Transcript Highlights:

• We legislated were successful at it.
• This is a policy issue of division of responsibilities between the executive and the legislative branch
• <02:54:14.080> to interest of the executive branch to interest of the executive branch to
• outside legislative authorization. outside legislative authorization.
• This provision specifies that the executive branch cannot increase the 100 series beyond what is legislatively

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , and I saw him as the best... ...States, the governor is the commander of the executive branch, and
• And that we as a state would be forced, essentially, to pass legislation that said, do your job.
• And that we as a state would be forced, essentially, to pass legislation that said, do your job.
• to OCA, or is the governor's relationship with the judicial branch...”
• "Or is the governor's relationship with the judicial branch sufficient to ask for the information and

Bills: SB825

Keywords: illegal immigration, economic impact, environmental impact, financial impact, annual study, Texas, government report

Summary: The Senate Committee on Border Security heard testimony on Senate Bill 825 by Senator Middleton, as substituted, which would require an annual or biennial study of the economic, environmental, and financial impacts of illegal immigration in Texas. Middleton said the bill is intended to provide lawmakers with comprehensive data on costs to law enforcement, health care, education, infrastructure, and taxpayers, and to support possible federal reimbursement claims. Several senators, including Hinojosa and Eckhardt, agreed that a study is needed but raised concerns about bias, the scope of the study, and whether the Comptroller’s Office rather than the governor’s office should conduct it. Middleton argued the governor’s office was the best coordinating entity because it could direct multiple agencies to provide data, while Hinojosa and others emphasized the Comptroller’s expertise and prior 2006 study. Public testimony was generally supportive of the idea of a study but critical of the bill’s framing. Sarah Cruz of the ACLU of Texas said the study should be a full cost-benefit analysis and warned that focusing only on costs could create an anti-immigrant narrative. Danny Woodward of the Texas Civil Rights Project also supported the concept but recommended moving the study to the Comptroller or, alternatively, creating a neutral commission. Jaime Pointe of Every Texan likewise supported updating the 2006 analysis and said state agencies should be able to cooperate with a governor-led study. Resource witnesses from the governor’s office, HHSC, TEA, OCA, TDCJ, and DPS explained that data collection would be uneven across agencies. HHSC and TEA said they often do not collect immigration status and, in TEA’s case, federal law limits schools from requesting such information; OCA and TDCJ said they could provide only partial or indirect data unless new reporting requirements were added. DPS said it already has Operation Lone Star data but would need to collect additional information if tasked with the broader study. The chair asked the governor’s office to provide a follow-up answer on separation-of-powers and related authority questions by the following Tuesday, and the committee recessed subject to the call of the chair without taking a vote on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, the fraud<01:25:48.440> branch<01:25:48.880> does fraud branch does fraud branch does
• um to give the authority to the branch um to give the authority to the branch to<01:26:25.640>
• legislation across their jurisdictions. legislation across their jurisdictions.
• the proposed legislation.
• proposed legislation. proposed legislation.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 83, which would require hotel keepers to give adequate notice of service disruptions to guests and third-party vendors. The Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs Office of Consumer Protection supported the bill but asked for amendments to restore remedies and add a nonwaiver provision, arguing that without penalties the measure would lack consequences and that consumers should not be able to waive the notice rights. Supporters, including Unite Here Local 5 and individual testifiers, said guests deserve transparency and meaningful recourse when disruptions occur, especially for labor disputes, construction, or other service interruptions that affect the experience they paid for. Hotel industry representatives, including the American Hotel and Lodging Association, the Hawaii Hotel Alliance, and hotel workers/testifiers, opposed the bill in its current form while offering amendments. They said the measure was too broad, difficult to implement, and could interfere with collective bargaining, third-party booking systems, and existing contracts. They also argued that some disruptions are not easily known in advance and that the bill unfairly singles out hotels compared with other industries. One testifier emphasized that notice should be required only for actual, known disruptions rather than potential events, and another raised concerns about applying the bill to properties not directly involved in a labor dispute. After the SB 83 testimony, the committee moved on to SB 2798, which would make permanent and expand statewide the agricultural enforcement pilot program created in 2025 and rename it the agricultural enforcement program. The chair introduced the measure and called on the Hawaii Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity as the first testifier, but the transcript excerpt ends before testimony or any vote on SB 2798.

