Transcript Highlights:

• One that comes to mind right off the top of the head is the memorization of times tables and the cursive
• One that comes to mind right off the top of the head is the memorization of times tables and the cursive

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up HB 129, which would redefine “evidence-based” in public education. The Department of Education testified that the bill’s definition would conflict with federal definitions and be very restrictive, potentially affecting a wide range of instructional methods, curriculum materials, teacher training, civics requirements, suicide prevention training, and other programs. The department said the bill could force a broad overhaul of school practices, create local implementation burdens, and require at least one new state position, with a fiscal note estimating roughly $118,000 in FY 2026 rising in later years. Members also raised concerns about possible impacts on federal pass-through funding and whether the bill was workable. Representative Papovich moved to retain HB 129, and the motion passed 7-0. The committee then heard HB 133, a Department of Safety/DMV bill involving follow-up when a person votes using an out-of-state license or non-driver ID and then does not obtain a New Hampshire credential within the statutory timeframe. DMV officials said the bill would require a $40,000 technology upgrade plus a new full-time position, and that the fiscal note did not include postage or fully account for the manual work needed to match records, send notices, and review responses. They said the proposal also raised broader tracking issues because it would apply not only to voters but to anyone who had not obtained a New Hampshire license within 60 days, and they questioned whether DMV was the proper agency to make those inquiries. Committee members pressed the department on how the 60-day clock would be determined, whether the bill could amount to a kind of poll tax or raise privacy concerns, and whether voter ID cards or other exceptions would avoid that problem. The department explained that New Hampshire offers a free voter identification card through town clerks for people without a license or state ID, but said the bill did not exempt those cards and that the DMV would still be asked to investigate status after voting. Officials also said the bill would be difficult to enforce, that some cases would be ambiguous, and that any response from the DMV would likely amount to a request for information rather than an enforceable consequence. No vote on HB 133 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• remarks, I would like the record to reflect that I am reading my testimony, which has been written in cursive

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm writing as a concerned citizen to express my opposition to the proposed bill, both bills actually
• c><01:22:47.840> I'm the Senate Judiciary Committee I'm the Senate Judiciary Committee I'm writing
• as a concerned citizen to writing as a concerned citizen to express<01:22:50.639> my<01:22:50.880
• c><01:25:33.639> U I'm actually very lucky because most kids, the younger people, can't do cursive
• I meet so many high school kids who are like, 'Oh, I can't write my name.' I'm like, 'I know.'

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that could be a 12-year-old writing a book report that gets published in the local newspaper.
• So that could be a 12-year-old writing a book report that gets published in the local newspaper.
• So that could be a 12-year-old writing a book report that gets published in the local newspaper.
• So that could be a 12-year-old writing a book report that gets published in the local newspaper.
• So that could be a 12-year-old writing a book report that gets published in the local newspaper.

Keywords: 928, house, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• they should balance their budget, what tools are we giving them to do that, and except us having to write
• I've seen some settlement agreements, helped write some of those, and typically you put a clause in there
• I've seen some settlement agreements, helped write some of those, and typically you put a clause in there

Bills: SB65, SB248, SB330, SB378, SB844, SB1330, SB1410, SB1475, SB1476, SB1565, SB1618, SB1623, SJR39, SJR47, SB2084, SB1655, SB1679, SB2174, SB1775, SB1873, SB1204, SB1884, SB1916, SB1937, SB1447, SB1500, SB2007, SB2074, SB1944, SB2018, SB1984, SB2026, SB2045, SB2049, SB2062, SB2112, SB2118, SB2127, SB2134, SB2135, SB2139, SB2154, SB1195

Keywords: SB65, naloxone, Narcan, opioid overdose, overdose reversal, opioid antagonist, emergency opioid antagonist, substance abuse services, harm reduction, public health, overdose prevention, good samaritan, civil immunity, criminal immunity, controlled substances, addiction treatment, fentanyl, opioid crisis, school overdose response, first aid

Transcript Highlights:

• It's my understanding that it would allow them to write in the whole 77 counties.
• So, I understand that they could write less than two times. Is that correct?
• They have to get approval to write anything over two times but less than 1.5 times.
• And so, is there any limit on the amount that they can write right now? Thank you for the question.
• They have to get approval to write anything over two times but less than 1.5 times.

