Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Raymond, Representative Swanson, Representative Toas, Representative Terry Wilson.
• Representative Raymond. Representative Swanson. Representative Toth. Representative Terry Wilson.
• Vice Chair Busey, Representative Isaac, Representative Morales Shaw, Representative Plaa, Representative
• Representative Plaza. Representative Raymond. Representative Swanson. Representative Toth.
• Representative Raymond, Representative Swanson, Representative Toas. Representative Terry Wilson.

Transcript Highlights:

• . person. person.
• . person. person.
• There are two my personal capacity.
• Representative Garrett excused. Representative Capella, I. Representative Kong, I.
• the excused absence of Representative the excused absence of Representative Garrett.<00:44:41.920

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Isaac? Here. Representative Morales-Shaw? Present. Representative Plesa?
• Representative Raymond. Here. Representative Swanson. Here. Representative Toth. Here.
• Representative Isaac? Aye. Representative Morales-Shaw? Yes. Representative Plesa? Yes.
• Representative Raymond? Representative Swanson? Representative Toth? Yes. Representative Terry M.
• Representative Raymond? Yes. Representative Swanson? Yes. Representative Toth? Yes.

Bills: HB376, HB817, HB 1297, HB1478, HB1661, HB1783

Keywords: HB 817, Texas Election Code, majority vote, majority threshold, ranked-choice voting, preferential voting, instant runoff voting, vote reassignment, ballot ranking, election administration, public office election, Election Code Section 2.0215, runoff elections, plurality vs majority, voting systems, education reform, budget allocation, teacher retention, student performance, accountability measures

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Abeyta [member_20557]? Here. Representative Chavez [member_20559]? Here.
• Representative Hall [member_13762]? Here. Representative Hochman-Vigil [member_12572]? Here.
• Representative McQueen [member_12514]? Here. Representative Reeb [member_14046]?
• Representative Abeta? Representative Chavez? Yes. Representative Hall? Yes.
• Representative Hockman-Vee-Hill? Yes. Representative Yes. Representative Hockman-Veehill? Yes.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Dukes, present. Representative Spiegelman, present.
• Representative Dukes, yes. Representative Spiegelman, yes.
• Representative Dukes, yes. Representative Spiegelman, voting yes.
• Representative Dukes, yes. Representative Spiegelman, yes.
• Representative Dukes, yes. Representative Spiegelman, yes.

Keywords: 1064, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Johnson. Thank you, Chairman Hayes.
• And second, that a A person who, if there is no statement of contingency of consent, is a person who
• The person is the parent. Yes. OK, all right. I think Representative LaHood... but has a question.
• Thank you, Representative Bryant. Mr.
• I am not testifying as a representative of Hays County, and the testimony that I provide is my own personal

Bills: HCR16, HB782, HB2159, HB2288, HB3281, HB3819, HB4656, HB4696, HB5494, HCR16

Keywords: fatherhood, family support, fatherlessness, community engagement, youth development, social policy, male role models, child development, policy reform, role models, mental health, parenting, single-parent homes, welfare reform, economic opportunity, mentorship, community initiatives, children, welfare programs, education

