Transcript Highlights:

• government in terms of federal reimbursements and a couple of federal block grants that flow through
• government in terms of federal reimbursements, a couple of federal block grants to flow through the
• state budget. about In terms of federal reimbursements, a couple of federal block grants flow through
• The number of federal grants and federal programs that flow through the state outside of the state budget
• I think we need to watch what happens with federal tax reform and the federal appropriations bills.

Committee: House House Committee on Federal Funding, Policy and Accountability

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The inaugural hearing of the newly named House Committee on Federal Funding, Policy and Accountability focused on how federal policy changes could affect Massachusetts, especially in education, health care, research, infrastructure, climate, and business conditions. Chair LaNatra said the committee was created to monitor federal funding decisions and their impacts on state programs and services. Members introduced themselves, then heard testimony from Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Sarah Mills of Associated Industries of Massachusetts, and Quentin Palfrey, the governor’s Director of Federal Funds and Infrastructure. Howgate argued that the Trump administration and new Congress pose ideological, practical, and process-related risks to Massachusetts, citing proposed cuts to Medicaid, education, research, and other domestic programs. He said federal dollars make up about a quarter of the state operating budget and capital plan, warned against using one-time reserves to backfill ongoing federal cuts, and urged the state to prioritize core services while protecting areas where Massachusetts is especially strong, such as higher education and research. In response to committee questions, he said the House Medicaid proposal would still cost Massachusetts hundreds of millions and that international student and NIH-related changes could harm the state’s labor force and innovation economy. He also advised that the state communicate clearly without overreacting to daily federal developments. Mills testified that AIM members are most concerned about uncertainty, tariffs, Medicaid cuts, and NIH reductions. She said tariffs are raising costs, disrupting supply chains, and hurting small and medium-sized businesses, housing construction, and exporters, with AIM’s business confidence index falling to its lowest level since the pandemic. She said Medicaid cuts would raise employer health costs, reduce productivity, and strain the health care system, while NIH cuts would threaten Massachusetts’ life sciences and academic research ecosystem. In questions, she said AIM has increased federal outreach, is coordinating with the U.S. Chamber and the Massachusetts delegation, and is hearing concerns from employers about immigration compliance and workforce disruptions. Palfrey described the Healey-Driscoll administration’s efforts to maximize federal funding, including a biweekly interagency council, a municipal partnership effort, and a statewide roadshow. He said Massachusetts has secured nearly $9 billion from major federal laws for projects such as the Cape Cod bridges, Allston Multimodal, grid modernization, clean-energy school buses, and broadband. He also said the administration launched a public website to track federal impacts and is working with municipalities, nonprofits, and the Attorney General on grant changes, legal issues, and litigation. In response to questions, he warned that cuts to NOAA, NSF, Medicaid, SNAP, and other programs could affect services and the state budget, and said the administration is tracking changes to federal grant applications and conditions. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> at here we're looking at direct at here we're looking at direct Appropriations<00:09:50.040><c>
• </c> that govern that that folks get direct that govern that that folks get direct dollars<00:10:55.880
• Those are 501(c)(3)s, and this is a federal tax law issue.
• </c><00:14:41.199><c> tax</c> are 501 c3s and this is a federal tax are 501 c3s and this is a federal
• </c> talking about the 1.1 billion in direct talking about the 1.1 billion in direct earmarked<00:16:

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• 3% state-directed cap.
• And fundamentally what's going on here is the federal government had issued guidance that directed states
• This is also due to recent direction from the federal government.
• So that is direction from CMS.
• of this federal administration.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• States with existing state-directed payments above the Medicare rates will need to reduce our state-directed
• States with existing state-directed payments above the Medicare rates will need to reduce our state-directed
• The range is really dependent on how the federal government interprets the federal law as passed by Congress
• These are new federal dollars.
• A new federal directive to restrict undocumented children from Head Start will further disable programs