Bills: SB65, SB248, SB330, SB378, SB844, SB1330, SB1410, SB1475, SB1476, SB1565, SB1618, SB1623, SJR39, SJR47, SB2084, SB1655, SB1679, SB2174, SB1775, SB1873, SB1204, SB1884, SB1916, SB1937, SB1447, SB1500, SB2007, SB2074, SB1944, SB2018, SB1984, SB2026, SB2045, SB2049, SB2062, SB2112, SB2118, SB2127, SB2134, SB2135, SB2139, SB2154, SB1195

Keywords: SB65, naloxone, Narcan, opioid overdose, overdose reversal, opioid antagonist, emergency opioid antagonist, substance abuse services, harm reduction, public health, overdose prevention, good samaritan, civil immunity, criminal immunity, controlled substances, addiction treatment, fentanyl, opioid crisis, school overdose response, first aid

Bills: SB6, SB62, SB74, SB90, SB104, SB119, SB132, SB133, SB135, SB182, SB185, SB193, SB207, SB217, SB229, SB233, SB260, SB262, SB280, SB281, SB300, SB306, SB378, SB382, SB393, SB403, SB422, SB427, SB431, SB434, SB442, SB452, SB456, SB468, SB472, SB487, SB503, SB6

Keywords: cloud seeding, Nevada, water conservation, agriculture, Desert Research Institute, victim compensation, hate crimes, property remediation, criminal justice, vulnerable persons, elections, voter registration, mail ballots, candidate eligibility, cybersecurity, education funding, teacher grants, classroom supplies, instructional support, specialized personnel

Bills: SB330, SB2069, SB2095, SB1721, SB1433, SB1316, SB1280, SB1455, SB1456, SB1457, SB1459, SB1461, SB1463, SB1465, SB1466, HJR1088, SB1684, SB378, SB1447, SB1920, SB1443, HR1047, SB1877, SB1884, SB1365, SB2174, SB1525, SB1810, SB1771, SB1805, SB1916, SB1530, SB1847, SB1990, SB2060, SB1992, SB1579, SB1778, SB2132, SB1623, SB2067, SB1589, SB1441, SB1224, SB372, SB1232, SB1264, SB1450, SB2011, SB2030, SB1980, SB1936, SB1477, SB1593, SB1725, SB1670, SB1480, SB1726, SB1633, SB1735, SB1632, SB1277, SB1217, SB1826, SB1824, SB1813, SB1326, SB1937, SB1641

Keywords: elk population, wildlife management, Oklahoma State University, veterinary medicine, ecosystem health, habitat assessment, waterfowl hunting, crane hunting, hunting guide, hunting outfitter, wildlife conservation, commercial hunting, outfitter license, guide license, hunting services, licensed guide, licensed outfitter, game and fish, hunting for compensation, waterfowl guide

Bills: SB2347, SB2911, SB2033, SB2158, SB2993, SB2778, SB2672, SB2014, SB3144, SB3096, SB3097, SB2968, SB2363, SB3154, SB2400, SB3313, SB2896, SB3279, SB2614, SB2687, SB2754, SB2549, SB3325, SB2658, SB2659, SB2602, SB2611, SB2877, SB3063, SB2615, SB3232, SB2875, SB3272, SB2854, SB3203, SB2803, SB2804, SB3302, SB3229, SB2969, SB2412, SB2657, SB2880, SB2540, SB2414, SB3142, SB3202, SB2281, SB2852, SB2272, SB2479, SB2589, SB2936, SB2720, SB2730, SB2749, SB2688, SB2798, SB3040, SB3107, SB3010, SB3109, SB3140, SB3187, SB2057, SB2377, SB3048, SB3083, SB3182

Keywords: tenant rights, landlord obligations, housing crisis, eviction prevention, multilingual access, intoxicating liquor, direct shipment, breweries, distilleries, Hawaii, renewable energy, grid-ready homes, interconnection process, electric utility, energy independence, surcharge, customer access, energy storage, smart inverters, veterinary workforce

Transcript Highlights:

• He said that students would still be assessed on writing, so the proposal is not eliminating writing
• Could they go to a testing center and take that SAT writing? Nobody looks at SAT writing.
• And that's because they were uncertain that the approach that the SAT writing sample uses to writing
• The SAT writing sample did not accurately reflect students' abilities to write at the college level.
• provides a writing score.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education met with four members present, adopted the December 10, 2025 minutes, and excused absent members. The agenda was testimony only on House Bills 4556 and 4557, along with substitute versions of each bill. The committee adopted the S-1 substitutes for both bills by unanimous 4-0 votes. The bills were described as bipartisan measures aimed at reducing standardized testing burden for Michigan 11th graders. Representative Kolazar explained that HB 4556 would eliminate the SAT writing component from the Michigan Merit Exam and remove the requirement that MME scores be placed on high school transcripts. He said the transcript requirement is a legacy of an older test and no longer serves its original purpose. Testimony from the Michigan College Access Network, the Michigan Association of Secondary School Principals, and the Michigan Association for College Admissions Counseling supported the bills, arguing that the SAT essay is outdated, not used by Michigan public universities, adds cost and stress, and can disadvantage Michigan students in a test-optional admissions environment. Witnesses also said removing the transcript requirement would give students more control over whether to share scores and could save time and money for schools and the state. Committee members asked whether Michigan public universities require SAT writing, whether employers use it, and why the transcript requirement remains in law. Witnesses responded that none of Michigan’s public universities require SAT writing, employers generally do not use the SAT, and the requirement dates back to an earlier assessment system. Several witnesses emphasized that the essay does not meaningfully measure college writing ability and that students often treat it as a perfunctory exercise. One member noted the change could reduce the overall 11th-grade testing burden and free up instructional time. Written cards were read into the record showing support from the Michigan Association of School Boards, Michigan Education Association, Michigan Alliance for Student Opportunity, Michigan Association of Superintendents and Administrators, and Wayne RESA, with the Michigan Department of Education listed as neutral. The committee then adjourned without taking final action on the bills beyond adopting the substitutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• in the name of a write-in candidate.
• So there'll be a space where you could write in, and you could write in one name or two names, whatever
• you want to write in that space.
• Do you have to write in and mark the spot, or if you write it in, would that be enough?
• So when it involves a write-in and you only require the write-in, it creates a problem: they have to

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Motion in writing. Mr.
