB1757, SB2050, SB1138, SB2626, SB2458, SB1864, SB2201, SB1862, SB1583, SB1055, SB2660, SB1898, SB2662, SB2161, SB2964, SB2881, SB1065, SB801, SB2743, SB2533, SB1413, SB2073, SB3014, SB3013, SB2774, SB2702, SB2629, SB2443, SB2349, SB2167, SB2145, SB2121, SB758, SB648, SB647, SB512, SB438, SB1721, SB2268, SB1495, SB2705, SB2366, SB1422, SB1369, SB1013, SB682, SB2692, SB2570, SB2797, SB2111, SB1896, SB1164, SB1020, SB663, SB2371, SB1152, SB2196, SB2383, SB2581, SB2798, SB330, SB646, SB843, SB1998, SB1418, SB2788, SB1169, SB2873, SB1754, SB1534, SB1718, SB2779, SB2004, SB1143, SB1756, SB912, SB2119, SB2032, SB527, SB1580, SB1952, SB2601, SB2322, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB407, SB2392, SB2076, SB2786, SB3031, SB2877, SB2876, SB2284, SB2225, SB1540, SB2920, SB2929, SB1395, SB1972, SB2540, SB1183, SB2742, SB2595, SB2217, SB2117, SB715, SB2330, SB1964, SB1383, SB500, SB1640, SB39, SB2001, SB2080, SB2722, SB506, SB2514, SB2623, SB2658, SB1574, SB2900, SB23, SB2753, SB2398, SB401, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB467, SB1449, SB2529, SB1531, SB2846, SB2476, SB2031, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, HB135, HB1109, SCR48, SB31, SB2880, SB1359, SB2386, SB771, SB2844, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB2807, SB2351, SB410, SB659, SB816, SB2776, SB2693, SB2580, SB1980, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB482, SB456, SB127, SB1666

Keywords: Texas constitutional amendment, property tax relief, school district taxes, ad valorem tax, homestead exemption, residence homestead, elderly homeowners, senior citizens, disabled homeowners, age 65 or older, school finance, tax exemption increase, local school taxes, property tax exemption, homestead tax relief, voter approval, school district revenue, tax rollback, disabled persons exemption, El Paso

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum, an invocation by Rabbi Kelly Levy, a gubernatorial message naming appointees to the Red River and Nueces River Authority boards, and several ceremonial recognitions, including Texas Woman’s University athletes, the Doctor of the Day, Balch Springs Day, St. Mary’s University, Austin Oaks Church’s centennial, and a memorial resolution for Marie Flickinger, which was adopted after remarks from members and a moment of silence. The chamber then moved to the calendar and took up a series of bills and resolutions. Several measures dealing with water and taxes were passed: Committee Substitute for SB 1413 on procedures for amending or revoking certificates of public convenience and necessity for certain water utilities; SB 1583 on groundwater conservation district management plans, amended by Blanco; SB 23 and SJR 85 to increase the school district homestead exemption for elderly and disabled homeowners, both passing with one nay; SB 2774 to classify industrial uniform and linen rental businesses as retail trade for franchise tax purposes; and SCR 29 designating El Paso as the official boot capital of Texas for 10 years. Members also adopted SCR 49 recognizing Austin Oaks Church’s 100th anniversary and SR 424 recognizing Balch Springs Day. The Senate also advanced a package of insurance and regulatory bills. Committee Substitute for SB 1643 would require prior approval from the Texas Department of Insurance for certain property and casualty rate changes over 10%, and Committee Substitute for SB 1642 would restructure TDI from a single commissioner to a three-commissioner model; both passed after debate about rising insurance costs, inflation, labor, reinsurance, and litigation. Committee Substitute for SB 1883, on land use assumptions, capital improvement plans, and impact fees, passed after discussion of transparency and local development costs. SB 826, enhancing penalties for DWI in an active school zone, passed with strong support. Two other controversial measures were also advanced: Committee Substitute for SB 1257, requiring health plan coverage for complications, reversals, and related care tied to gender transition procedures, passed to engrossment but was held there after a 20-11 vote; and Committee Substitute for SB 2024, banning disguised vape pens and, by amendment, hemp vape pens and other intoxicating-substance vape pens, passed. The final item shown was Committee Substitute for SB 240, the Texas Women’s Privacy Act, which was laid out by Senator Middleton and described as restricting access to sex-specific private spaces in public facilities based on biological sex, with civil penalties for violations; the transcript cuts off during the presentation of that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• are protected.
• are protected.
• The number one rule of government is public safety, law, and order, and women and children must be protected
• The number one rule of government is public safety, law, and order, and women and children must be protected
• That is crucial in order to protect women and children and their privacy and safety once and for all.