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s Medi-Cal program and on community health effects from recent immigration enforcement actions. Committee leaders said H.R. 1 would sharply reduce federal funding, increase administrative burdens, and worsen access to care, especially for Medi-Cal enrollees, immigrant families, rural communities, and reproductive health patients. The second half of the hearing examined how ICE raids and related federal actions are creating fear, reducing clinic and emergency department use, and disrupting children’s access to schools and early childhood education. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined the main H.R. 1 provisions affecting Medi-Cal: work requirements, semiannual eligibility redeterminations, shorter retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal support for emergency and lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for prohibited abortion providers. She estimated millions could lose coverage, with tens of billions of dollars in federal funding at risk. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warned the defunding provision could force clinic closures, service reductions, and loss of access to family planning, STI testing, and cancer screenings. The California Hospital Association said the financing changes could cut hospital revenue by tens of billions over 10 years and threaten access, especially for rural and safety-net hospitals. The Western Center on Law and Poverty argued the law would increase churn, paperwork, and uninsured rates, disproportionately harming working adults and people experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation timelines, notification systems, administrative costs, the effect on immigrant eligibility, and whether California could delay or mitigate some provisions. Bass said the state was still assessing federal guidance, planning county and provider outreach, and exploring a possible delay for work requirements and a transition period for provider-tax changes. Members also discussed how state budget actions may need to be revisited in light of H.R. 1, and how California might preserve access through state-only funding or other policy changes. In the second panel, CHIRLA, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Children’s Partnership described the health consequences of immigration enforcement. Speakers said raids and data-sharing fears are causing anxiety, trauma, and avoidance of care, with Los Angeles County reporting declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits after enforcement actions. The Children’s Partnership said school and early childhood absences are rising in some communities and that enforcement is undermining children’s emotional well-being and access to education. Members asked for more data and discussed possible state protections, telehealth, mobile care, and legal and policy responses to reduce fear and preserve access to health and education services.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think it follows federal regulations.
• Experience has shown that directed from friends and families and, Experience has shown that directed
• unit per federal regulations.
• unit per federal regulations.
• And we have presented these results per federal regulations And we have presented these results per federal

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• However, federal credits per the grant plan's April 2025 report on the impact of federal grant funding
• Have operated under both federal and state statute.
• The federal budget reconciliation could primarily affect student eligibility to receive federal reimbursement
• So what would be the best direction we should take that in? Mr.
• That has a lot of issues with the federal government.

Transcript Highlights:

• So currently, the structure includes the federally designated coalition, which there is a federal statute
• So currently, the structure includes the federally designated coalition, which there is a federal statute
• So, for example, the federally designated coalition is required and funded by the federal government
• that direct service... ...to state what exactly direct services entails, including that direct service
• Would we be able to draw down the federal funds if we didn't have a federally designated... ...we would

Committee: Senate Children, Families, and Elder Affairs

Summary: The committee held a panel discussion on Florida’s domestic violence system, focusing on how state and federally funded services are coordinated, the role of the Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence (FPEDV), the Florida Domestic Violence Collaborative, DCF, and certified domestic violence centers. Members reviewed the post-2020 restructuring after the dissolution of FCADV, the current hotline, legal services, training, and technical assistance contracts, and the Legislature’s recent work on lethality assessments under SB 1224. Panelists also described prevention, shelter, counseling, child advocacy, and legal support services, along with the statewide network of 41 certified centers serving all 67 counties. Testimony highlighted both collaboration and tension. FPEDV and Women in Distress described overlapping training and technical assistance roles, but FPEDV said its relationship with DCF has been difficult and at times obstructive, while DCF said communication and coordination are ongoing. Women in Distress and other providers emphasized the importance of direct services, the statewide hotline, injunction assistance, child welfare co-located advocates, and prevention programs. Several members asked about funding flows, certification, and whether the current structure is sufficient for rural counties; witnesses said federal FVPSA funds are formula-based, DCF contracts directly with centers, and rural programs face staffing and fundraising challenges that limit beds and services. A major portion of the discussion centered on the lethality assessment work group and implementation of the new statewide tool. FDLE explained that the work group concluded the Maryland model was copyrighted and costly to replicate exactly, so Florida adopted a statutory assessment that is not evidence-based in the same way, with training available online and 46 of about 400 law enforcement agencies having completed it so far. Senators raised concerns about multiple assessments, redacted police reports, and whether the tool will be useful without better coordination and data collection. Witnesses also discussed rising domestic violence, teen dating violence, and strangulation cases, with providers reporting increased demand, full shelters, and greater use of hotels and mobile crisis responses. No formal votes or actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then there are also the direct support professionals, who are largely caregivers that provide direct
• as it relates to raising standards for the direct care workforce.
• It has the largest share of the direct care workforce.
• Well, this is federal CMS language.
• Until there is a direct federal impact on these services, every dollar spent by New Mexico will bring

