Transcript Highlights:

• rights under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, emphasizing that the state should not interfere

Bills: HB1511, HB1831, HB1988, HB2147, HB2234

Keywords: housing, affordable housing, state regulations, zoning, local government authority, drug court, juvenile justice, diversion programs, rehabilitation, criminal justice reform, remote proceedings, depositions, virtual hearings, court technology, criminal responsibility, age of maturity, expungement, mental health services, juvenile record sealing, 1184

Transcript Highlights:

• think we need to do in terms of being able to support the president and the university and remove interferences

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education first took up a block of confirmation hearings for trustees and board members at several public universities and state colleges. Appointees from Florida A&M University, Florida International University, New College of Florida, Pasco-Hernando State College, South Florida State College, Valencia College, Florida Atlantic University, and the University of Florida described their backgrounds and emphasized themes such as governance, student success, workforce alignment, fiscal stewardship, research growth, and institutional reputation. Members asked a few questions, but most nominees received no substantive opposition. The committee then voted unanimously to recommend confirmation of the group of appointees on tabs 3 through 18 and forwarded them to Ethics and Elections. The committee next heard Senate Bill 114 by Senator Trumbull, which would create the Florida Center of Excellence in Insurance and Risk Management at Florida State University, move the public hurricane loss projection model from FIU to FSU, and provide funding for the effort. Trumbull said the bill is intended to strengthen the state’s insurance research capacity and broaden study of insurance lines beyond wind risk. Senators asked about the impact on FIU and the distinction between the new center and existing FIU work; Trumbull said FIU’s Wall of Wind would remain and that the state-owned model would simply be contracted to FSU instead of FIU. The committee reported the bill favorably. The committee then considered Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 1624 by Senator Calatayud, a wide-ranging higher education bill addressing tuition, workforce programs, institutional operations, and naming changes. Amendments were adopted to create state college regional consortium service organizations for rural colleges, remove a proposed out-of-state fee change for nonresident online students, extend university master plan update cycles from five to 10 years, and rename Hillsborough Community College as Hillsborough College. The bill also changed several references from specific minority categories to “underrepresented,” revised aid and waiver provisions, adjusted adult education and career program rules, and made other technical changes. Senators Smith and Davis questioned the shift away from enumerated categories, arguing it could obscure disparities affecting groups such as Black students, women in STEM, and students with disabilities; Calatayud said the intent was to focus on socioeconomic access and flexibility for institutions. After debate, the committee voted 6-2 to report the bill favorably, with Senators Davis and Smith voting no, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• What this bill does not do, um, is interfere with the traditional legal mechanisms for holding offenders

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I worry, again, about that political. interference that, like it or not, these judges are human and when

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We know these actors have been poking around in critical infrastructure and attempted to interfere in

Transcript Highlights:

• American that these public servants be able to investigate waste, fraud, and abuse without political interference

Transcript Highlights:

• best medical care for their children and women to choose what's best for our bodies without state interference

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and anything that interferes with those two things is really problematic.
• Um, and anything that interferes with those two things is really problematic.
• Um and<01:19:27.280> anything<01:19:27.600> that<01:19:27.840> interferes<01:19:
• 28.320> with<01:19:28.480> those and anything that interferes with those and anything that
• interferes with those two<01:19:28.880> things<01:19:29.199> is<01:19:29.440> really

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• faculty members at the university in the university system, there could be some concern that it would interfere
• faculty members at the university in the university system, there could be some concern that it would interfere
• c><02:02:31.280> that<02:02:31.520> it<02:02:31.679> would<02:02:31.840> interfere
• some concern that it would interfere some concern that it would interfere with<02:02:32.480>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:46:15.360> really I the idea that we don't really I the idea that we don't really interfere
• c> with<01:46:16.280> private<01:46:16.599> businesses<01:46:17.080> on interfere
• with private businesses on interfere with private businesses on this<01:46:17.480> one<01:46:
• So I just want to make sure what they're saying is that municipal department personnel cannot interfere
• So I just want to make sure what they're saying is that municipal department personnel cannot interfere

