Transcript Highlights:

• It is critical to the Legislature has a clear understanding of both their quality performance and financial
• of births.
• of time.
• of 21 with at least 90 continuous days of enrollment.
• purpose of that component of the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• the State of Idaho and the Congress of the United States.
• This is the formal statement by the legislature to go into code that we agree with the principles of
• supremacy of Article 6 of the U.S.
• Speaker, to declare a conflict of interest under Rule 80. Mr.
• Speaker, to declare a conflict of interest under Rule 80. I need Rule 80 on this one, too.

Transcript Highlights:

• But you made that decision that's in the best interest of your son.
• That doesn't show a level of interest in cooperation and understanding of what the problem Well, I can
• That doesn't show a level of interest in cooperation and understanding of what the problem The level
• of interest in cooperation and understanding of what the problem is.
• And the best interest of the children, because that's what we're talking about.

Summary: The special legislative study committee met with seven members present, adopted minutes from prior meetings, and then heard public testimony from Terrell Butler and his father about a transfer-eligibility dispute involving Leesville High School and Anacoco High School. They described a family decision to move schools for broader educational and personal reasons, but said the student was ruled ineligible for varsity athletics despite strong grades and a desire to play basketball. Several members responded that the rule seemed to punish students for adult decisions and for transfers within the same parish, and they urged the family to keep working hard while the committee considered broader policy changes. The committee then reviewed a draft report containing factual findings about LHSAA and discussed recommendations. Members expressed concern about inconsistent enforcement, lack of transparency, limited accountability, and LHSAA’s repeated absence from committee meetings. The committee adopted findings for the report and approved three recommendations: creating a structured student-transfer eligibility process allowing one transfer through junior year; making the House and Senate representatives on the LHSAA executive committee voting members; and adding a governor-appointed voting member to the executive committee. Speaker Pro Tem Johnson then outlined broader options for legislative action. One proposal, adopted as the committee’s recommendation, would create a cooperative endeavor agreement framework between the Department of Education/BESE and a nonprofit to administer high school athletics, with public-records coverage subject to existing privacy exceptions and an option for nonpublic schools to participate. A second, more expansive proposal would create a state Office of Sanctioned Athletics within the Department of Education; the committee agreed to include that concept in the report for future discussion but not as a recommendation. The committee also authorized staff to finalize the report, incorporate the adopted findings and recommendations, make technical edits, and send the report to the House and Senate education committees and LHSAA. The meeting ended with closing remarks thanking staff and members, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, of course, a legislative employee cannot pursue private interests on state time.
• any specific prohibition against certain activities that would be a clear conflict of interest, such
• So, to the extent that there is kind of crossover or a bleeding of interest between the two, I believe
• the interests of everyone that is in that district, whatever walk of life they may represent.
• and other experiential attainment, a list of duties performed by the employees of DLA, a general statement

Committee: House Legislative Council

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> of the state. of the state.
• I just want to kind of look at this from a financial point.
• </c> care of it. care of it.
• </c> of Minnesota. of Minnesota.
• to get rid of a lot of the fraud and abuse of the system.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they can really have an accurate record as well as they assess the reliability of these statements
• </c> the reliability of these statements. the reliability of these statements.
• of whatever the possible statement was for whatever purpose that may be.
• of whatever the possible statement was for whatever purpose that may be.
• Not one of these statements was signed, and not one of these statements was recorded.

Committee: House Criminal Justice and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> and at the end of the day that's one of and at the end of the day that's one of our<00:10:18.959
• </c> years of somebody an estimated amount of years of somebody an estimated amount of at<00:27:04.559
• So, we're not understaffed in the city of Tuscaloosa because of a lack of effort.
• </c> Tuscaloosa because of a lack of effort. Tuscaloosa because of a lack of effort.
• My mailbox is full of notifications because I literally have taken such an interest.