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• If it's pending before, you know, the federal government or some federal agency, then no.
• at the direction..."
• "OMB is the managerial agent that directs at the direction of the president.
• OMB directs the cabinet agencies.
• Yes, there is a federal—it's basically federal case law from the U.S.

Bills: SB825

Committee: Senate Border Security

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:

• The federal impact cannot be overstated.
• The federal cuts don't directly go to direct artists; it goes through organizations, so artists... so
• The federal government...
• So while there's been no direct impacts to MOT's budget from federal budget cuts to organizations that
• So in 2024, the three largest federal funders, IMLS, NEA, and NEH, The three largest federal funders,

Committee: House House Committee on Federal Funding, Policy and Accountability

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on the impact of recent federal policy and budget actions on Massachusetts libraries, humanities organizations, arts institutions, and tourism. Testimony from library leaders described the loss or jeopardy of Institute of Museum and Library Services funding, including statewide databases, local grants, staff positions, E-rate/hotspot support, and digital equity programs. Witnesses said the cuts have already forced reductions in services, canceled grants and workshops, and in some cases left schools, students, job seekers, and low-income patrons without access to key resources. Members of the committee asked for lists of affected communities and databases, and several witnesses said they would provide additional written detail. Arts and humanities witnesses said federal terminations from the NEA, NEH, and IMLS have hit organizations across the Commonwealth, including Mass Cultural Council, Mass Humanities, Mass MoCA, and local museums and historical societies. They described canceled or rescinded grants, layoffs, reduced programming, and a chilling effect on future applications and on artistic and scholarly work, especially where federal awards had already been matched with local or private funds. Several speakers also raised concerns about executive-branch DEI conditions attached to funding and about book challenges and book banning, saying these trends threaten intellectual freedom and public access to culture and history. Committee members emphasized the economic importance of the sector and the need to publicize the impacts. Tourism officials from Meet Boston and the Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism testified that federal cuts and broader geopolitical and tariff issues are hurting international visitation, especially from Canada and Western Europe, and could affect major upcoming events such as the 2026 World Cup and Sail Boston. They said reduced funding for Brand USA and Discover New England will weaken long-term marketing efforts and international partnerships, with downstream effects on hotel tax revenue, jobs, and workforce recruitment. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with members mainly asking questions and requesting follow-up written testimony and data.

Transcript Highlights:

• You addressed both federal and state.
• Those are, those are typically not eligible for any type of federal, uh, federal funding.
• TWC started this program with federal funds years ago, but those federal funds... must be redirected
• We there is there are funds in our base budget to draw down federal dollars, but not all the federal
• Most funding available to serve this population is either through limited federal funding federal grant

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But federal uncertainty remains.
• And then directed payments are ways that the state can direct payments Through the managed care system
• Directed payments.
• Federal guidance is still emerging.
• And if the Legislature is concerned about this federal approval, it could consider directing DHS to report

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• in federal funds using directed payments and also from the hospital quality assurance fee.
• So we were moving in that direction. And the non-federal share for some of this...
• So the federal policies is... I don't see any federal policies impacting this.
• share in place of the state to draw down federal funding through supplemental payments, like the state-directed
• down federal funding.