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing opened on House Bill 192, which concerns the Joint Committee on Employee Classification process for state employee positions. Representative Peter Schmidt explained that the bill is a procedural step to send already-reviewed classifications to Korn Ferry and then into statute and the budget. Department of Corrections staff and Commissioner Helen Hanks testified that one Deputy Director of Medical Services position had been omitted from the bill by mistake even though it had already gone through the JCEC process, and they asked for an amendment to add it. Hanks clarified that the position is an existing classified job being converted to unclassified status, not a new position. The committee discussed how the amendment would work and the quorum requirements for the JCEC, then closed the hearing on HB 192 after no further testimony. The committee then heard House Bill 435, sponsored by Representative Don McFarland, which would clarify professional engineering licensure law. McFarland said the bill is intended to make clear that work in IT security, electronics, digital systems, computing, and software is not the practice of engineering requiring a professional engineer license, while preserving licensure requirements for fields such as civil, structural, and building-related engineering. He said he had consulted with the American Council of Engineering Companies and that the bill is meant to remove ambiguity and legal risk, not deregulate engineering. Several members with engineering backgrounds spoke in support, describing the distinction between licensed PE work and other technical fields, and one member noted that software development and regulated software work typically do not require a PE license. The committee voted ought to pass on HB 435 by a roll call of 16-0 and placed it on consent. Finally, the committee opened House Bill 210, which would create a commission to study the New Hampshire state flag. Representative Tom Corman argued that the current flag is a generic “state seal on a blue bedsheet” and does not meet common vexillological design principles such as simplicity, meaningful symbolism, limited colors, and distinctiveness. He said the proposed commission would include legislative members plus representatives of the New Hampshire Historical Society and the New England Vexillological Association, and would review the flag’s history and recommend whether to redesign it and how to do so. He also indicated he intended to add language to avoid costs, but the bill discussion was not completed in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• This could interfere with the frequency of contact consideration, and depending on the interpretation
• The interference with custody could be for weeks, months, sometimes years.
• allegations of Abus or neglect to<04:30:40.880> DCF to DCF to DCF the<04:30:42.760> interference
• > with<04:30:43.439> custody<04:30:43.880> could<04:30:44.080> be the interference
• with custody could be the interference with custody could be for<04:30:44.439> weeks<04:30:45.000

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The House Children and Family Law Committee opened its February 4, 2025 hearing with a business item on House Bill 553, appointing a subcommittee chaired by Representative Greg and including several named members. The committee then took up House Bill 486, which would revise New Hampshire’s grandparents’ visitation law. The prime sponsor said the bill is intended to address gaps in current law, especially in situations involving divorce, separation, kinship care, and parental substance use, so that children can maintain important relationships with grandparents or other kin caregivers. He emphasized that the proposal was meant to supplement existing law rather than replace it, and said the language was modeled on statutes from other states. Several witnesses testified in support of HB 486, describing painful family separations and arguing that current law can be interpreted too narrowly. One grandmother said the existing statute had been used to dismiss her visitation case because she was restricted while the parents were separated, and she asked for language changes so courts could still order visitation in similar circumstances. Another witness, testifying online, urged passage of the bill as being in the best interest of children. A third witness described a family living arrangement in which grandparents had been a consistent presence in their grandchildren’s lives but were later cut off during a contentious separation, and said the bill would help repair those relationships. Committee members asked about the six-month timeframe in the bill, whether the proposed language would affect cases where a grandparent does not live with the child but is still a regular caregiver, and whether the sponsor had written amendment language; the sponsor said the six-month language was taken from other states’ statutes and that the new language would not change existing visitation rights but would add to them. After hearing the testimony, the chair said the committee would hold HB 486 aside for a week or two while awaiting additional information before voting. The hearing then moved to House Bill 320, an act relative to enforcement of marital property settlements. The sponsor explained that the bill would require courts to enforce final property decrees and would clarify the difference between enforcement and contempt, arguing that courts should have clear authority to fashion remedies and that litigants, especially self-represented parties, need clearer statutory guidance. Committee members questioned the legal distinctions the sponsor drew, including whether the bill was aimed at enforcement rather than contempt and how the proposed language would operate in practice. The transcript cuts off before any vote or further action on HB 320.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a state mandate that interferes with local control.
• This is a state mandate that interferes with local control.
• state said we have to do this this is a state mandate<02:20:37.560> that<02:20:37.720> interferes
• <02:20:38.200> with<02:20:38.359> local mandate that interferes with local mandate
• that interferes with local control<02:20:40.760> and<02:20:41.000> even control and even