Bills: HB450 , HB469 , SB298 , HB450 , HB638 , HB469 , SB298

Committee: House Public Safety and Homeland Security

Keywords: HB450, judges, judicial office, constitutional amendment, Alabama Constitution, age limit, mandatory retirement, judicial eligibility, supernumerary judge, judicial retirement, state judicial retirement benefits, election law, appointment, voter approval, ballot measure, Judiciary Committee, ambulance services, balance billing, health insurance, emergency transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• c> action</c> regardless of whatever course of action regardless of whatever course of action we<00:03
• /c> knowledge themselves of the uh of these knowledge themselves of the uh of these three<00:07:49.919
• </c> of well I heard I saw this I thought of of well I heard I saw this I thought of that.<00:15:53.600
• That's part of the..." >> But if a witness has um shared false statements with the media and then is
• Chair, I'm interested in your thoughts and any of the commission members.

Summary: The commission heard argument on a renewed motion to compel discovery and related sanctions in an ethics case. Enforcement counsel said the respondent had provided incomplete and inconsistent discovery responses, including no authenticated medical records, and asked the commission to compel full interrogatory answers, bar the respondent from relying on unsupported medical claims at hearing, allow subpoenas for medical records and an LRC report, and continue the December 2 hearing. Respondent’s counsel replied that the defense had complied with discovery, that medical records were being withheld for reasons previously discussed, and that no outstanding discovery remained. The next matter was enforcement counsel’s motion in limine, which sought to exclude a wide range of evidence as irrelevant to the three ethics charges already found to have probable cause. Counsel argued the hearing should focus only on whether the respondent intimidated Fox’s, offered a favor in exchange for a donation, and engaged in inappropriate conduct while intoxicated in his office, and not on complainants’ motives, media coverage, bullying, religious discrimination claims, LRC policies, or other legislators’ conduct. He also argued that any claim of mental or physical condition should be excluded absent supporting medical proof. Respondent’s counsel opposed the motion, saying the excluded topics went to witness credibility, bias, motive, and context, and that LRC materials and testimony from additional witnesses were important to the defense. Commission members questioned both sides about the breadth of the motion in limine and whether any topics could be agreed to as irrelevant. Counsel for the respondent maintained that some challenged topics, including Lexington media coverage and broader legislative practices, were relevant to credibility and context. Enforcement counsel responded that even if such conduct were common, it would not excuse a violation of the ethics code. No final ruling or vote was announced in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> issued that case of of Veagel um but issued that case of of Veagel um but with<00:01:28.159><c>
• </c><00:02:32.959><c> of</c><00:02:33.040><c> of</c><00:02:33.760><c> unserialized</c> implications of
• of of unserialized implications of of of unserialized uh<00:02:35.760><c> guns</c><00:02:36.239><c>
• </c> we are asking of gun owners of lawful we are asking of gun owners of lawful gun<00:42:15.040><c>
• In the interest of time, I'll take that and I'll just cut to the point.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you are interested in another part of this, you are certainly welcome to also participate today.
• interest and other matters critical to the subject of redistricting.
• As President of the Frederick Douglass Republicans of Tarrant County, I stand behind this statement.
• , seemingly representing his interests versus the welfare and well-being of the citizens of Texas.
• I want to live in a state, regardless of political party, that represents the interests of the people

Transcript Highlights:

• If the vendor fails to meet the required service terms of the contract, they're charged a financial penalty
• If the vendor fails to meet the required service terms of the contracts, they're charged a financial
• A financial penalty has probably been the strongest tool we’ve got since the signing of the amendment
• They have responded to the incentive of the financial penalty. Thank you. Thank you.
• Off of the base, yes. Off of the base.