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the Department of Health Care Services’ proposed budget, including a $229.1 billion total-funds budget and projected Medi-Cal enrollment decline as redeterminations continue. Members focused heavily on the fiscal and programmatic effects of prior budget solutions and federal changes, especially the elimination of General Fund-supported Prop. 56 dental supplemental payments beginning July 1, 2026, the hospice utilization-management change, and the impact of reduced caseloads alongside rising health care costs. DHCS said it is still completing required access and rate-reduction analyses for the dental cuts and has been engaging stakeholders, but could not yet quantify the real-world effect on utilization or provider participation. The committee also reviewed the November 2025 Medi-Cal local assistance estimate, which shows higher General Fund spending despite lower enrollment, driven by managed care rate growth, Medicare cost growth, state-only claiming, and federal policy changes. The hearing then turned to provider taxes and federal H.R. 1 constraints, with extensive discussion of the MCO tax, the hospital quality assurance fee, and other health care-related taxes. DHCS explained that H.R. 1 phases down allowable tax levels and tightens “generally redistributive” rules, making the current MCO tax structure and the proposed higher hospital fee levels difficult or impossible to renew as originally designed. Staff and the LAO described the tradeoff between preserving Medi-Cal funding and avoiding higher costs on private providers and consumers. Members asked about options for preserving revenue, including possible amendments to Prop. 35 or returning to voters, and were told the department is still evaluating approaches while federal guidance remains in flux. The committee also reviewed hospital payment increases already implemented through state-directed payments, with DHCS noting that H.R. 1 will force those payments down to Medicare levels over time. Several budget change proposals were discussed and left open, including requests tied to the managed care final rule, managed care operations, hospital value strategy, long-term care payment transparency, and interoperability requirements. The committee also heard about a one-year trailer bill extension for skilled nursing facility financing, including continuation of the SNF workforce standards program, the SNF quality assurance fee, and annual rate growth, while the department develops a longer-term financing redesign for 2027-28. Members expressed skepticism about repeated rate reform efforts and questioned whether a one-year extension of the eliminated workforce quality incentive program should be restored during the transition. Finally, Covered California presented its budget and enrollment update, reporting that the expiration of the federal enhanced premium tax credit is expected to reduce affordability significantly, with average premiums roughly doubling for many enrollees and as many as 400,000 Californians potentially losing marketplace coverage over time. The exchange said California’s $190 million subsidy program is helping lower-income enrollees, but not enough to offset the federal loss, and it is also implementing a new gender-affirming care benefit and awaiting federal action on benchmark plan changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the federal Constitution is a so-called granting constitution, in that the federal Constitution or
• The federal court has blocked it.
• I'm just curious: federal agent acting under federal authority in due course for the federal agent's
• Directed and autologous blood donations are federally allowed and already processed through licensed
• Directed and autologous blood donations are federally allowed and already processed through licensed

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the journal, and moved through committee reports, House messages, and first and second reading calendars before taking up several bills on third reading. Committee reports advanced a number of measures, including bills on elections, public notices, parks and recreation, immigration cooperation, taxation, slow-moving vehicles, short-term rentals, private property rights, and directed blood product transfusion. The chamber also received House bills and transmitted enrolled Senate bills to the House for further action. Among the major floor debates, Senate Bill 1328 passed 30-5 after discussion about shifting legal counsel authority for the Department of Lands from the Attorney General to the department’s general counsel. Senate Bill 1260 passed 29-6 after debate over immigration enforcement language and whether the bill was necessary while related litigation was pending. Senate Bill 1345 passed unanimously to allow Idaho Tax Commission secure electronic communications through opt-in taxpayer accounts, with estimated cost savings. Senate Bill 1224 passed 35-0 to create exceptions for slow-moving farm and construction equipment when no safe pull-off exists, after concerns from law enforcement were addressed. The Senate also passed House Bill 583, 23-12, to reinforce the state’s short-term rental law and limit local governments from imposing special restrictions beyond generally applicable residential regulations; supporters framed it as a property-rights and tourism measure, while opponents warned it could worsen housing shortages and reduce local control. Senate Bill 1326 as amended passed 30-5 to require government agents to have landowner permission, a warrant, or exigent circumstances before entering private property, with supporters citing Fourth Amendment protections and opponents warning it could hinder law enforcement and raise constitutional issues. House Bill 528 passed 25-8 to clarify access to directed blood product transfusions, with supporters emphasizing patient choice and opponents stressing blood-supply safety. The Senate then reordered the third-reading calendar, made announcements, and adjourned until the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Guests, would you say that's part of our directed payment?
• For the state-directed payments, no.
• So we don't have direct data on that.
• We're not going to give you the legislative directive.
• The directive comes from the federal government, and we have to sort of mitigate that potentially, right