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Hayes: Here. Representative Landgraf: Here. Representative Little: Here.
• Representative Louderback: Here. Representative Manuel: Here. Representative Morales: Here.
• Representative Raymond: Here. Representative Slawson: Here. Representative Tepper: Here.
• We represent the same people, folks in the city represent, or the county represents.
• We represent the same people, folks in the city represent, or the county represents.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Weber. Representative Weber.
• Representative Webber, no. Representative Nagel, no. Representative Woods, no.
• Representative Nagel: No. Representative Woods: No. Representative Palmer: No.
• Representative Nagel. No. Representative Representative Nagel. No. Representative Woods. Woods.
• Representative Weber. No. Representative Representative Weber. No.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To her left is Representative Natalie Higgins. At her left is Representative Meghan Kilcoyne.
• No person may read testimony on behalf of another person, but the committee welcomes and accepts written
• That young person, before law enforcement, would question that young person, they would have to make
• I personally represented many youth charged under the current law and have seen 14-, 15-, and 16-year-old
• guides personal health decisions.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing began with opening remarks from the House and Senate chairs outlining procedures for a large public hearing with more than 100 witnesses on 64 legislative proposals. They explained time limits, rules for in-person and virtual testimony, written testimony procedures, and the committee’s reporting deadline. Testimony then moved through a series of juvenile justice, child protection, and civil liberties bills, with witnesses generally urging favorable reports or, in one case, opposing expanded juvenile court transparency and child advocate access to records. Several witnesses supported bills aimed at juvenile justice reform. Representative Hendricks backed H. 1744 to prevent child labor exploitation and trafficking, citing federal findings of child labor in seafood processing and calling for stronger penalties and a ban on minors working in such facilities. Senator Gomez supported S. 1131 and S. 1121 to reduce juvenile fees, fines, restitution burdens, and bail-related costs, arguing they worsen racial and economic disparities. Senator Crean and other advocates supported S. 1051/H. 1695 to expand juvenile diversion eligibility, while multiple witnesses from juvenile justice and immigrant advocacy groups supported H. 1657/S. 1058 to expand juvenile expungement and to limit sharing juvenile fingerprints with federal authorities, describing recent ICE detentions of Chelsea students and the resulting fear in immigrant communities. Witnesses also supported H. 1918/S. 1240 to narrow the youthful offender statute, raising the minimum age and reducing mandatory adult-style penalties for youth. The committee also heard testimony on child safety and bodily autonomy bills. Middlesex District Attorney Marion Ryan supported H. 1752 to protect children left in extreme temperatures, explaining it would create civil penalties, allow emergency responders to remove children from cars without liability, and add criminal penalties when serious injury results. Representative Thurber and Senator O’Connor testified for H. 2011/S. 1227, a bill prohibiting coercion or mandates for health-related interventions, including vaccinations, and allowing legal remedies for violations. Senator Jalen supported S. 1136/H. 1847 to prevent false confessions by requiring recording of interrogations and banning deceptive tactics, and several innocence-project and legal-services witnesses described wrongful convictions tied to false confessions and coercive interrogations. Another major topic was H. 1626, which would require age verification for pornographic content and launch an education campaign about online sexual exploitation; Representative Cruz and survivor Udoz Wallace testified in support, describing nonconsensual image sharing and deepfake harms. Not all testimony was supportive. The Committee for Public Counsel Services opposed S. 1035, which would increase transparency in juvenile court proceedings, and H. 1689, which would expand the child advocate’s access to confidential juvenile records, arguing both would undermine privacy and trauma-informed protections for children and families. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided; the session consisted of opening remarks and public testimony on the listed bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• I represent those persons who suffer...
• I represent those persons who suffer invidious discrimination.
• Now, you don't have to agree with a person to understand that brilliance of the person.
• Uh, these animals are not persons.
• Uh, these persons, after we Uh, these persons, after we ended the enslavement of these persons, then

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, June 11, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, thank you, Representative Lopez. Members, any questions for the representative?
• I personally felt this discrimination.
• Thank you, Representative Jones.
• Thank you, Representative. Any questions? Representative Simmons? Thank you for bringing this bill.
• Representative Schofield. Mr.

Bills: SB1117, SB1373, SB672, SB1986, SB1098, SB626, SB1784, SB2480, SB2487, SB437, SB660

Keywords: dentistry, botulinum toxin, aesthetic treatments, dental regulation, training, medical staff privileges, hospital administration, healthcare regulation, Texas Health and Safety Code, consistency in privileges, SB 672, Texas hospital emergency operations plan, hospital diversion, emergency department, cyberattack, cyber security, power outage, electrical outage, patient diversion, hospital preparedness