Transcript Highlights:

• branch in particular, they will find all of us here together during the legislative session, and they
• branch in particular, they will find all of us here together during the legislative session, and they
• Or attacking the legislative branch in particular, they will find all of us here together during the
• <01:37:54.159> branch<01:37:54.560> function to make this legislative branch function
• to make this legislative branch function safely<01:37:55.440> and<01:37:55.760> without

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I've been asked to give you a little update on legislative staff needs and the legislative branch building
• And what you might think the legislative branch needs in.
• But we went with the initial plan of let's cover all the needs that we believe the legislative branch
• wing to accommodate the legislative branch.
• And that money has been used for other purposes, not legislative-branch-related, for years.

Summary: The committee began with roll call, introductions of a new fiscal analyst and a new member, and approval of the March 19 minutes. The first major presentation was from the Office of Management and Budget on the state’s general fund and special fund status through May. OMB reported general fund revenues were running below the legislative forecast by about $76 million, driven largely by weaker individual income tax and sales tax collections, though the projected ending balance remained positive and above the budgeted level. The budget stabilization fund was above its cap and would transfer excess earnings to the general fund, and the legacy fund balance continued to grow. Members also asked about federal funding uncertainty and mineral leasing revenue variability. The committee then reviewed compliance reports and trust fund analyses, followed by discussion of a bill draft for the fixed-route city transportation network study. The draft would create a $15 million general fund grant program with a formula-based distribution to eligible fixed-route transit cities, intended to support operating and capital needs and help match federal transit funds. Transit officials from Minot and Fargo testified in support, explaining local fare and match structures and the difficulty of replacing aging buses and securing federal matching dollars. Several members questioned whether the program should be limited to the current four cities or broadened to future eligible urban areas, and whether local funding sources should be explored further. The committee did not finalize the bill draft at that point and planned to continue discussion at a later meeting. The committee also approved a bill draft repealing obsolete language related to approval of a bi-state authority with South Dakota, after staff explained that no agreements had ever been implemented and the provision appeared outdated. A roll call vote was taken and the motion carried. Later, the Department of Commerce and the Northern Plains UAS Test Site presented updates on uncrewed aircraft systems initiatives, including the Vantis radar data enclave, the drone replacement program, and efforts to build a revenue model for Vantis. Test site officials said FAA approval had been secured for the radar data program, replacement of noncompliant drones was underway, and future revenue could come from state and external users once pricing and intellectual property arrangements are finalized. Members asked about Chinese-made drones, supply chain issues, automation, and how the system would manage beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation then presented on the design of a new minimum-security prison and a reentry housing study. Officials said the proposed facility would relocate the minimum-security prison to the penitentiary campus, reduce costs from an earlier estimate, and provide more beds and programming space, with construction potentially beginning in 2027 and opening around 2031. They also described staffing needs, the planned move of women to the New England facility, and possible expansion of men’s housing there. The parole and probation chief described a reentry housing task force studying housing needs for people leaving incarceration, with a goal of developing data-driven recommendations for subsidies and support services; a representative from Protection and Advocacy closed by expressing general support for fixed-route and paratransit funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've been asked to give you a little update on legislative staff needs and the legislative branch building
• Then on top of that, you could build the structure that could accommodate the legislative branch.
• But we went with the initial plan of covering all the needs that we believe the legislative branch is
• wing to accommodate the legislative branch.
• And that money has been used for other purposes, not legislative-branch-related, for years.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, where is the executive branch on this? Are we talking about an additional secretary?
• But I think that the executive branch and the legislative branch will be working together on all of this
• and the legislative branch will be working together on all of this because it's to everybody's benefit
• If there is legislation that results from your study, they can assist with that.
• Legislation a year later. So absolutely, ROI is something we can absolutely help you.