Bills: SB7, SB14

Keywords: gender designation, civil penalties, private civil rights, multiple-occupancy spaces, Texas Women's Privacy Act, law enforcement, confidentiality, personnel files, employee records, misconduct

Summary: The Committee on State Affairs heard testimony on Senate Bill 7, the Texas Women’s Privacy Act, with the author and committee substitute explaining that the bill would require public facilities to designate multi-use private spaces by biological sex, restrict access to women’s restrooms, locker rooms, showers, sleeping quarters, shelters, and correctional facilities, and create civil penalties and enforcement mechanisms. Members asked about how the bill would apply to family violence shelters, children in mixed-family settings, venue layout, and venue for lawsuits; the author said the bill was similar to prior legislation but with stronger penalties and the 15th Court of Appeals as the exclusive intermediate appellate court for challenges, while clarifying that trial venue should generally be local except for state agencies. The committee also heard that the bill would be amended to better address local venue concerns and shelter-related issues. Invited testimony was largely in support of the bill from witnesses who described personal experiences in women’s sports, prisons, shelters, and public facilities, arguing that single-sex spaces are necessary for privacy and safety. Supporters included parents, former incarcerated women, a Republican county chair, a legal advocate, and a prison educator, who cited incidents involving transgender-identifying individuals in locker rooms, shelters, prisons, and restrooms, and said the bill would restore sex-based boundaries and protect vulnerable women and girls. One witness from Texas Values said the bill was needed despite the recently enacted Women’s Bill of Rights, and another ADF witness said the measure would protect privacy in schools and shelters. Opponents testified that the bill would harm transgender and intersex Texans, create harassment and “gender policing,” and expose cisgender women and children to invasive enforcement. Several witnesses argued there is no evidence that transgender women pose a restroom safety threat, while others said the bill would worsen mental health, employment, and school conditions for trans people and could conflict with prison standards and federal law. Family violence advocates urged changes to protect shelter operations and clarify that children can stay with parents, while other witnesses said the bill would create barriers for victims seeking help. The hearing featured extensive public testimony on both sides, but no final vote or committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• the protection that they need.
• No one will protect you. That's all. What country won't protect you? Thank you for your testimony.
• Hearing none, it is so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• I think of my unborn child. child, who is now protected in my womb and who I will continue to protect

Bills: SB240, SB1183, SB1184, SB1577, SB2043, SB2051, SCR42, SJR68

Keywords: biological sex, gender identity, public facilities, civil penalties, local government, EBT, electronic benefits transfer, food stamps, SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, TANF, temporary assistance for needy families, welfare benefits, benefit card fraud, fraud hotline, card replacement, photo ID, recipient photograph, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• > order<00:17:49.120> statutes, And actually in Kentucky, in order to get a protective
• Um, so in order to get<00:18:08.320> a<00:18:08.559> protective<00:18:09.039> order,
• order, there has to be get a protective order, there has to be physical<00:18:11.600> injury,
• may not even have sought a protective may not even have sought a protective order<00:19:07.360><
• <00:38:08.320> order crime uh parties in protection order crime uh parties in protection order