Committee: House Corrections and Public Institutions

Transcript Highlights:

• fee is one of the cost drivers of the cost of the exact same visit.
• Representative, of experts, because it would be interesting to see which insurance covers, which don't
• So larceny of property of the value of stolen firearms is guilty of a third-degree felony when its value
• So what we can do—and what I've had a lot of people interested in doing, especially through the schools—is
• And to me, it's kind of an interesting thing that it's legalized, but I did not know, and I didn't catch

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 306, which would prohibit facility fees on certain routine health care services, including preventive care, vaccinations, and telehealth, while preserving fees in inpatient, emergency, and some rural hospital settings. The sponsor and Health Care Authority said the bill is meant to reduce surprise billing, improve transparency, and lower costs for patients and premiums. The Hospital Association opposed the measure as a potential threat to hospital operations, while insurers, consumer advocates, and a private citizen supported it. Members asked about rural exemptions, which hospitals would be affected, uninsured patients, and whether premiums might fall. The committee approved HB 306 on a 5-0 vote. The committee then considered House Bill 166, which would create statewide standards for battery-charged electric fences with alarm systems for commercial properties. Supporters said the bill would reduce permitting delays, provide uniform rules, and help businesses deter property crime. There was little opposition, and members focused mainly on signage requirements and the bill’s limited application to commercial, not residential, fencing. HB 166 was passed on a 4-0 vote. Next, the committee took up a proposed tax credit for gun safes tied to safe storage of firearms. Supporters argued it would encourage compliance with safe-storage laws and help people afford secure storage, but members raised concerns about the size of the credit, possible administrative complications, and whether it should be handled in tax committee instead. The sponsor agreed to roll the bill and work with stakeholders rather than move it forward immediately. The committee also heard Senate Bill 100, a committee substitute clarifying the definition of “dwelling” for burglary and aggravated burglary after a Supreme Court case involving a portal/porch area. Supporters, including law enforcement, business, and property-rights groups, said the bill would provide clarity and better reflect privacy expectations around enclosed spaces. The Public Defender and Criminal Defense Lawyers Association opposed it, arguing the law already distinguishes between trespass, attempted burglary, and burglary, and that the case was correctly handled under existing law. The committee passed SB 100 on a 6-0 vote. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 196 and House Bill 197, both governor’s bills increasing penalties for firearm-related offenses. HB 196 would raise the penalty for receiving a stolen firearm from a fourth-degree to a third-degree felony, and HB 197 would do the same for larceny of a firearm. Opponents argued higher penalties would not deter crime and could increase incarceration, while supporters from state police and the Chamber of Commerce said the bills target stolen guns that fuel violent crime. HB 196 was tabled on a 3-2 vote after debate over deterrence and the narrow scope of the offense. HB 197 was then heard separately, with no opposition testimony, and members discussed how the higher penalty would work in practice; the transcript ends before a final vote on HB 197 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• I actually, it's interesting, I've had somebody reach out to me about the same type of situation and
• I actually, it's interesting, I've had somebody reach out to me about the same type of situation and
• this statement where the individual swears to the truth of what they're saying, subject to criminal
• He said there has been a lot of interesting work in the last few years outside of state government, and
• interesting work that there's a lot of interesting work that's<05:11:37.798><c> taken</c><05:11:38.200