Summary: The committee met to review an audit and recommendations from the Alliance for Opportunity as part of a broader study of social service and workforce development reform under Act 145 of 2025. Members discussed creating a more integrated, regional, and “one door to work” system that would combine eligibility screening, service delivery, and workforce connections across DHS, workforce, and related programs. Much of the discussion focused on reducing administrative overhead, improving coordination, and using tools such as AI and centralized databases to help applicants learn about benefits, training, and job opportunities while still preserving case managers and in-person help for people without digital access. Members also emphasized targeting groups with low labor-force participation, including people in generational poverty, rural residents, individuals reentering from prison, and people involved in the court system who may be employable but are not currently connected to employers. Several members raised concerns about benefit cliffs, the burden of repeated paperwork across agencies, and whether the system should include performance measures tied to cost per person served and return on investment. The committee agreed that quantifiable savings and outcomes should be part of the study and future recommendations. The committee then considered and discussed a draft consultant services agreement with Work Ed Consulting LLC, represented by Mason Bishop, to assist with the study. Bureau of Legislative Research staff explained that the contract would run through June 30, 2027, with a maximum amount of $158,000, billed on actual hours and expenses, and could be expanded by up to 10% if needed. Bishop said he could provide ongoing ROI updates and technical assistance based on his experience in other states. After discussion, the committee voted to move forward with the contract, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Analysis Office; and Anita Lee, Legislative Analysis Office.
• Caitlin O'Neill with the Legislative Analyst's Office.
• I think you're the most underfunded branch, and I think that...
• And of them, 13, or about 60%, are for implementing new legislation.
• A hundred of those cases are directly related to the recent legislation.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• She explained that the legislative auditor is within the legislative branch of government, and that this
• was part of the original discussions about putting the OIG in the legislative versus executive branch
• She said the OIG does not have authority to investigate within any legislative branch agency; it is limited
• investigate within any legislative investigate within any legislative branch<00:53:35.280> agency
• It is executive branch branch agency. It is executive branch agencies. agencies. agencies.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate File 856, which would create an Office of the Inspector General to combat fraud in state public programs. Representative Norris described the bill as the product of a long bipartisan, bicameral working group and emphasized the office’s independence, five-year term, Senate confirmation, removal-for-cause protections, authority to investigate entities receiving public funds, prevention-focused duties, and required public and annual reporting. Representative Anderson PE also thanked the bipartisan authors and staff, saying the bill was the result of extensive negotiations and should move forward without reopening the agreement. Members then considered several amendments. Norris offered a technical cleanup amendment, A44, to clarify language about embedding employees at the Department of Education, distinguish civil and criminal investigative authority, and update law-enforcement terminology; it was adopted. Anderson PE then offered and secured adoption of a technical amendment, A45, to correct a drafting error. Representative Cleorne offered A37 to add prepayment review procedures for all agencies, but it failed on a roll call, 65-67. Cleorne also offered A38 to appropriate $15 million for OIG modernization and data-sharing improvements, but withdrew it after noting it would be out of order. A39, which would have renamed the proposed law enforcement unit from an anti-fraud and waste bureau to an anti-fraud and enforcement unit, failed on a roll call, 66-67, after debate over whether “waste” should be included in the title and scope. During debate on the naming amendment, supporters argued the title should better reflect law-enforcement work and avoid implying the office was a “waste” agency, while opponents said the existing language reflected the bipartisan working-group agreement and that changing it could jeopardize the bill’s progress. Representative West cited inspector general standards that include waste among their duties, and Representative Pinto questioned the substantive basis for opposing the change. Later, Representative Mhler offered A41 to eliminate the future law-enforcement agency entirely, arguing it would be duplicative and unfunded; the transcript cuts off before the vote on that amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• executive branch base reductions. executive branch base reductions.
• state workers in the executive branch. state workers in the executive branch.
• As indicated, this is the branch budget bill for the judicial branch.
• the Southern Legislative Conference. the Southern Legislative Conference.
• breakfast uh open to all legislators. breakfast uh open to all legislators.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The meeting opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved into committee and floor reports. Several measures received favorable committee reports and were ordered to first reading and placed on the calendar, including Current Resolution 9, Senate Joint Resolution 23, House Bill 145, House Bill 567, and House Bill 506 with House Committee Substitute 1. The chamber also noted that House Bills 500 and 504 had already received two readings and were sent to the Rules Committee before House Bill 500 was brought up for final consideration. Most of the discussion focused on House Bill 500, the executive branch budget bill. Members described it as a “good first draft” and emphasized a budget process they said was more transparent than in prior years. The bill was presented as a restrained two-year operating budget with spending growth kept at a little under 2% annually, while setting aside about 2% of projected revenues, or roughly $614 million, in the Budget Reserve Trust Fund for future needs. The budget also used base reductions in some areas while exempting others such as Medicaid benefits, SEEK, corrections, behavioral health, and veterans programs. Subcommittee chairs then outlined major spending areas. Education provisions included a 2% annual increase in base SEEK funding, transportation funding held flat, equalization for recallable nickel funding, continued retirement contributions, and major support for postsecondary access, dual credit, asset preservation, and workforce training. Health and family services provisions held Medicaid steady while adding waiver slots, behavioral health and substance use support, public health investments, and funding for rural health and laboratory capacity. Other sections covered personnel and pensions, veterans services, infrastructure, public safety, economic development, tourism, and environmental projects. The only recorded action on the floor was adoption of House Committee Substitute 1 to House Bill 500, followed by a motion for final passage of the bill as amended. The transcript ends as discussion on final passage begins, before any final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• participation in the legislative participation in the legislative process. process. process.
• . legislation. legislation.
• ordinary legislation. ordinary legislation.
• that is the legislative intent of ERA. that is the legislative intent of ERA.
• And no longer will there be representation of the people in the legislative branch on that particular