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing focused first on Oregon Medicaid coordinated care organization (CCO) finances and rate setting. Oregon Health Authority staff explained how 2025 CCO financial results will inform 2027 capitation rates, including reserve requirements, subcapitation arrangements, and major cost drivers such as behavioral health, pharmacy, rural hospital costs, and dental directed payments. They said the Legislature’s added 2025 funding materially improved CCO margins and that, without it, the program would have been negative overall. Members asked about retained earnings, subcapitation, behavioral health utilization, ABA therapy, and whether outcomes are being evaluated; OHA said rate setting is actuarial and that CCOs, OHA, and other partners all play roles in monitoring efficacy and access. OHA also reviewed House Bill 4039 changes intended to increase transparency and give CCOs earlier access to rate information and reconciliation exhibits. CCO representatives then testified that the system is under significant financial pressure and that behavioral health state-directed payments, benefit changes, and federal uncertainty from H.R. 1 are reducing flexibility. CareOregon said it has lost more than $500 million over the last couple of years and is now making provider terminations and other network changes to align spending with available funding, while emphasizing that CCOs must make hard decisions about which services and providers can be sustained. Eastern Oregon CCO said rural and frontier factors, cost-based hospitals, air ambulance needs, and statewide efficiency adjustments are not fully reflected in rates, and that dental funding is especially strained. Trillium similarly warned that state-directed payments and benefit expansion pressures are constraining the global budget model and that H.R. 1 could worsen acuity and volatility. Members pressed the witnesses on who is responsible for evaluating treatment effectiveness, especially for ABA and psychotherapy, and on how utilization limits and reimbursement changes are being used to control costs. The committee then shifted to an overview of the Affordable Care Act and Oregon’s commercial insurance market. Department of Consumer and Business Services staff explained actuarial value, metal tiers, premium tax credits, medical loss ratio rules, and the main drivers of premium rates: cost trend, utilization trend, and administrative costs. They said mandates have likely added only a limited amount to premiums over the past decade, though the exact effect is difficult to isolate, and they gave examples of how high-cost, low-volume services versus broad, high-utilization services can affect rates differently. Staff also noted that Providence Health Plan and PacificSource Health Plans are withdrawing from the individual market, though consumers should still have at least three insurer options in every county and may have four in many counties. The division said it is in the middle of reviewing proposed 2027 rates and will continue its public rate review process, including hearings and written comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal pass-through over the last six years, I'm sorry, the federal pass-through is nearly $15 billion
• and federal agencies, local governments, private organizations, and individuals.
• These are funded with state resources and with federal resources.
• funds that we receive from the Federal Highway Administration.
• and oversight to the Florida Highway Patrol under the direction of the department.