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Jones, excused. Representative Joy. Yes. Representative Keagle. No.
• Representative Craft. No. Representative Lucero Nicolai. No. Representative Murphy. Yes.
• Representative Olson. Yes. Representative Sensenig. No. Representative Skraba. Yes.
• You know, I heard a discussion, I think, from the person represented, Deputy Registrar, about concern
• Uh Representative<00:42:30.400> Olson. Representative Olson. Representative Olson.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 1335, a bill to authorize Minnesota digital/mobile driver’s licenses and related electronic credentialing. Chair Tapkey moved the bill as amended to Ways and Means, and the committee adopted the A2 author’s amendment changing the effective date. Tapkey described the bill as a modernization measure modeled on other states, intended to add convenience and security for ID checks at bars, restaurants, airports, hotels, and car rentals, while keeping physical IDs in place. Chair Kosnick objected that the bill’s subject matter should be heard in other committees, especially Commerce, Public Safety, and Judiciary, citing privacy and law-enforcement concerns, but the hearing continued. Several testifiers supported the broader move toward digital credentials and e-titling. Brian McDaniel of the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association said the hospitality industry supports tools that make it harder for minors to access alcohol, while noting privacy concerns and wanting a role in developing the system. Amanda Doerr of the Minnesota Automobile Dealers Association supported the A3 amendment as an incremental step toward electronic titles and electronic signatures, saying Minnesota is behind other states and that the transition should be gradual. Jim Hurst of the Minnesota Deputy Registrars Association said deputies support moving toward e-titling but raised concerns about liability for fraudulent electronic documents and strongly opposed the A4 revenue-sharing amendment, warning it could put deputy registrars out of business. Sam Krieger, representing private deputy registrars, said the A4 amendment could exclude private deputies and close about half the offices in the state. Chair Tapkey said the A3 and A4 amendments were intended to improve customer service, digital access, and future title transfers, but after hearing objections, both amendments were withdrawn. The committee then considered the A5 amendment offered by Rep. Anderson, which would bar electronic driver’s licenses for people not lawfully present in the United States. Anderson argued it would prevent issuing credentials to people in the country illegally, including suspected terrorists. Opponents, including Rep. Kegel and Rep. Lucero Nicolai, argued it would create unequal treatment and could wrongly affect refugees or asylum seekers. DVS Director Pong Xiong testified that current applications do not include NCIC checks and that standard credentials are validated through document review rather than broader database screening. The transcript ends amid continued debate over the A5 amendment and related privacy and eligibility questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The lady from Bernalillo, Representative Vanuorananu. All, don't. Representative Dow.
• It's an emergency for the community and district I represent. And district I represent. Thank you.
• A person was assassinated. All this person did was what was within the political realm of words.
• I am a very direct person. I am a very conservative person.
• Speaker, finally, this is personal to me, very personal.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, as Representative Hudson said, the person at the desk makes the rules.
• Representative Hudson, remember personalities are not allowed in debate.
• <01:18:27.040> Representative an undocumented person?
• Representative an undocumented person?
• be an undocumented person? be an undocumented person? Representative<01:19:44.960> Rhymer.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• , as my personal representative, access information.
• representative to access... ...or client to nominate my lawyer as my personal representative to access
• And can you explain to me why we are using, why you're changing things from patient personal representative
• Can I not have my daughter as my patient personal representative? Senator Carl. Thank you, Mr.
• , even though federal statute says that the term patient personal representative is what is normally