• Following motion in writing. Motion in writing. Mr.
• Following motion in writing. Motion in writing. Mr.
• I'll call the motion in writing. Motion in writing. Mr.
• Following motion in writing. Motion in writing. Mr.

Bills: SJR 5, SJR 27, SB 4, SB 6, SB 7, SB 9, SB 13, SB 15, SB 23, SB 27, SB 30, SB 40, SB 57, SB 66, SB 140, SB 268, SB 293, SB 331, SB 413, SB 437, SB 447, SB 457, SB 467, SB 506, SB 510, SB 512, SB 568, SB 571, SB 650, SB 710, SB 763, SB 785, SB 800, SB 850, SB 863, SB 865, SB 904, SB 905, SB 973, SB 974, SB 1191, SB 1281, SB 1300, SB 1362, SB 1494, SB 1504, SB 1522, SB 1540, SB 1567, SB 1579, SB 1580, SB 1610, SB 1660, SB 1723, SB 1760, SB 1838, SB 1923, SB 1946, SB 1957, SB 1964, SB 2018, SB 2024, SB 2121, SB 2167, SB 2217, SB 2221, SB 2321, SB 2337, SB 2368, SB 2373, SB 2407, SB 2431, SB 2477, SB 2587, SB 2615, SB 2753, SB 2807, SB 2900, SB 2965, SB 2972, SB 2986, SB 3039, SB 3047, SB 3059, SB 3070, SB 1, SB 8, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15, SB 17, SB 21, SB 30, SB 37, SB 260, SB 268, SB 331, SB 379, SB 441, SB 447, SB 457, SB 509, SB 650, SB 763, SB 1198, SB 1405, SB 1506, SB 1566, SB 1610, SB 1637, SB 1660, SB 1833, SB 2018, SB 2024, SB 2155, SB 2217, SB 2308, SB 2337, SB 2601, SB 2753, SB 2778, SB 2878, SB 2900, SB 3059, HB 4, HB 145, HB 300, HB 493, HB 2011, HB 2067, HB 2516, HB 2525, HB 2885, HB 2974, HB 3071, HB 3372, HB 3595, HB 5138, HB 5246, HB 796, HB 1523, HB 5294, HB 748, HB 3395, HB 180, HB 3171, HB 4690, HB 146, HB 5596, HB 5694, HB 1135, HB 3225, HB 186, HB 1449, HB 3793, HB 112, HB 104, HB 4233, HB 1094, HB 3336, HB 3520, HB 3320, HB 5663, HB 2731, HB 2399, HB 111, HB 3483, HB 4580, HB 3748, HB 632, HB 4730, HB 127, HB 5690, HB 5689, HB 3385, HB 4359, HB 5381, HB 20, HB 123, HB 549, HB 5606, HB 2594, HB 1057, HB 3664, HCR 141, HCR 40, HCR 59, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 2023, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 507, SB 1434, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1122, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 1085, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 1200, SB 1845, SB 2458, SB 801, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 2797, SB 2076, SB 2876, SB 1640, SB 1449, SB 1181, SB 1234, SB 2926, SB 2841, SB 1528, SB 1854, SB 317, SB 1250, SB 2082, SB 1237, SB 2819, SB 629, SB 2608, SB 1602, SB 2009, SB 867, SB 640, SB 1698, SB 2680, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1483, SB 1444, SB 1553, SB 1556, SB 1703, SB 2133, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2622, SB 2955, SB 2334, SB 1367, SB 2044, SB 2363, SB 2565, SB 1888, SB 3036, SB 3057, SB 3043, SB 3063, SB 3035, SB 203, SB 2688, SB 2522, SB 2459, SB 2655, SB 2251, SB 1884, SB 2928, SB 2566, SB 2549, SB 2553, SB 2919, SB 1944, SB 1232, SB 1798, SB 2603, SB 2607, SB 2683, SB 1319, SB 3045, SB 3071, HB 20, HB 127, HB 549, HB 1094, HB 2594, HB 2731, HB 4233, HB 4690, SR 625, HCR 167, SJR 5, SB 4, SB 6, SB 9, SB 23, SB 40, SB 13, SB 15, SB 30, SB 268, SB 331, SB 447, SB 457, SB 568, SB 650, SB 763, SB 1540, SB 1610, SB 1660, SB 2018, SB 2024, SB 2217, SB 2337, SB 2753, SB 2900, SB 2972, SB 3059, HB 4, HB 145, HB 493, HB 2067, HB 2516, HB 2885, HB 2974, HB 3071, HB 3372, HB 3556, HB 3595, HB 5138