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to take up three bills today: Senate File 87, felony interference with a police officer amendment
• Uh this bill, as the title alludes to it, is amending the offense of interference with a peace officer
• And then here's the language that would apply if he knowingly obstructs, impedes, or interferes with

Bills: SF0087, SF0088, SF0092

Keywords: felony, law enforcement, police officer, criminal penalties, public safety, sex offender, child care facility, residency restrictions, criminal law, sex offenders, child care facilities, legislation, false claims, civil penalties, state accountability, whistleblower protection, fraud prevention, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the license plate, and repeals the requirement that the cover shield shall be intended to alter or interfere
• 00:48:14.880> or shield shall be intended to alter or shield shall be intended to alter or interfere
• 15.599> visibility<00:48:16.240> legibility The bill would prohibit anything that interferes

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several transportation-related bills. HB 1688, which would provide a general excise tax exemption for certain aircraft maintenance materials, parts, tools, and facility construction, received comments from the Department of Taxation and support from Alaska Airlines, Hawaiian Airlines, Kohala Coast Resort, the Activities and Attractions Association of Hawaii, and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii. Testimony indicated the measure was intended to clarify an existing exemption rather than create a new one. The bulk of the hearing focused on HB 2386, which would authorize the Public Utilities Commission to establish automatic adjustment mechanisms and a water carrier inflationary cost index. The Department of Transportation said it would change its testimony to support the bill, citing a 2020 working group recommendation, while the PUC and DCCA offered comments. Matson, the Maritime Group, Hawaii Harbors Users Group, and Young Brothers supported the measure, arguing it would modernize regulation, improve predictability, and help maintain reliable interisland shipping. Hawaii Farm Bureau offered comments, while Hawaii Food Industry Association, Maui Brewing Company, Lani Kai Brewing Company, and the Japanese Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Hawaii opposed it, arguing automatic rate increases were not the solution and that underlying costs and efficiencies should be addressed first. The chair noted the bill was essentially the same as one previously considered, and asked questions about how Hawaii’s water carrier regulation compares with other states. The committee also heard HB 1691, which would allow electronic signatures for certain motor vehicle title transfers after total-loss insurance settlements and remove the notary requirement for that narrow transaction. The City and County of Honolulu Department of Customer Services, Hawaii Insurers Council, Copart, American Property Casualty Insurance Association, and one individual supported it, with Copart saying the change would reduce delays and could allow a faster, largely electronic settlement process. Members asked about county impacts, and Copart said counties would only see a different form with no added cost or electronic integration. HB 1680, requiring county finance directors to notify agencies through a centralized system for vehicle transfers, drew opposition from the City and County of Honolulu Department of Customer Services and one individual in support. HB 2516, raising helmet requirements for electric foot scooters and bicycles and requiring helmets for high-speed or Class 3 electric bicycles, received support from DOT, DOH, AAA Hawaii, and the Hawaii Bicycling League. HB 193, allowing deaf vehicle owners to register a deafness designation visible to law enforcement, drew support from the City and County of Honolulu Department of Customer Services, the Hawaii Disabilities Rights Center, and an individual who suggested amendments to broaden the bill to deaf and hard of hearing individuals and adjust the proof standard. HB 2442, increasing required accessible and van-accessible parking spaces in larger parking lots, was supported by the Disability and Communication Access Board, the Council on Developmental Disabilities, and the Disability Rights Center, which said the bill would address shortages of accessible parking and may need technical amendments to align terminology with the ADA.

Transcript Highlights:

• But that said, I would take issue with my tax dollars being used to frankly interfere with the petition
• I think that's a good suggested change to this bill. frankly interfere with the petition frankly interfere

Keywords: Discussion of BR 25 (2026 RS) 04:15 Presentation on voting systems by ES&S 48:14 Presentation on voting systems by Hart InterCivic and Harp Enterprises 01:13:07, 958, all