Committee: House Criminal Justice and Public Safety

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on House Bill 146, which would require longer retention and quicker disclosure of certain video recordings from traffic stops and similar motor vehicle violations when a citation is disputed. The prime sponsor described the bill as a response to a constituent who challenged a speeding ticket but could not obtain a cruiser video before it was deleted under the current 30-day retention practice. Supporters argued the bill is about fairness and access to potentially exculpatory evidence, and one member suggested a simple 60-day retention period might avoid confusion over different timelines. The sponsor also noted that the bill would not affect criminal cases and that victims and complainants should have access to the same evidence as law enforcement when a recording is relevant to a defense. Major Brendan Davey of the New Hampshire State Police testified in opposition. He said the proposal would create a different discovery standard for one type of evidence, could discourage agencies from adopting body-worn or cruiser cameras, and would add cost and administrative burden. He explained that the State Police already retain routine traffic-stop videos for at least 30 days, but keep videos much longer when complaints or possible litigation are involved, and said the current system balances efficiency with accountability. He also argued the underlying speeding case did not make the trooper video directly material to the citation, though he acknowledged the legislature could choose a longer blanket retention period if it wished. No vote was taken during the hearing. The committee then opened a public hearing on House Bill 638, which would allow people serving life without parole sentences to become eligible for a parole hearing at age 60 after serving at least 18 years, provided they have had no major conduct violations in the prior 10 years. The sponsor said the bill is intended to give a narrow second look to a small number of elderly prisoners, citing the high cost of incarceration and the health challenges of aging in prison. He emphasized that the bill would not automatically release anyone, would not apply to capital murder convictions under RSA 630:1, and would still allow victims to participate in the parole process. Testimony on HB 638 was mixed. Alexander Bailey, a survivor of violent crime and domestic violence advocate, supported the bill, saying many survivors favor rehabilitation, second chances, and restorative justice, and that people in prison often age faster and face serious health and safety problems. Another supporter, Russell Roy, began offering a personal story about crime, addiction, and violence in Concord, but the transcript cuts off before his full remarks. Committee members asked about why age 60 was chosen, how released individuals would support themselves, and whether victims or families would be consulted; the sponsor said 60 was meant to limit eligibility and reflect the health realities of prison, and that parole boards already consider support networks and victim input. No action or vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Amendment number three introduces a comprehensive conflict-of-interest, excuse me, provision prohibiting
• Jordan's line of questioning, and part of my concern is the risk of preemption.
• Of that 23%, most of it would be in the form of co-pays, a little over... ...would be in the form of
• And so for that, I think it is kind of a false statement from one of the most profitable industries in
• And so for that statement, I think it is kind of a false statement from one of the most profitable industries

Committee: House Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• I think the bill also reflects a strong statement of what our national security needs are.
• I think the bill also reflects a strong<04:26:46.080><c> statement</c><04:26:46.479><c> of</c><04:26:
• national strong statement of what our national security<04:26:48.000><c> needs</c><04:26:48.399><c>
• </c><04:59:32.798><c> of</c><04:59:32.958><c> our</c> going to serve the best interests of our going
• the House Committee on ranking member of the House Committee on Financial<05:01:51.760><c> Services,

Transcript Highlights:

• Just noting my agreement with some of your statements, such as your comment about the lack of a cap,
• Just noting my agreement with some of your statements, such as your comment about the lack of a cap,
• Just noting my agreement with some of your statements, such as your comment about the lack of a cap,
• Just noting my agreement with some of your statements, such as your comment about the lack of a cap,
• 01:21:51.679><c> your</c><01:21:51.920><c> statements</c> agreement with some of your statements agreement

Committee: House Housing

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think some of them are going to have to be resurrected so that we can be reminded of some of them
• And there was a lot of hours and a lot of work and a lot of debate, healthy debate, that took place and
• And we want this to be a collaboration of all of us.
• of children today are not the same as the interests of children yesterday.
• After hearing and in writing that it is in the interest of justice to do so.