Keywords: bail, felony offenses, criminal justice reform, public safety, constitutional amendment, judicial conduct, state commission, judicial misconduct, commission membership, property tax, homestead exemption, school funding, state aid, electric power, interconnection, utilities, ERCOT, large load customers, water supply, sewer service

Summary: The meeting centered around the discussions of several key bills, notably HB4233, which aims to align Texas's money transmission licensing and auditing requirements with federal regulations. Senator Parker led the discussion, emphasizing the need for consumer protections around cryptocurrency kiosks that have become targets for fraud, particularly affecting vulnerable populations such as seniors. The meeting also saw lively debates on HB20, designed to reintegrate technical education into high schools, addressing skills shortages in the workforce. The bills were well received, with strong bipartisan support evident in the votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Motion in writing. Mr.
• In writing, the Secretary will read the motion. Motion in writing. Mr.
• Motion in writing, the Secretary will read the motion. Motion in writing. Mr.
• Following motion in writing. Motion in writing. Mr.
• Following motion in writing: Motion in writing, Mr.

Bills: SJR5, SJR27, SB4, SB6, SB7, SB9, SB13, SB15, SB23, SB27, SB30, SB40, SB57, SB66, SB140, SB268, SB293, SB331, SB413, SB437, SB447, SB457, SB467, SB506, SB510, SB512, SB568, SB571, SB650, SB710, SB763, SB785, SB800, SB850, SB863, SB865, SB904, SB905, SB973, SB974, SB1191, SB1281, SB1300, SB1362, SB1494, SB1504, SB1522, SB1540, SB1567, SB1579, SB1580, SB1610, SB1660, SB1723, SB1760, SB1838, SB1923, SB1946, SB1957, SB1964, SB2018, SB2024, SB2121, SB2167, SB2217, SB2221, SB2321, SB2337, SB2368, SB2373, SB2407, SB2431, SB2477, SB2587, SB2615, SB2753, SB2807, SB2900, SB2965, SB2972, SB2986, SB3039, SB3047, SB3059, SB3070, SB1, SB8, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB21, SB30, SB37, SB260, SB268, SB331, SB379, SB441, SB447, SB457, SB509, SB650, SB763, SB1198, SB1405, SB1506, SB1566, SB1610, SB1637, SB1660, SB1833, SB2018, SB2024, SB2155, SB2217, SB2308, SB2337, SB2601, SB2753, SB2778, SB2878, SB2900, SB3059, HB4, HB145, HB300, HB493, HB2011, HB2067, HB2516, HB2525, HB2885, HB2974, HB3071, HB3372, HB3595, HB5138, HB5246, HB796, HB1523, HB5294, HB748, HB3395, HB180, HB3171, HB4690, HB146, HB5596, HB5694, HB1135, HB3225, HB186, HB1449, HB3793, HB112, HB104, HB4233, HB1094, HB3336, HB3520, HB3320, HB5663, HB2731, HB2399, HB111, HB3483, HB4580, HB3748, HB632, HB4730, HB127, HB5690, HB5689, HB3385, HB4359, HB5381, HB20, HB123, HB549, HB5606, HB2594, HB1057, HB3664, HCR141, HCR40, HCR59, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2683, SB1319, SB3045, SB3071, HB20, HB127, HB549, HB1094, HB2594, HB2731, HB4233, HB4690, SR625, HCR167, SJR5, SB4, SB6, SB9, SB23, SB40, SB13, SB15, SB30, SB268, SB331, SB447, SB457, SB568, SB650, SB763, SB1540, SB1610, SB1660, SB2018, SB2024, SB2217, SB2337, SB2753, SB2900, SB2972, SB3059, HB4, HB145, HB493, HB2067, HB2516, HB2885, HB2974, HB3071, HB3372, HB3556, HB3595, HB5138

Keywords: bail, felony offenses, criminal justice reform, public safety, constitutional amendment, judicial conduct, state commission, judicial misconduct, commission membership, property tax, homestead exemption, school funding, state aid, electric power, interconnection, utilities, ERCOT, large load customers, water supply, sewer service

Transcript Highlights:

• Ultimately, we have an extremely accurate approach to grading writing, but grading writing is complex
• So imagine a student was scored an 8 on their writing on their writing question, 361 Um, but they are
• Uh, can I ask a question about the writing part because, you know, the SAT has a writing portion, but
• There was a 4th grade and 7th grade writing test plus writing embedded in the 9th and 10th grade test
• The grading of writing is a process that is designed to reach as objective a way to grade writing as

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Summary: The House Committee on Public Education met to hear House Bill 8, which would replace STAAR with a new assessment and accountability system beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The chair described the bill as reducing testing time, limiting benchmark tests, adding beginning-, middle-, and end-of-year assessments, requiring faster score turnaround, involving Texas teachers in test development, and tightening accountability timelines and transparency rules. Members also discussed provisions on A-F ratings, cut scores, CCMR, local accountability plans, and TEA reporting requirements. Committee members and invited witnesses split sharply on the bill’s approach. Supporters, including the chair, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath, and Ed Trust’s Nicholas Munyon Penny, argued the bill would reduce high-stakes pressure, provide quicker and more actionable data, limit over-testing, and better align assessments to Texas standards while preserving criterion-referenced accountability. They said the new system would help teachers and parents intervene sooner and would improve transparency, including parent access to student responses and automatic rescoring in some writing cases. Opponents, including Rep. Hinojosa and student witness Ella Moran, argued the bill still increases testing and replaces one high-stakes test with multiple TEA-created tests. Moran testified that STAAR creates anxiety, disrupts instruction, and does not reflect real learning, while Hinojosa said the House had previously passed a better bill based on a nationally norm-referenced model and criticized the new proposal as a concession to the Senate. Questions also focused on AI scoring of writing, rescoring rates, and whether the bill’s new accountability rules would be reliable and fair. The committee did not take a final vote during the portion provided, but the chair said a vote on HB 8 would be called after public testimony later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Motion in writing: Mr.
• The following motion in writing, the following motion in writing, this The following motion in writing
• Motion in writing: Mr.
• Following motion in writing. Motion in writing. Mr.
• Following motion in writing. Following motion in writing. Motion in writing. Motion in writing. Mr.