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's really shameful that Secretary Simon, who's not even a member of this branch, overstepped his
• officials don't get to interfere in the legislative branch.
• to receive per diem for the 2025-26 legislative session.
• officials don't get to interfere in the legislative branch.
• to receive per diem for the 2025-26 legislative session.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House Republican leaders held a press availability focused on the ongoing Minnesota House stalemate caused by the absence of Democratic members, which left the chamber without a quorum. Speaker Lisa Demuth and Leader Harry Niska said Republicans were present and ready to work, argued that Democrats were refusing to attend session, and said the Secretary of State had not allowed motions to be taken on the floor. They also criticized Secretary of State Steve Simon for adjourning the House and for not recognizing Republican motions or members. Niska described a proposed motion under Article 4, Section 13 of the Minnesota Constitution that would have compelled absent members to attend the next session and would have withheld their legislative salary and per diem until they returned. He said the motion was blocked and argued that the Constitution gives the House authority to compel attendance and impose penalties. The leaders repeatedly said Democrats needed to “show up for work,” and said the situation was delaying negotiations over a power-sharing agreement and other House business. The discussion also touched on Representative Brad Tabke, whose seat has been part of the dispute. Republicans said Tabke had not appeared in the chamber and that his absence was not helping negotiations. Demuth said Republicans would return the next day at 3:30 p.m. and continue working if Democrats appeared. No votes were taken, and no motion was adopted during the availability.

Transcript Highlights:

• Duna for legislation to establish a sick leave bank for Gregory Baker, an employee of the Suffolk County
• I want to thank the Senate president who made clear at the start of this legislative session that she
• The entire first meeting, Trained in deciphering legislative language.
• So moving the date... ...a day or two before the end of the legislative session.
• under the order for temporary rules of the two branches for 25 26 legislative session I hereby transfer