Summary: The committee met to approve the October 21 minutes and then took up BR 25 for the 2026 regular session, a proposal relating to prohibited uses of tax dollars and public resources. The sponsors said the bill is intended to strengthen existing law by adding civil and criminal penalties for taxpayer-funded advocacy on ballot questions, especially in light of controversies during the 2024 election over school officials and districts using public resources to oppose a constitutional amendment. They also described related concerns about school districts hiring third-party lobbyists and public relations firms, particularly in Fayette County, and said the proposal was meant to keep tax dollars focused on public services rather than political persuasion. Committee members raised several concerns about scope and drafting. Some asked whether the bill should specifically mention schools, school boards, and school employees, and the sponsors said they would add that language. Others questioned whether the measure would also affect local government lobbying through groups like KLC and KCO, and the sponsors said they intended to focus narrowly on schools while exempting certain advocacy organizations and internal government lobbyists. Members also asked whether public employees could still speak as private individuals, and the sponsors said yes. Several members suggested splitting the lobbying and ballot-advocacy issues into separate bills, and the sponsors said they would consider that. Members also pressed for clarification on how the bill would apply in practice, including whether it would cover legal challenges to petition drives or only advocacy after a question is on the ballot. Counsel for the sponsors said the bill would not cover some petition-related litigation as drafted, though they believed it should. The sponsors and supporters argued the proposal was needed to give the existing prohibition real enforcement, while some members warned that the language could unintentionally limit legitimate public representation or be too broad if not carefully drafted. No final vote was taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• 30.720> it They think I think their thinking is it They think I think their thinking is it interferes
• 31.839> their<00:43:32.079> usage<00:43:32.480> of<00:43:32.640> their interferes
• with their usage of their interferes with their usage of their blue<00:43:33.119> light.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from the Kentucky Aviation Association on the importance of general aviation airports in Kentucky and their economic and public-safety role. Witnesses said the state has more than 50 general aviation airports that support jobs, agriculture, tourism, medical transport, disaster response, and law enforcement, and they urged continued support for aviation infrastructure and workforce development. They asked the legislature to again provide $200,000 per general aviation airport for operating and basic infrastructure costs, to route the money through the Kentucky Department of Aviation for accountability, to revisit a special-purpose governmental entity audit requirement they said is too costly for small airports, to create a long-term appropriations process for the roughly $100 million in unmet capital needs, and to fund the Arrow Act for aviation education and scholarships. Members asked about a dedicated aviation fuel tax and about local training partnerships, simulators, and school or community college programs; the witnesses said they preferred an appropriations-based solution and offered to help connect interested communities with aviation education resources. The committee then took up “Troy’s Law,” sponsored by Representatives White and Flannery, which would allow tow trucks to use blue lights while stationary and actively removing vehicles or debris from highways. Sponsors and tow operators said the bill is intended to improve worker safety after the deaths of tow operators Troy Cwell and Hubert Mosley in highway hit-and-run incidents, and they emphasized that tow operators often work in dangerous conditions at night, in bad weather, and near fast-moving traffic. They said the proposal would not apply while driving or towing and noted that other states have adopted similar measures. Witnesses from the towing industry, including Bubba Johnson and Barbara Maguire, supported the bill as an added layer of protection and described tow operators as first responders who help motorists in emergencies. Representative Flannery and other members expressed support for the safety goal and invited further discussion, but no vote or final action was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Texas communities should solve these challenges on their own, without state interference, ignorant paranoid
• But when people are doing things that step out and interfere with the responsibilities of others, that's
• But when people are doing things that step out and interfere with the responsibilities of others, that's

Bills: SB7, SB14

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• and counties should be able to access available resources to keep their residents safe without interference
• They cannot be used when there's an intent to intimidate others, to interfere with campus operations,
• or to interfere with an institution's policies in place. ...employees or a peace officer's lawful performance

Bills: SB15, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SB6, SB2878, SB13, SB30, SJR87, SB7, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB57, SB512, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB1346, SB2753, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB552, SB646, SJR1, SB15, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SB2501, SB66, SB268, SB331, SB618, SB414, SB1394, SB2425, SB898, SB993, SB442, SB735, SB784, SB2538, SB1919, SB1013, SB2215, SB2322, SB626, SB570, SB747, SB2183, SB673, SB1015, SB1447, SB1370, SB1784, SB1897, SB2873, SB2891, SB2933, SB2540, SB2681, SB2695, SB1965, SB2203, SB872, SB875, SB1030, SB1277, SB1730, SB1681, SB1152, SB2969, SB2747, SB2705, SB2541, SB1708, SB2080, SB2721, SB1986, SB2392, SB2539, SB2857, SB2799, SB2785, SB2782, SB1531, SB1927, SB1263, SB1098, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SCR9, SB21, SB1198, SB1405, SB2601, SB2778, HB5560, HB762, HB1584, HB 107, HB 114, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323, HB4341, HB6, HB171, HB143, HB449, HB3486, HB4263, HB5246, HB2, HB2011, SB17