Summary: The Florida Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several recognitions, including interns, Denim Day awareness for sexual assault survivors, a resolution honoring Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange, and a memorial proclamation for former Senator Karen Johnson Gendron. The chamber then moved to special-order bills, with senators also briefly discussing the session’s pace and thanking staff and colleagues for their work. The first major bill, on driving and boating offenses, was amended and passed 37-0. As amended, it increases penalties for repeat DUI/BUI manslaughter and vehicular homicide/vessel homicide offenses, and adds notice requirements and misdemeanor penalties for refusing lawful breath or urine tests. Senators also passed SB 306 on Medicaid providers 37-0, requiring Medicaid managed care plans to offer more after-hours and holiday access and ensuring more primary care appointment availability outside regular business hours. The Senate then passed a major condominium and cooperative associations bill, also 37-0, after extensive debate and multiple amendments. The measure extends deadlines for structural integrity reserve studies, adds flexibility for reserve funding and budgeting, tightens rules for managers and inspectors, limits certain requirements to buildings of three or more habitable stories, and extends the rescission period for condo purchases. Senators from both parties praised the bill’s sponsors for years of work responding to post-Surfside safety and affordability concerns. The longest and most contentious item was SB 7016/HB 1205 on constitutional amendment petition procedures. Sponsors said the bill responds to fraud and abuse in the citizen initiative process by tightening circulator rules, requiring faster submission of signed petitions, adding voter notification, increasing penalties, and shifting costs to sponsors. Opponents argued it would burden volunteers and make it harder for citizens to qualify initiatives. The chamber adopted a series of amendments, including changes to the petition-circulator threshold, volunteer protections, submission timing, invalid-signature investigation thresholds, and notice/cure provisions, while debate continued over whether the overall package would protect election integrity or suppress citizen-led amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm sorry, Representative Moody.
• Uh, Representative Bowers, Representative Little, Representative Money Quorum is present.
• Representative Money.
• That's a person who is a time bomb waiting to go off and a person who's waiting to hurt another person
• You represent who?

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Travers. Representative Travers. Mr.
• Representative Austin votes no. Representative Wilson votes no. Representative Ligori.
• Representative Cooper. All right, Mr. Chair, I rise to a point of personal privilege.
• Representative Press. Thank you, Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. I rise on a point of personal privilege.
• Representative De Los Santos. Thank you, Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. So, a point of personal privilege.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The House convened with prayers, the Pledge of Allegiance, guest introductions, and several proclamations and recognitions, including International Mother Language Day, Nurses Day at the Capitol, Environmental Day, Arizona Aerospace Day, Childhelp, Teamsters Local 104, and African American Legislative Day. Attendance was recorded at 57 present, zero absent, and three excused. The chamber also handled routine business such as committee reports, bill referrals, first and second readings, and announcements of upcoming committee meetings. The main floor action centered on House Bill 2785, a tax conformity measure. Members debated it at length, with supporters arguing it would make tax forms legal, align Arizona with federal tax changes, and provide tax relief to taxpayers and small businesses, while opponents said it was an unpaid tax cut for wealthy individuals and corporations that would force cuts to health care, education, SNAP, and other services. The House passed HB 2785 on a 32-26 vote with two not voting and sent it to the Senate. The House then resolved into Committee of the Whole and considered several Health and Human Services and Commerce bills. HB 2190, HB 2206, HB 2396, HB 2442, HB 2448, HB 2688, HB 2689, HB 2690, HB 2796, and HB 2797 were debated, with most receiving do-pass recommendations after amendments. Testimony focused heavily on SNAP policy, including payment error rates, work and training requirements, food restrictions, and waiver authority, with Democrats warning of added burdens and reduced access for eligible families and Republicans arguing the bills would improve accountability, nutrition, and compliance with federal law. HB 2689, which would collect hospital patients’ immigration status on a voluntary basis, drew strong opposition over concerns it would deter people from seeking care; it was still reported out of committee, though a later motion to amend the committee report to show HB 2689 failed was rejected 24-32. The House adopted the Committee of the Whole report, and several bills were referred to engrossing before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative<00:43:20.800> Shear, Representative Shear, Representative Shear, >> um,<00
• Representative<02:15:29.840> Murphy. Representative Murphy. Representative Murphy.
• Any question represents? represents? represents?
• Representative Proulx, yes. Representative Lascelles, yes. Representative Devoid, yes.
• Representative Harriott-Gathright, no. Representative Meuse, no. Representative Newman, no.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused primarily on House Bill 1087 and House Bill 123, both related to firearms. HB 1087 was introduced as a Second Amendment measure, but after questions from the chair and discussion with law enforcement, the sponsor agreed it should be set aside and referred to a study committee for further review, rather than advanced as written. The New Hampshire Chiefs of Police Association testified in opposition to the bill as written, while also indicating support for the sponsor’s proposed amendment or a study approach. The bulk of the discussion centered on HB 123, which would require the return of firearms after a not guilty verdict or dismissal. The sponsor and several members described the bill’s purpose as speeding up the return of property, but law enforcement and judicial branch witnesses raised concerns about federal law, the need to ensure a person is still legally eligible to possess firearms, and the bill’s 24-hour return requirement. Witnesses from the State Police and judicial branch explained the current process, including background checks through the state police gun line, and said the existing procedure already aims to return firearms promptly while allowing time to verify disqualifying information. Members and witnesses discussed possible amendments, including removing language that would bar background checks and instead tying return of firearms to completion of the check within a set time frame. Judicial branch and State Police witnesses said a process that requires a background check and return within a reasonable period, with notice if there is a delay or denial, would better address safety and legal concerns. The hearing ended without a vote; the committee closed the public hearing and indicated it would continue working on the language before executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Wilcox, here. Representative Robbins, here. Representative Bracie, here.
• Representative Hurst, here. Representative Butler, here. Representative Lawrence, here.
• Representative Lawrence, here. Representative Moore, here. Representative Gibbons.
• Representative Lamb, here. Representative Underwood, I'm here. Representative Lens, here.
• Now, the problem is if that one person only has one person, he still gets two minutes.