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate first adopted three congratulatory resolutions recognizing the retirements of Dolores Hayes, Lisa Audet, and Kate Fitzpatrick. It then handled several procedural matters, including suspending Joint Rule 12 to refer a sick leave bank bill for a Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office employee to the Committee on Public Service and referring House petitions to their respective committees. The chamber also adopted a conference report on the joint rules for the 2025-2026 session after remarks from Senators Creem, Tarr, Lovely, and Fattman emphasizing transparency, public access, recorded votes, longer notice for hearings and conference reports, remote participation, and periodic review of the rules. The report was accepted by a 40-0 roll call. The Senate then took up the bill strengthening health care protections in the Commonwealth, Senate No. 2538, commonly described as Shield Act 2.0. Senator Friedman and others argued the bill was needed to protect reproductive and gender-affirming care from out-of-state and federal interference, to limit disclosure of sensitive information, to create a state-level EMTALA-style protection for emergency care and active labor, and to strengthen privacy and licensing protections for providers and institutions. Senators Cyr, Lovely, and Fattman also spoke in support, framing the bill as a response to recent federal and state threats and as an extension of Massachusetts’ prior shield-law work. The chamber considered numerous amendments. Several were rejected, including amendments by Senators Finegold and Keenan and multiple Tarr amendments on topics such as medical records, consistency with existing law, and public health data collection. Some amendments were adopted, including a Montigny amendment on health-connected data disclosure, a Brownsberger amendment further protecting privacy for reproductive and gender-affirming care, a Rauch amendment clarifying protections for patients in active labor, a Tarr amendment removing an exemption for data from personal tracking devices, and a Rodrigues corrective amendment. After the amendments, the Ways and Means substitute was adopted, the bill was ordered to a third reading, and it then passed to be engrossed by a 37-3 roll call. At the end of the session, the Senate adopted a memorial adjournment in honor of former Senate Majority Leader Louis P. Bertinazi. The Governor also filed a message submitting a bill to build resilience for Massachusetts communities, authorizing future capital spending for energy and environmental affairs, which was referred to the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources. The Senate then adopted an order to meet again the following Monday at 1 p.m. and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• AND THIS IS THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH THAT ACTUALLY GIVES YOU THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY TO DO YOUR RULES
• >> IF THERE WAS A DIRECTIVE FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH THAT IS UNLAWFUL AND OF COURSE THE AGENCY WOULD
• YOU LUCKILY ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF A LEGISLATIVE SESSION RIGHT NOW THAT COULD CERTAINLY HELP YOU.
• IT WILL BE GREAT TO SEE THE POTENTIAL PROVISIONS HAPPENING WITH THEM BOTH LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES OR PERHAPS
• ARE WE PLANNING TO PROPOSE LEGISLATION OR DO AN AMENDMENT ON CURRENT ISSUES?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Bills: SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB1515, SB2835, HB2282, SB3083, SB2031, SB2519, SB2667, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB2861, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: salvage vehicles, vehicle title transfer, electronic signatures, insurance, administrative efficiency, bribery, corruption, statute of limitations, public servant, criminal justice, deafness, traffic safety, law enforcement, vehicle registration, communication, biological evidence, DNA analysis, post-conviction, evidence retention, court approval

Transcript Highlights:

• committee reports numbers 11-26 through 40-26, as listed on pages 1 through 7, will be deferred one legislative

Bills: SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB1515, SB2835, HB2282, SB3083, SB2031, SB2519, SB2667, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB2861, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: salvage vehicles, vehicle title transfer, electronic signatures, insurance, administrative efficiency, bribery, corruption, statute of limitations, public servant, criminal justice, deafness, traffic safety, law enforcement, vehicle registration, communication, biological evidence, DNA analysis, post-conviction, evidence retention, court approval

Bills: SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB1515, SB2835, HB2282, SB3083, SB2031, SB2519, SB2667, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB2861, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: salvage vehicles, vehicle title transfer, electronic signatures, insurance, administrative efficiency, bribery, corruption, statute of limitations, public servant, criminal justice, deafness, traffic safety, law enforcement, vehicle registration, communication, biological evidence, DNA analysis, post-conviction, evidence retention, court approval

Bills: SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB1515, SB2835, HB2282, SB3083, SB2031, SB2519, SB2667, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB2861, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: salvage vehicles, vehicle title transfer, electronic signatures, insurance, administrative efficiency, bribery, corruption, statute of limitations, public servant, criminal justice, deafness, traffic safety, law enforcement, vehicle registration, communication, biological evidence, DNA analysis, post-conviction, evidence retention, court approval

Transcript Highlights:

• backfill any federal cuts or cost shares, they can do this out of that fund on their own without legislation
• :02:46.320> their<01:02:46.480> own<01:02:46.680> without<01:02:46.920> legislation
• fund on their own without legislation fund on their own without legislation being<01:02:47.520><

Bills: HB2241, HB1163, HB1514, HB1696, HB2021, SB2135, SB2466, SB2727, SB3082, SB3097, SB2861, SCR100, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, SCR162, SB2614, SB3118, SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: renewable energy, income tax credit, solar energy, wind energy, low-income households, energy policy, commercial drivers license, non-domiciled, federal regulations, commercial learner's permit, citizenship, lawful residency, Department of Transportation, workers' compensation, vocational rehabilitation, injury recovery, employment services, return to work, commercial driving, driver's license

Bills: HB2241, HB1163, HB1514, HB1696, HB2021, SB2135, SB2466, SB2727, SB3082, SB3097, SB2861, SCR100, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, SCR162, SB2614, SB3118, SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: renewable energy, income tax credit, solar energy, wind energy, low-income households, energy policy, commercial drivers license, non-domiciled, federal regulations, commercial learner's permit, citizenship, lawful residency, Department of Transportation, workers' compensation, vocational rehabilitation, injury recovery, employment services, return to work, commercial driving, driver's license