Keywords: SB 15, Texas Local Government Code, zoning preemption, housing affordability, small lots, lot size, lot density, single-family zoning, residential subdivision, municipal land use, local control, state preemption, parking requirements, setbacks, infill development, missing middle housing, lot width, lot depth, homebuilders, housing supply

Transcript Highlights:

• This legislation was very carefully crafted to not interfere with the theater. or elementary aged children
• The right to practice the religion of our choice, or no religion at all, without government interference
• And now we know that every Texan has a right to practice their rights. religion, free of interference

Bills: HB4, HB54, SB 10, SB 24, HB4, HB54, HB775, HB850, HB 1122, HB 1249, HB1405, HB2336, HB2757, HB3372, HB3622, HB4442, HB4687, HB4893, HB5089, HB5515, HB5606, SB10, SB24, HB1573, HB3369

Keywords: district composition, congressional election, Texas, legislature, voting districts, citizenship, U.S. citizen, non-citizen, public office, advisory board, task force, state government, local government, political subdivision, commission board, appointment eligibility, officeholder qualifications, public service, naturalization, Texas Government Code

Transcript Highlights:

• Exposure to substances with central nervous system effects during this critical period can interfere
• Exposure to substances with central nervous system effects during this critical period can interfere
• prohibits a prescription drug manufacturer from engaging in discriminatory practices that would interfere

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee met on April 22 and took up a special order of bills focused largely on prior authorization and utilization management in health care. The chair framed the discussion as part of a broader legislative effort to reduce delays and barriers to care, especially in behavioral health, chronic disease management, cancer treatment, and rehabilitation services. AB 384 by Assembly Member Connolly would prohibit prior authorization for inpatient mental health or substance use emergency admissions and related physician care; supporters said it would prevent dangerous delays in crisis care, while insurers and health plans warned about fraud, abuse, and ambiguity around residential treatment facilities. The bill was moved on a due pass as amended motion and passed the committee on a party-line style vote, with Republicans largely absent or not voting. The committee then heard AB 510 by Assembly Member Addis, which would require health plans, upon request, to provide a peer reviewer of the same or similar specialty when a treating provider appeals a prior authorization denial or modification. Supporters argued that specialty-matched review would make appeals fairer and more clinically informed; opponents said the requirement was too rigid and that timelines and electronic submission rules needed changes. After discussion about the need for timely, specialty-specific review, the bill was approved on a due pass as amended motion and placed on call. AB 539 by Assembly Member Schiavo would extend prior authorization approvals to one year or the duration of the physician’s prescribed treatment for chronic conditions; supporters cited repeated denials and treatment interruptions, while opponents raised concerns about overbreadth, fraud, and the need for shorter validity periods. The bill was also passed as amended and placed on call. The committee next considered AB 669 by Assembly Member Haney, which would bar concurrent and retrospective review for the first 28 days of medically necessary substance use disorder treatment and limit prior authorization for related outpatient medications. The bill was presented with a powerful personal story from Ryan Matlock’s mother about her son’s death after an insurer cut off treatment early; supporters said the measure would keep patients in care long enough to stabilize, while opponents argued it would reduce oversight and could allow lower-quality or non-evidence-based care. The bill was moved on a due pass as amended motion and placed on call. Finally, AB 512 by Assembly Member Harabedian would shorten prior authorization response times to 24 hours for urgent requests and 48 hours for non-urgent requests; supporters said delays can worsen outcomes, while opponents warned the timelines were unrealistic and could increase administrative burdens and safety issues. The bill was approved as amended and placed on call. AB 574 by Assembly Member Mark Gonzalez was then heard; it would allow up to 12 medically necessary physical therapy sessions for a new episode of care without prior authorization, with supporters emphasizing stroke and neurological recovery and opponents warning of reduced oversight and unnecessary care. The transcript ends during testimony on AB 574, before final action is shown.