Bills: HB397, HB523, HB397

Keywords: real estate, disclosures, equitable interest, disciplinary actions, Alabama Real Estate Commission, parole procedures, advocacy, parole board, victim representation, inmate rights, HB397, homestead exemption, ad valorem tax, property tax, tax relief, senior exemption, elderly homeowners, retiree exemption, disability exemption, blind exemption

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Brass, present. Representative Bro? Here. Present. Representative Bryant, present.
• Representative Carrier, present. Representative DeWitt, here. Representative Domain, present.
• Representative Kerner, present. Representative Jacob Landry, present. Representative Mack, present.
• Well, Representative Mack, even in the original version, it defined person.
• I represent people from Louisiana, don't represent people. you know, who we represent.

Summary: The committee first took up HB 804, the Louisiana Energy Protection Act, which was presented as a narrowly focused ban on climate-change damages lawsuits rather than a measure affecting emissions claims, pollution claims, or private property rights. The author and supporters said the bill was intended to stop speculative suits targeting energy producers, farmers, truckers, manufacturers, and other businesses for global climate impacts, while preserving claims for actual legal violations under state or federal environmental and safety laws. After a substitute amendment was adopted to clarify and streamline the bill, the committee heard extensive support from oil and gas, chemical, business, port, and legal reform groups, along with a few opposition speakers who argued the bill could still be read to shield industry too broadly or weaken climate accountability. HB 804 was reported favorably as amended. The committee then considered HB 802, as amended, which creates a watershed conservation fund tied to the Amite River Basin. The author explained that the bill was narrowed from a statewide proposal to a basin-specific program to reduce flood risk and restore watershed areas using existing severance revenue from sand mining, modeled in part on coastal restoration funding. Supporters from the concrete industry, landowners, levee boards, and conservation groups described it as a practical, low-cost, non-government solution to help remediate old sand and gravel pits and improve flood control. With no opposition cards and no objections, HB 802 was reported favorably as amended. Finally, the committee heard HB 934, as substituted, which would allow licensed wildlife rehabilitators to possess white-tailed deer fawns under specific conditions, including disease monitoring, release only within the same management zone, and other handling requirements. The author said the bill was meant to prevent the euthanizing of orphaned fawns that could be rehabilitated and to create a lawful pathway for licensed care. A supporter described her experience rescuing an orphaned fawn that was later confiscated and killed, while the Louisiana Wildlife Federation opposed the measure, warning it could effectively create a captive deer program, undermine wildlife conservation principles, and lead to dangerous or inhumane facilities. The transcript ends during testimony on HB 934, before final committee action is shown.