Summary: The Senate opened with an invocation by Senator West, approved the previous day’s journal, and then adopted several recognitions, including Senate Resolution 625 honoring the McLennan Community College Dance Team for winning two 2025 National Dance Alliance national titles. The chamber also recognized University of Texas Rio Grande Valley interns, the doctor of the day, and the San Antonio Coalition for Veterans and Families. The governor’s withdrawal of a Texas Lottery Commission nomination was received and the nomination was returned, and the Senate appointed numerous conference committees on pending bills. The body then took up and passed several measures, often by suspending the rules and the constitutional three-day rule. Senate Bill 4 and Senate Bill 23 were concurred in House amendments as part of property tax relief, with supporters emphasizing homeowner savings. House Bill 20 creating the Applied Sciences Pathway Program passed after a floor amendment and was described as a way to expand career and technical education and help students earn industry certificates in high-demand trades. House Bill 2594 passed to expand venue options for prosecuting certain theft and cybercrime cases, and House Concurrent Resolution 167 was adopted to correct a typo in House Bill 1314. The Senate also concurred in House amendments to Senate Bill 9, Senate Bill 40, Senate Joint Resolution 5, and Senate Bill 6. SB 9 and SJR 5 were presented as major bail-reform measures, with supporters saying they would strengthen public safety, clarify appeal procedures, and give judges and prosecutors more tools in serious cases; the debate included questions about records, counsel, and the standards for denying bail. SB 40 dealt with nonprofit bail-bond funding, and SB 6 addressed electricity and data-center growth. The chamber also passed House Bill 423 on digital asset service provider reporting and auditing, with amendments adding protections for cryptocurrency kiosks and a technical correction. Additional bills passed included House Bill 4690 on motor fuel standards, House Bill 1094 on transportation protection agreements, Committee Substitute for House Bill 2731 on roadside vendors and solicitors in certain border counties, Committee Substitute for House Bill 127 on protecting higher education from foreign adversaries and trade secret theft, and House Bill 549 on airway clearance devices at public school campuses. The Senate granted or requested conference committees on a long list of other measures, including HB 4, HB 145, HB 493, HB 2974, HB 3071, HB 3372, HB 3556, and multiple Senate bills. The session ended with adjournment until the following Friday morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you write me a treaty insurance reinsurance?
• Can you write me a treaty insurance reinsurance?
• concerned about the timeline for writing concerned about the timeline for writing new<00:44:33.960
• correct sir uh HP is not set up to write correct sir uh HP is not set up to write condominium<00
• <00:55:32.760> of on the ones that we already write of on the ones that we already write of

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But writing is inherently more complex, which means there is more disagreement on how any writing samples
• So this is the how to—how does one score the writing?
• But, if you are going to grade writing, which is what you want teachers to teach, writing inherits.
• Previously, and I guess to go back a ways, there was a 4th grade and 7th grade writing test plus writing
• That the grading of writing is is a process that is designed to reach as objective a way to grade writing

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• offer how many policies would hpia write offer how many policies would hpia write what<00:42:54.240
• and they started to not want to write and they started to not want to write<01:00:17.200> some
• ><01:00:17.359> of<01:00:17.520> these write some of these write some of these buildings
• really write really write um<01:04:01.279> surely<01:04:01.920> you<01:04:02.039><
• <01:05:43.760> in you should be trying to to to write in you should be trying to to to write

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Who will write? the uh majority report. Who will write?
• you write the majority? you write the majority?
• will write the minority? will write the minority?
• Okay." who will write the minority? who will write the minority?
• will you write the report? will you write the report?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• People being able to write off the costs of they're incurring, right?
• People being able to write off the costs of they're incurring, right?
• People being able to write off Right?
• They're writing off costs that incurred.
• write that off. off. off.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard presentation on HF 495, a bill intended to help families with rising child care costs by allowing a subtraction from taxable income for licensed child care expenses. The author said the measure would provide immediate relief to families while broader child care supply and affordability problems are addressed, citing a revenue analysis estimating about 81,700 returns affected and an average tax decrease of $639. The bill was described as applying only to licensed child care centers, family child care, or group family child care under chapter 142B. A virtual testifier, Annel Velasco of St. Paul, opposed the bill. She said child care is indeed expensive but argued the proposal is only a small patch that does not address structural problems such as provider closures, low teacher pay, and lack of available slots. She also said the subtraction would disproportionately benefit higher-income families and would not help providers or teachers. Members debated whether the bill should be more targeted. Representative Smith and Representative Lee argued the proposal is uncapped, expensive, and structured as a subtraction rather than a refundable credit, meaning it would mainly help higher-income households and could divert resources from other credits such as the working family tax credit or child tax credit. Representative Swedzinski supported the bill as allowing families to keep their own money and said child care costs are high across income levels. Chair Gomez and others emphasized that the child care system has broader structural failures, including low pay and lack of slots, and said this bill would address only one part of the problem. No vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.