Summary: The committee met to review agency program funding as it prepared to build the budget, hearing brief presentations from six agencies and then taking member questions. Florida Division of Emergency Management highlighted its role in response, preparedness, recovery, and mitigation, describing a largely federal pass-through budget, major technology investments, and large disaster and preparedness grant activity. The Department of Commerce, Department of State, Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Department of Transportation, Department of Military Affairs, Florida State Guard, and Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles also summarized their budgets, staffing, and major programs, including workforce and economic development, elections and arts funding, housing assistance, transportation work programs, military readiness, state guard expansion, and highway safety and motorist services. Members focused questions on several issues: arts and library grant funding and whether award criteria had changed; Commerce’s rural infrastructure and job growth grants and why funds were not being disbursed faster; Florida Housing’s use of SAIL, Live Local, Hometown Heroes, and SHIP funds and how smaller agencies learn about and access funding; and DOT’s work program gap between agency and governor proposals. The most extensive questioning was directed to Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles about long DMV lines, vacancies, overtime, staffing shortages, and the ability to shift funds between divisions. The department said staffing and pay constraints, especially in South Florida, were driving service delays and vacancy rates, and that overtime was being used because troopers were leaving for better-paying jobs. The Florida State Guard was also questioned about its spending and procurement pace, including aircraft purchases and facilities. Its director said long procurement timelines explained the low initial spending and that obligations had risen sharply as contracts matured. Members also asked about the department’s public opposition to Amendment 3 and whether agency resources were used in that effort; the director said no contracts or purchases were made to influence the vote and said the colonel’s comments were made off the clock. The meeting ended with the chair asking agencies to respond promptly to unanswered questions, and the committee adjourned without any recorded votes or formal actions beyond receiving the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The best way to protect this federally established, federally qualified health center Medicaid payment
• This bill would protect against federal changes to federally qualified health center Medicaid protections
• This bill would protect against federal changes to federally qualified health center Medicaid protections
• Carmella Mancini, a direct primary care doctor.
• H. 1343, an act relative to direct primary care.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing with testimony on several health care bills, with most of the discussion focused on primary care access, community health center reimbursement, midwifery and birth centers, telehealth, hospital-at-home, direct primary care, and trans-inclusive health care access. Chair Feeney and Chair Murphy opened by noting the large number of signups and asking testifiers to keep remarks brief because of time constraints. Legislators and witnesses repeatedly emphasized that Massachusetts’ primary care system is under strain and that federal policy changes and reimbursement gaps are worsening financial pressure on providers. On community health centers, Representative Blay, Senator Lovely, Michael Curry, Bethany Keeley, Jag Deep Trevetti, Sean Cahill, and Christina Severin all supported H. 1096/S. 711, which would require commercial insurers to pay federally qualified health centers at least the MassHealth prospective payment system rate. They argued that commercial plans currently reimburse health centers below Medicaid rates, threatening sustainability, staffing, and access, especially as federal cuts and coverage losses could increase uncompensated care. Testifiers said the bill would stabilize health centers, protect primary care access, and not cost the state money. A second major topic was H. 1117/S. 784 on sustaining birth centers and the midwifery workforce. Senator Lovely, Senator Miranda, Emily Anesta, Rebecca Orden, Catherine Rushworth, Nishira Burrill, Joel Sutherland, Rachel Blessington, Joelle Ward, and others described the 2024 maternal health omnibus as an important first step, but said birth centers and midwives still face low reimbursement, workforce shortages, and financial instability. They urged reimbursement parity, a workforce development fund, and support for freestanding birth centers, citing improved outcomes, lower C-section rates, better patient experience, and racial equity in maternal health. Several speakers shared personal birth stories and said the bill would help preserve and expand birth options in communities like Roxbury, Worcester, and the North Shore. The committee also heard support for H. 1343 on direct primary care from Dr. Garofalo, Dr. Altman, Dr. Nair, Stephanie Cameron, Dr. Haley Moke-Blessed, and others, who said current insurance rules force patients to use a separate in-network primary care doctor for referrals and sometimes prevent physicians from dispensing medications. They argued the bill would reduce delays, administrative burden, and costs while improving continuity of care. In addition, Dr. Miklides and Sue Stempeck supported H. 1141 on hospital-at-home parity, saying the model has strong outcomes and should be reimbursed at the same rate as brick-and-mortar hospital care. Heather Myers and Katrina Cook testified on telehealth and digital health equity, urging broader coverage for asynchronous care, remote monitoring, interpreter services, and digital literacy supports. SEIU Local 509 supported H. 1188/S. 681 on trans-inclusive health care access, saying it would remove arbitrary insurance barriers to gender-affirming care. No votes or committee actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is this specifically to ICE as a federal agency, or does it cover all federal law enforcement agencies
• I understand your desire that a federal law...
• It directs study of delivery models and system design.
• Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility.
• States cannot regulate or obstruct how federal officers execute federal law, and this bill attempts to