Keywords: 00:00 - Call to Order/Roll Call 01:05 - Discussion of 26RS HB 418 21:23 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 418 22:40 - Discussion of 26RS HB 611 26:00 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 611 26:52 - Discussion of 26RS HB 598 51:25 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 598, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Families and Children met to consider three bills. House Bill 418, relating to domestic violence and child custody, was presented by Rep. Neimus with testimony from ZeroV and Greenhouse 17. The bill, as amended by a committee substitute, would require courts to prioritize family violence in custody decisions, create a rebuttable presumption against unsupervised visitation and custody after two or more acts of domestic violence, require certain offenders to complete parenting or intervention programs before unsupervised contact, require training for paid supervised visitation providers and parenting coordinators, and ensure victim advocates are available in protective order hearings. Members discussed the two-incident threshold, the definition of domestic violence under Kentucky law, fiscal impact, and whether the bill adequately addresses severity and context; the bill passed 14-0 with favorable expression. The committee then heard House Bill 611, also on domestic relations, presented by Rep. Dietz with support from ZeroV. The committee substitute would create a 10-year interpersonal protective order upon conviction for certain felony assaults, sexual offenses, and stalking involving family members, unmarried couples, or dating partners, and would expand reporting requirements related to domestic violence data, legal representation in protective order hearings, and child dependency/neglect/family violence data. Testimony emphasized improved tracking of cases and survivor safety. The bill passed the committee 14-0 with favorable expression. Finally, House Bill 598, relating to guardian ad litem and other appointed counsel, was presented by Rep. Dietz with testimony from Kentucky Youth Advocates. The bill, titled the Family Representation and Advocacy Act, would reorganize how legal representation is provided in child welfare cases by creating a Family Representation and Advocacy Commission under the Supreme Court, allowing the department to hire staff attorneys or contract with private attorneys, nonprofits, law school clinics, and social workers, and aiming to improve quality, accountability, compensation, and support. Testimony cited high caseloads, low compensation, attorney turnover, and delays in foster care cases. The committee substitute was adopted, and the bill passed 14-0 with favorable expression.

Transcript Highlights:

• to protect it, so I'd be able to have it.
• How is Rick Kilfoy protecting her best interests?
• They ordered a guardian to help. Yeah, right.
• So after that visit, my brother and his attorney got an order of protection against me and lied in that
• He violated orders of protection. He didn't pay his... Thank you. Orders of protection.

Summary: The Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Elder Abuse opened by explaining it was gathering testimony on elder abuse, especially alleged misconduct involving court-appointed systems such as guardians ad litem and fiduciaries, to identify gaps in law and oversight and develop legislative fixes. The chair limited each witness’s time, asked for names and contact information for follow-up, and repeatedly noted that some allegations might warrant referral to law enforcement, the attorney general, or county attorneys if basic criminal elements were present. Several witnesses described alleged abuse in guardianship, conservatorship, and fiduciary cases. Dr. Holly Lauder said her mother, who had Alzheimer’s disease, was subjected to allegedly deficient psychological capacity evaluations that ignored treating doctors and family input, leading to a fiduciary arrangement that later resulted in neglect. Kevin Axson described his mother’s probate case, saying a guardian ad litem and conservator were appointed after a family financial dispute, that the guardian ad litem and fiduciary had little contact with his mother, and that the estate was burdened with substantial fees and a $200,000 bond requirement. Frieda Alvarado testified about a 94-year-old client, Samuel Armento, saying he was isolated, medicated without his request, and treated without dignity after a fiduciary and care team took control. Bill Chalmers, Johnny Hamilton, and Kathy Hamilton also testified about Sam Armento’s case, alleging isolation, excessive fees, conflicts of interest, and poor oversight by fiduciaries and caregivers. Other witnesses raised broader concerns about Arizona probate practices. David Redkey said he has been under a long-running conservatorship despite earning degrees and maintaining capacity, and alleged that court-appointed professionals and fiduciaries overcharged his estate and blocked efforts to terminate the arrangement. Susan Wolfe described the Peyton case, alleging that a wife’s conservatorship and related court actions led to the loss of assets, exclusion of witnesses, and large fees for a relatively small monthly care bill. Dr. Lewis Heller, an OB-GYN and disciplinary committee member, said the medical evaluations he reviewed showed the people involved were competent and that the conduct he observed was unethical and possibly criminal. Renee Self testified that she lost her role as trustee and spent large sums defending her father’s estate, alleging that the probate process stripped her father of assets and limited her access to him despite APS findings that her actions were in his best interests. No formal committee votes or legislative actions were taken in the excerpt, but members repeatedly expressed concern, asked for documents and transcripts, and indicated they would follow up with witnesses and consider stakeholder meetings to craft legislation addressing oversight, transparency, and accountability in guardianship and fiduciary systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• So ordered. Thank you, Senator Woods. purpose of a call. Hearing no objections. So ordered.
• Is protected.
• So let's take this common sense path to protecting our environment, protecting our health, protecting
• So let's take this common sense path to protecting our environment, protecting our health, protecting
• Let's take this common sense path to protecting our environment, protecting our health, protecting our

Keywords: 996, all