Summary: The Juvenile Justice Policy and Oversight Committee (JJPOC) met for administrative updates, approved the April meeting minutes, and discussed a proposed shift from monthly full committee meetings to a quarterly schedule beginning later this year. Members generally supported the change, saying it would reduce strain on agency and committee resources and allow more time for work groups to complete implementation tasks. Several members also asked for more flexible agendas and a clearer way to add issues between meetings, with staff suggesting a standardized form for submitting topics in advance. Work group updates covered cross-agency data sharing, diversion, education, incarceration, and community expertise. The data-sharing group reported continued work on the Equity Dashboard 2.0, a statewide expulsions analysis, municipal-level data collaboration with UConn’s IMRP, and a cross-system analysis of crossover youth. The diversion group described work on POST curriculum revisions for juvenile law, a youth-focused law enforcement interaction training, a community-police relationship toolkit, expansion of youth diversion teams, and pre-arrest diversion policy. The education group is reviewing implementation of the law creating educational oversight in juvenile facilities, along with a free public transportation pilot for high school students and truancy cleanup legislation. The incarceration group is tracking conditions of confinement, DOC restraint and chemical agent reports, the DOJ settlement monitoring process, the reentry success plan, and gender-responsive programming. The community expertise group emphasized elevating lived experience, youth voice, prevention, and conditions of confinement, with members urging the committee to focus on stability, infrastructure, and meaningful use of lived-experience perspectives. A major presentation from OPM outlined Connecticut’s effort to re-enter the federal Title II juvenile justice formula grant program. OPM explained the program’s core compliance requirements, including deinstitutionalization of status offenders, adult jail and lockup removal, sight-and-sound separation, and addressing racial and ethnic disparities. Staff said Connecticut is currently not fully compliant because of issues including youth being held in adult facilities and the state’s six-hour detention rule, and that Title II funding is on hold while OPM works toward compliance. OPM is developing a monitoring manual, identifying facilities to be monitored, and forming a state advisory group (SAG) to support the application and compliance process. Members questioned why a separate SAG is needed, whether JJPOC or the community expertise group could serve that role, and how lived-experience members would be selected; OPM said federal rules require the SAG to include youth or parents with lived experience and that the group cannot be composed of state or government employees in the key leadership roles. The committee agreed to circulate the federal parameters and ask members to suggest candidates for the SAG and to help move compliance work forward over the summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• Amendment number three introduces a comprehensive conflict-of-interest, excuse me, provision prohibiting
• Jordan's line of questioning, and part of my concern is the risk of preemption.
• Jordan's line of questioning, and part of my concern is the risk of preemption.
• Of that 23%, most of it would be in the form of co-pays.
• And so for that statement, I think it is kind of a false statement from one of the most profitable industries

Committee: House Insurance

Summary: The House Insurance Committee met on April 1 with a quorum present and first took up House Bill 938 by Rep. Turner, which would overhaul pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) regulation by setting a flat administration fee, requiring dispensing fees and NADAC-based reimbursement, mandating rebate pass-through, giving the Department of Insurance access to PBM data, and creating a reverse-auction process for PBM procurement. Turner said the bill is intended to level the playing field for independent pharmacies, improve transparency, and reduce hidden PBM practices. The committee adopted amendment set 1444 without objection, and Turner said additional conceptual amendments were still being worked on. Supporters included independent pharmacies and the PBM Accountability Project; opponents included union plan representatives, benefits consultants, and PBM/insurance industry witnesses who warned of higher costs, ERISA preemption problems, and likely litigation. After extended questioning on cost, preemption, and vertical integration, the committee reported HB 938 with amendments. The committee then considered House Bill 870, also by Rep. Turner, dealing with formulary placement and cost-sharing for generic drugs and biosimilars and limiting certain utilization management practices. Amendment set 1540 was adopted, revising and tightening technical definitions. Turner and a representative of the Association for Accessible Medicines argued the bill would help lower-cost generics and biosimilars gain market share and reduce patient costs, citing examples such as insulin and Humira biosimilars. Opponents from Louisiana Blue said the bill would force coverage based on wholesale acquisition cost rather than net cost, would raise premiums for fully insured members, and would mandate coverage of drugs that are not always the lowest net-cost option. Rep. Jordan again raised ERISA and preemption concerns, and committee members discussed whether the bill would interfere with tiering and plan design. After closing comments and a motion by Rep. Glorioso, HB 870 was reported with amendments, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It has a purpose statement, and not all areas of statute have that, but this one does.
• The gender of my kid should not be the first thing anyone is interested in, but somehow their gender
• This committee is one of the few in this legislative body devoted exclusively and explicitly to the interests
• This committee is one of the few in this legislative body devoted exclusively and explicitly to the interests
• I believe it is in the best interest of males and females to compete with their biological sex.

Committee: House Education Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• The Financial Planning Association of Minnesota is the leading professional organization for financial
• A warm thank you first of all to the members of the committee who have met with the Financial Planning
• association of financial planning association of Minnesota.<01:26:23.040><c> The</c><01:26:23.360><c
• The financial planning of Minnesota.
• The financial planning of miss<01:26:24.639><c> association</c><01:26:25.120><c> of</c><01:26:25.280>

Bills: HF2730 , HF2257 , HF2768 , HF1932 , HF2437

Committee: House Taxes