Summary: The Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee heard testimony on several bills. On SB 5906, the SAFE Act, staff and Sen. Hansen described protections limiting immigration enforcement access to non-public areas in schools, early learning settings, higher education, health care facilities, adult family homes, and ballot-processing areas, and restricting collection of immigration-status information. Supporters said the bill would clarify and strengthen existing Keep Washington Working policies, while some witnesses requested amendments to better define health care facilities, clarify adult family home and election-related provisions, and keep Section 6 on ballot security. Some members questioned the factual basis for reported ICE activity near schools and daycares and the distinction between judicial and administrative warrants. The committee also heard SB 5886 on personality rights and forged digital likenesses. Staff explained that the bill would add digitally created or modified likenesses to the Personality Rights Act, raise civil penalties, and allow recovery of actual and non-economic damages in forged-digital-likeness cases. The sponsor and supporters said the bill is intended to address AI deepfakes and identity misuse while preserving satire and fair use; student and advocacy witnesses supported the measure as a way to protect students and victims of digital impersonation. The committee then heard SB 5169, which expands child hearsay and closed-circuit testimony rules to older children and additional offenses. Prosecutors and forensic interviewers supported the bill as necessary in trafficking and child abuse cases, while defense advocates opposed it as an overbroad expansion that could raise confrontation-clause issues and create legal challenges. Additional hearings included SB 5865, which would move garnishment form updates from statute to the Washington Pattern Forms Committee; judges supported it as a way to fix a wage-withholding calculation error and allow future updates without legislation. SB 5912 would reinstate the Indigent Defense Task Force to study statewide public defense delivery and recommend sustainable reforms; counties, the Office of Public Defense, and defense groups supported it. SB 6009 would make permanent the current process for direct review of administrative decisions by the Court of Appeals and retain land-use transfer provisions; a Court of Appeals judge supported the bill. SB 6087 would extend limited liability for donations of children’s items to religious organizations and add strollers and car seats, with support from Zero Waste Washington. The committee did not take final votes on these bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Obviously, we don't get direct state general funds.
• These are existing lawsuits that are being settled out, that money's being directed to us.
• It directs the instructions to the CPRA and what we need to do.
• It directs the instructions to the CPRA and what we need to do.
• As you know, DOTD is the non-federal sponsor for that.

Summary: The House Natural Resources Committee met to consider House Resolution 1, which approves the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority’s annual State Integrated Coastal Protection Plan for fiscal year 2026-27. CPRA officials Michael Hare and Gordon Dove presented the plan, describing about $1.54 billion in proposed spending authority, a three-year outlook near $1 billion annually, and a portfolio of 143 projects focused largely on construction and implementation. They highlighted major work in multiple regions, including marsh creation, shoreline protection, levees, land bridges, barrier island restoration, the Birdsfoot Delta, Grand Isle, and the Barataria and Terrebonne basins, and said the plan is intended to restore roughly 12,000 acres and support coastal jobs and labor income. A major portion of the discussion focused on non-structural flood protection, especially home elevations and related measures being pursued with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Representative Sauer questioned whether this approach represented mission creep and whether CPRA and the state should be responsible for such programs. CPRA staff responded that non-structural measures have been contemplated in the master plan, but are now treated more programmatically and at a local level; they said the state is already involved as a non-federal sponsor in many projects and has used CPRA, HUD, and FEMA funding to help offset costs. Members also discussed the scale of the program and the need to determine which agencies should lead it. Chairman Dove emphasized that the coastal program is moving forward through regional, multi-parish projects and praised cooperation among parish leaders, levee boards, ports, state officials, and federal partners. He also stated that the Mid-Barataria sediment diversion is fully defunded, its permit and coastal use authorization have been terminated, and related contracts have been settled or are still being resolved in court. Members asked follow-up questions about the diversion settlement, project tracking, and the status of expropriation-related litigation tied to the canceled project. No vote on HR 1 was recorded in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• in federal funds using directed payments and also from the hospital quality assurance fee.
• And the non-federal share for some of this So we are moving in that direction.
• So the federal policies is— I don't see any federal policies impacting this.
• So the federal policies is... I don't see any federal policies impacting this.
• share in place of the state to draw down federal funding through supplemental payments, like the state-directed

Keywords: 987, senate, all